Jump to content

Joseph Clemson

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

920 Forum reputation = excellent


About Joseph Clemson

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Bolton, Lancashire


  • Alamy URL
  • Images
  • Joined Alamy
    11 Mar 2011

Recent Profile Visitors

2,765 profile views
  1. Jigget is not the first person to appear on the forum asking about images of themselves appearing in the Alamy collection. It's not that difficult to sign on to Alamy as a contributor and once that has been done access to the forum is available. Because Alamy wants new contributors to have access to help in getting their first three images past QC, they don't even have to have an accepted image to post here. I guess not many go to the lengths of signing on as a contributor, but 'Why is there a picture of me in your library' must be a question which is often asked as Alamy have a blog article devoted to answering questions on the issue. Trouble is you have to know it's there in order to go looking for it.
  2. My submission from yesterday has just passed QC. Timescale is about normal in my experience, 30 hours or so, and my old fashioned three star ranking remains in place. No sure what I would need to do to get the new five star ranking, given that I have never had a QC failure. Submit more often? Sell more? Get a better CTR? I presume there is some reason I am not getting the same QC priviliges as others are describing here.
  3. I uploaded a batch of 22 images this morning and they are still in the QC queue and I still have my old three stars. Many are called but not all are chosen, it would seem...
  4. I'm afraid my QC rank stays resolutely on three stars out of three, despite having never failed a QC check (and putting that in writing is surely tempting fate). I'll see if anything changes when I upload my latest batch of images later today.
  5. Can you comment on Spacecadets' post immediately above about artworks in a wider context. Most of the public art images I shoot are also in a wider context, usually incorporating people viewing the artwork. Do these have to be sold as non-exclusive?
  6. I think I would try to focus on the evocative and emotional words which your pictures convey, which someone looking for a book cover image may also use if the subject or theme of their book is not a purely subjective one. You might even make these evocative keywords into supertags, if you are convinced that this is what they evoke. I find it hard to believe a publisher looking for an image for their book cover would look for the search term 'book cover' as, arguably, nearly all photos with a bit of copyspace could legitimately have that tag.
  7. I tend to work on the basis that it they are distinguishable as birds at 100% magnification then I will let them remain, unless there is something about them which is a definite distraction to the viewer. If they look like blobs or dust spots at 100% I clone them out in Lightroom. I've occasionally wondered if ornithologists, hundreds of year from now, will wonder why on earth the birds visible in stock photos of the era don't tally with the great garden birdwatch survey figures of the time. They won't know of the photographers rampant fear of dust spots and frantic cleansing of the clear skies, lest we offend the great god QC and are banished to the semi-eternal damnation of the sin-bin.
  8. Hello Kevin, What I think I had in mind was Alamy's blogs on the subject of legal use of drones for commercial photography. Looking at it again and taking into account what you are saying, it looks like Alamy clearly expects drone submisions to comply with regulations (CAA in the UK, and presumably other regulatory provisions elsewhere) but they don't actually take any steps to make sure individual contributors or particular submissions comply with regulations. As with so many things at Alamy, the responsibility lies with the photographer and relies on their professionalism.
  9. Thanks for your response Jon D, especially on the drone work. I shall ponder whether it is right for me... Have a look at other forums discussions on the 'Discoverability' bar to get a handle on what users here think about using all 50 keywords. There is not unanimity, but the leaning is towards less being more. Have fun.
  10. Spacecadet is right about the numerous similars having a harmful effect on your search ranking in the medium to long term. Much better to limit similars to just a handful. I would also recommend you aim to use fewer keywords. Keywords which are peripheral or barely relevant to the subject of the image will produce false positives in searches and, again, drive down your ranking in searches. The other issue which you might want to address with your existing portfolio before uploading many more imaages is to make sure you mark any RF images which contain recognisable property or unreleased people as 'editorial only'. I note the response you give to Spacecadet on similars. I would point out that Alamy isn't microstock and things can work differently here, but time will tell for each of us. Note that it is very difficult to recover a poor search ranking at Alamy once a portfolio has headed downwards. You clearly have some talent for this work and I'm sure you will be sucessful, but even more so if you start out on the right foot. One final question. I not that you have some arial shots, presumably from a drone. I know that Alamy will only accept such work from a properly CAA authorised operator. Do you have to provide Alamy with evident of CCA authority before submitting, only when you make a sale, as is the case with model and property releases? Have you found the costly investment in a drone and training to provide a decent return on stock shooting alone? I have wondered more than a few times whether to enter that particular field.
  11. Thanks for pointing out that small point. One presumes that since the OP has made no further responses and still doesn't have any images in their portfolio, he/she has abandoned the project.
  12. You asked essentially the same question in a post last month. Until we get to the bottom of why your first three pictures, which you say passed QC, aren't showing up in your portfolio, then we're unlikely to get a sensible answer to the question you posted here. So, do you have an email from Alamy saying your first three image have passed QC? Can you see them in Alamy Image Manager? Have you captioned and keyworded them in line with the replies given in the earlier thread?
  13. I've been doing video for years now and I have found it useful to have several baskets of eggs. Whether coincidental or providential, I've often found that lulls in one income stream have coincided with upturns in another.
  14. Only Alamy can answer for certain in any particular case, so you may want to contact Contributor Relations if you would like reassurance. However, I have had double, apparently identical, sales in the past, which Alamy assured me were correct and we're, in time, paid out in full. I didn't inquire into the minutiae of why it was done this way, but I would guess it related to two different kinds of publication by the same publisher using the same story or article.
  15. Personally, I regard anything posted on Twitter as being untrustworthy and lacking credibility, posted probably by some numpty who may know lots about social media but may not have a full range of expertise in the subject they are dealing with. The tweet you refer to is typical in that it has an element of truth but doesn't tell the whole story. The last word from Alamy I am aware of is their own blog on street art, which states that the street art must be in a wider context AND be ticked Editorial Only. ETA Looking at the tweet itself, I would say that the images showing on the tweet would not pass the 'wider context' requirement. Perhaps Alamy would care to comment on this, given the fuss they have made previously on the subject.
  • 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.