Jump to content

Joseph Clemson

Verified
  • Content Count

    1,008
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

822 Forum reputation = excellent

3 Followers

About Joseph Clemson

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Bolton, Lancashire

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    https://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={53C86774-081D-43C5-8407-07630E3EC132}&name=Joseph+Clemson
  • Images
    3512
  • Joined Alamy
    11 Mar 2011

Recent Profile Visitors

2,535 profile views
  1. OP, the specialised subject matter of your portfolio is so different, compared to the many generic portfolios here, that most comparisons are going to be meaningless. You can try to judge the general state of business at Alamy, but even that judgement is near impossible based on the evidence of a handful of contributors replying. You really need to be in the business of seeking out other photographers in your particular field and comparing notes (if they will!). For what it's worth, my very generic portfolio is on course to slightly better last years figures, but there is not much in it and the last two months have been very quiet.
  2. Basically, unless your are primarily a live new photographer, Alamy don't want to know any more, as far as live news access goes. They will allow occasional live news type pictures from non-live news contributors through the Reportage route (search forum for recent discussion on the subject if you want to know more). Reportage doesn't appear in the live news stream but it does appear in the library within 24 hours.
  3. The perception purely from the picture alone is that the photographer is close to the horse and, therefore, probably on private property. There is no wider context to indicate otherwise. If the picture is editorial use then it is not greatly relevant whether the image was taken from a public highway, or from private land where the photographer was working with the tacit permission of the owner. However, if I were a buyer looking for a commercial use, I would want to be sure that there was no possibility that the property owner (location and horse) would not object. Therefore, in the light of my perception of the image and not being cognisant of it being taken from a public highway, I would look for a property release for the location itself as well as the horse.
  4. It looks like the image is taken on a piece of private property, someones farm or stable. Therefore, if you were wanting to sell this picture for commercial use you would need a property release for the site itself. The horse is also property and a further release would be needed for commercial use. If it were me I would be looking simply to sell the photo for editorial use, I would have satisified myself beforehand that there were no explicit restrictions on photography for 'commercial purposes', i'e. photographs intended for sale. I would also try to make sure the horse was not particularly significant (not a Derby winner and not therefore recognisable to hundreds of racegoers!). In those circumstances I would leave the property and model release boxes unticked so the buyer can decide. If the horse was significant and well known, I would also tick the Editorial Only box as an additional safeguard. If I wanted to use the photo commercially I would ask the stable owner for the two property releases.
  5. I use standalone Lightroom 4.4 and add all my captions and keywords there before uploading to Alamy. I've never had any problem with either captions or keywords when uploading images, and certainly nothing like the problem you describe. I usually surround multi-word phrases with double quotes, as well as separating each phrase or word with commas. The only time I have an issue is when I leave out one of a pair of double quotes and it misleads the import engine into dividing the phrases incorrectly. If multi word tags are being divided into individual words it suggests some form of punctuation or tab (possibly invisible) is being placed between the words. However, I have no idea what would cause keywords to be duplicated in the way you describe. The only solution I can think of is to contact Contributor Relations, attach an image which has misbehaved in this way, and ask them to look at the embedded data in the images and see if they can identify what is causing this phenomenon.
  6. Alamy have said that they are not planning to accept new contributors for video submissions, even from those of us who are long-standing stills contributors. They have focussed their resources on the current stills library and their iphone stock app which cannot be discussed in this forum, by decree of Alamy. Alamy also forbid naming of competitor agencies, so we can't really discuss much. However, the one you mention hardly ever sells any still images anyway. The four big microstock agencies all do video and they are your best bet if you are a generic photographer/videographer (except one big G which I wouldn't touch with a bargepole).
  7. As far as I know you cannot use a photograph or part of a photograph taken by another photographer and then submit the combined photo to Alamy as your own work. it doesn't matter whether it is RF or not, the issue is that another photographer owns the copyright on the photo you may plan to use, and they alone retain the right to licence it. If an end user chooses to licence both photos and combine them in a layout of their own choosing, they are may be at liberty to do that, but we as contributors cannot take another photographer's copyright work, in whole or in part, and then submit it to Alamy in our own name. If you need to improve an image in the way you describe, the only options are to re-shoot the image in more favourable conditions, or shoot another image yourself which gives you he background you desire, enabling you to produce a composite image of which you own the copyright of all the elements in the image..
  8. You have to own the copyright of any image you submit to Alamy. If you use a part of someone else's image then the image is no longer entirely your own. There's nothing to stop you using elements of other images of your own to change skies or backgrounds - I know other contributors here have mentioned doing it. However, you should be wary of doing it on editorial images, which are supposed to be submitted with minimal editing.
  9. I'm all for competitors culling their portfolios, especially where they have images which compete directly with mine. In all honesty, apart from removing similars which pull down one's CTR, I can't see any downside in a competent photographer retaining images which may eventually sell. There is no obvious cost to doing so.
  10. My own experiments, conducted about a year ago and along the lines Reimar suggested above, indicated that supertags carried noticeably more weight than ordinary tags. The process of supertagging is worthwhile, I believe. This being the case, it also follows that one ought to be circumspect with supertags, and only create a supertag where the image really fits the supertag being used. If an inappropriate tag is used on an image it will tend to be falsely returned in searches and never get zoomed as the image is not what the buyer is looking for. Over time, views which do not result in zooms will be detrimental to the search ranking of the contributor. If an inappropriate tag is marked as a supertag, it will appear in search results even more, but still not get zoomed as it is still not what the buyer is looking for, and the harm to your CTR is, if anything, accelerated. I typically use around 7-8 supertags, sometimes fewer and very occasionally, all 10. I don't use them if they are not clearly pertinent to the image, though I will leave a peripheral keyword as a normal tag. I can't promise my method is the route to success, but it is logical and follows what I know of how Alamy operates.
  11. Ran into a problem straightaway as the image dragged on to the search box has to be less than 5Mb. Nearly all my images uploaded to Alamy are over that size, so I can;t even see if it will find my own images without downsizing them for the purpose of searching.
  12. Can't see the picture on that link as its behind the Financial Times paywall. However, if there's no possibility that the image has been sold previously and is being reused under an RF licence, then contact Alamy. They will be able to say if the refund was for the FT usage or someone else entirely.
  13. Had it been microstock it would very likely have been $0.35 or so with unlimited use thereafter, and no option to sell it as RM which at least gives the possibility of a repeat sale. I still like my bread buttered on the Alamy side, even if the butter is increasingly like margarine.
  14. I've just begun to notice the emoji options on the upvote/downvote button on each forum post. A new feature unless, I've been asleep even more than usual. I think I'm going to be more confused than ever. The Sad emoji looks more confused to me than sad. Does a sad emoji count as an upvote or a downvote? Does our reputation points increase by more than one if we are awarded the 'Thanks' trophy? Is this just another way of enticing us to fritter away more of our time on-line rather than doing real work? And wouldn't it be really useful to have upvote/downvote emojis for puzzled and 'oh no, not again'? 😉
  15. It looks to me like the focus is on the wrong part of the image - the flowers in the foreground look sharp to me but the car is outside the focal plane and clearly not at all sharp. I think it may be mostly a case of getting used to using that particular camera and getting used to how the images look when viewed in your workflow.
×
×
  • 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.