Jump to content

Steve Valentia

Verified
  • Content Count

    313
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Steve Valentia

  1. You're really getting "in there", with your images and finding shots that grab the eye Andy. So much better than the ports I see of building exteriors and shop front signs! (I'll forgive your Paddy Power shot, as gambling is in the news in Ireland). Great work.
  2. Thanks Colin, I'll double check and then see if works for the batch, but to be honest, the exclusive setting is applied when I open the settings. But it's just not happening in the images (in optional).
  3. I set it over a week ago and had a new submission pass this evening. It wasn't applied to it.
  4. I'm having trouble getting the "exclusive to Alamy" setting to apply to new submissions. I've got it checked under the "gear" settings in AIM, but it doesn't seem to be automatically applying itself to new submissions.
  5. ...Distributor commission. Just made a sale for $60. Minus 30% "Alamy Distribution Commission", which left $42. Minus 40% "Distributor Commission", which leaves me with $18. A 70% total commission "take". I give up.
  6. I would echo your first paragraph, to some extent. Last year was my best ever with Alamy (in 14 years), with my highest number of image sales and my highest total revenue. Not "fantastic" - I've just bought an old Honda 50 as a treat, and not paid for a house as one member did - but encouraging. So far, this year, I've had 3 sales, totalling $48, 2 for $5 each (UK newspapers with 2M+ print runs, on the newspaper "discount scheme") and one for $38, for a German travel brochure. A generally bad start, reflecting some of the years when I sold 15 or 20 images in 12 months. I may have had more sales, but I've opted out of PU some time ago. Like you, I have no idea why anyone would buy some top class images I've sold for next-to-nothing, and which cost a lot to get, for personal use. Then, again, I probably do. Why Alamy charge some peanuts and others a much higher fee for the same image is only a question they can answer. The question of why they are not being fairer to contributors with consistently higher rates is another.
  7. Thanks, I was also unable to find it. To be fair, why should we have to come to the forum to find out though? Another sentence in the original Tweet would have done it. Who's training these people in the fine art of communication?
  8. Absolutely agree with you, and I've also published low fees here - and got myself into bother with some forum regulars. The more we say about this nonsense, hopefully the more @Alamy might start to look after it's contributors, many of whom are seasoned professionals.
  9. Thanks for the comments Michael. I was going to PM you with additional feedback, but that doesn't seem to be possible. But, generally, certain Cameracraft personnel are currently unable to reinstate their involvement with the forum. But we hope everyone enjoys the link.
  10. There may still be one Italian person, using Italian as their first language still living in the UK. They'll be gone by 29th March 2019.
  11. I wonder what the morons at Gatwick are flying, and can we expect them to appear in the Live News thread?
  12. Yes. It's happened to everyone who has ever had a fail. The only exception is processing errors, where other images will pass (if not otherwise subject to QC fail issues).
  13. Really? Well, we're obviously reading different threads. What exactly does being "brutally aware" have to do with a gesture of a free magazine? Chuck's post had nothing to do with the OP, so that makes it off-topic to begin with, and many posts have been red lined or reported for being that. I also had Christmas in mind, so I even find the use of the word "brutally" here inappropriate. You know what, next time I decide to do something nice, I'll do something sensible instead.
  14. I suggest you've had one over the 8 Chuck. I was trying to do something altruistic and your post seems out of place, at the very least.
  15. In the meantime, put your feet up and be inspired by my link in the "let's talk about pix" thread.
  16. Christmas is coming! Seriously, you can't do night (or twilight) shoots without a tripod. A monopod isn't of any real use for long(er) exposures, as you'll definitely "wobble" after 1/15th of a second. Forget high ISO's. Low is the way to go. Low and long. On a tripod! There's too much competition in photography not to make your shots 110% perfect.
  17. Here we go again! Please don't reply after too many Martinis. Happy New Year! https://issuu.com/iconpublications/docs/ccseptoct2018?e=10914365%2F64706460 The new issue is available on subscription here: http://www.iconpublications.com/
  18. I was teasing, you, too. My Irish Normandy Ancestry, which surfaced in Limerick about 1822 - nearly half past six - tells me that I'll never get rich, and certainly not with Alamy. My surname ('as gaeilge' - in Irish) is 'de Poer' which translates to...The Poor!
  19. Are you sure he's Irish? And, are your certain he's a Colonel?
  20. I'm holding up a piece of string. How long is it?
  21. I agree totally. I suggest you find a way to get such a good suggestion to those who can make it happen.
  22. I used to do a lot of this stuff for local newspapers, of houses that were lit up like Christmas trees! I always made a point of liaising with the owners to go BEFORE it got very dark. Use a sturdy tripod. Keep the ISO low and don't have anything moving in the image. You can then keep the aperture quite small (especially useful if objects extend into the garden a long way from the house) and a subsequently slow shutter speed, without worrying about camera shake. Use the camera's timer or a release to trigger the shutter.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.