Jump to content

Joseph Clemson

Verified
  • Content Count

    899
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

721 Forum reputation = excellent

2 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
    3474
  • Joined Alamy
    11 Mar 2011

Recent Profile Visitors

2,328 profile views
  1. In a subject as specialised as yours, the discoverability bar is a complete irrelevance, even more so than it is to the rest of us. Anybody who needs your images will use the scientific names and yours will be one of the few to show up in the search. Now, I have no idea what most of the keywords mean in your images, but I would urge you to make sure your ID of the subject is accurate as picture editors will be relying on your knowledge to point them to the correct picture. Finally, I would take out keywords which will give many false positives in searches, unless they are absolutely relevant. For instance someone searching for 'sandstone wall' will hardly ever be looking for a picture of microscopic vegetation. In your line of photographic work you don't need a multiplicity of keywords, you just need the correct ones for the subject at hand. Sales will not be numerous, but if there is any justice, they should be, at least, moderately rewarding when the sales do come in.
  2. Identifying a TV usage is almost impossible, unless you strike lucky and spot your own image in a programme. Usages are almost always credited at the end of the programme, but only ever mentioning the agency and not the creative artist. In some documentaries dozens of still images may be used and it would take one very dedicated individual to trawl through them an identify the source agency. The nearest thing to a light at the end of the tunnel is that the BBC quiz 'Pointless' often uses Alamy images. A typical episode uses up to five still images in a particular round (the head-to-head), so it is relatively easy to look on Alamy to see where they came from. I admit I have pondered the possibility of starting a 'Seen on Pointless' thread, but have always shied away from the commitment of keeping it up - I do not have the unflinching dedication which Bryan for so long showed with the Times (thank you Byran, we still miss you after your 'retirement' following the Live News debacle). Episodes of Pointless are available to UK viewers on the BBC iPlayer.
  3. It was early this morning and I didn't make more than a passing mental note, but I think is was an agency - possibly Xinhua, but I'm not certain of the precise ID.
  4. I applied the same day as I received the initial 'bad news' email and I received another on Saturday declining my new application.
  5. I think they must be doing some curating, possibly conscious of the criticism being levelled at them. When I looked at Live News first thing this morning there was a group of 25 images of bunny rabbits with a wicker basket and small Easter eggs (pure stock fodder). A while after the Alamy office opened, they had gone.
  6. The email I have received confirming my rejection after re-applying for Live News gives no indication whatsoever that Alamy are considering any other options. I fear all the creative thinking in this thread on how to re-shape Live News is like the seed which fell on stony ground ☹️. Tomorrow I am going to watch a whole load of steam excursions whizzing up and down the West Coast Main Line and areas round about. I'd love to upload some topical news pics but, hey-ho. I'll try not to be too jealous of those shooters who have the opportunity to get their pics in The Times (their picture editor likes steam trains).
  7. Can you quote yourself...? Just received another email from Alamy. My Live News upload privilage is still a big NO, but they've removed the half-baked comment about recommending I upload more frequently. II fired in my application for Live News uploading privileges very quickly after being kicked out, so it may be that other contributors will hear from them soon as they work through their self-created backlog of applications.
  8. I think they mean upload more stock generally, though it is not entirely clear. I can't really devote more time and effort to uploading a lot more Alamy stock as that would impinge on my video work which brings in more actual cash. Not to mention that returns per image at Alamy are declining, for me at least, and there is less incentive to upload more here. (But that is an argument for another thread....)
  9. Just received an e-mail declining my application to rejoin Live News submissions. They are happy for me to submit 'Breaking News' on a per-occasion basis, filling in a form each time. I don't think I'll be doing that and am disappointed in Alamy for not opening any pathway to soft live news for us mere mortals. The email ends 'We also recommend you upload more frequently so that we can gage ' Gauge what, precisely???
  10. As I don't have Live News access any longer I can't test this, but I am almost certain that IPTC keywords upload correctly with the rest of the metadata.
  11. As far as I am aware, News pictures do have tags and all the other information that normal stock photos carry and they can be edited in AIM as soon as they are processed. Where time and circumstances have permitted I have fine-tuned my captions and added relevant keywords soon after uploading. It may not make much difference in the live news stream, but it does when the image goes into normal stock.
  12. Re-captioning and optimising the supertags may be helpful in re-focussing on the subject of the image. I posted a live news image of a hospital caught up in a controversy about high rates of septicaemia. The images didn't sell then, but have sold as stock a few times after I refocussed the captions and keywords away from septicaemia to general hospital imagery. Much depends of on the nature of the image, but the extra work may well be rewarded.
  13. It seems to me that we are wasting our time to rant at Alamy about the microstock-type prices when such price points are inevitable in a marketplace which is flush with so much near identical imagery. If Alamy didn't make the sale, someone else surely will. The decline in prices has become even more inevitable since so many microstock contributors have simply ported their images to Alamy as well as microstock sites, so the buyer may not even have to shop around - just a quick call to the sales team to point out where they can get identical images more cheaply. The above comments about images being available on microstock may well not apply specifically to the OP's sale, or any of the others referred to above, but as a statement of general principle, it is why we are where we are. The only way to begin to combat the downward trend is to make our Alamy content as unique as possible, both in terms of what we shoot and making sure Alamy is the only place it is available.
  14. Ah. Got it now. I should pay more attention to the tutorial. I Thank You.
  15. I didn't know the automask could work like that so I am interested to learn something new. I'm not sure the mask feature has enough accuracy for me to want to rely on it for Alamy work, the mask spills over into areas of similar colour very easily and there is no way to fine tune the tonal range that I can see, other than by visually identifying and erasing unwanted sections, as the tutorial shows. My main reason for posting though is to say that on my venerable Lightroom v.4, the red overlay showing the mask area does not appear, or it appears sometimes and not on others, so it is difficult to see where the mask has taken effect. The mask is definitely there, as I can see if I make adjustments, but there is no red overlay. Does anybody know why this is the case?
×
×
  • 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.