Jump to content

Joseph Clemson

Verified
  • Content Count

    1,063
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

899 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
    3578
  • Joined Alamy
    11 Mar 2011

Recent Profile Visitors

2,676 profile views
  1. Not a lot you can do about it, I fear. There is only one result for "Bill Wood", a sculpted piece in Knoxville. I assume this is what the searcher wanted. Every other result is a because the search engine scrapes the bottom of the keyword and caption barrel to try and find some more relevant images. It is not often that so many irrelvant images come up in this way, but when there are few 'correct' results in the library, then some false positives are inevitable. It happens to us all and the bad occurances probably even themselves out over time across the contributor population. The only contributors who will get more that their fair share of false positives are those who have filled their keywords with irrevelant or near irrelevant keywords. They will reap what they sow in that respect. I would venture to suggest the back-lit Dog Daisy is probably falling foul of having just a little too much detail in the caption or keywords. I can't imagine any potential searcher looking specifically for a flower that is back-lit (though I'm not an expert in nature photography!). I would probably have left the 'back-lit' keyword out of the list, lest it does indeed produce false positives. Sometimes we can be a bit too detailed in keywording - judging what is and what is not useful in that respect is something of an art and becomes easier the longer you have been doing it. Each morning I look at which of my images have appeared in searches unexpectedly and review them to see if I can rid myself of keywords which give rise to this kind of false positive. However, sometimes we just have to put up with them. ETA. Nice images, by the way. You seem to keyword and caption very well and I think you are not a little unlucky to have been caught out with false positives in this way.
  2. I think the labourious and costly task of curating a very large image library would make a varied collection like Alamy's completely uneconomic. Although the multi-million image collection is unwieldy, the use of raw computer power and algorithms to identify what the customer wants is almost certainly a more cost-efficient way of proceeding. Machine curating a massive collection is easier and cheaper and probably as successful as trying to do it manually, I am increasingly happy to see poorly keyworded and captioned images, because I know they will not be in realistic competition with mine or other careful contributors.I do try to help new contributors to understand this, so they have a chance to succeed, but hey-ho, some do not hear.
  3. I think it would be helpful to refer to Contributor Relations. Photorealistic images is a grey area and they may be best placed to offer a meaningful response.
  4. A little more detail on Alamy QC Basically, Alamy use an industrial type sampling system for QC. Once the contributor has passed their initial submission test, it is assumed they have the skills and workflow to consistently submit acceptable images. The only only check Alamy make is to examine a small number of images from each batch submitted. It the sample is OK, they assume the rest are OK too. They rely on the professionalism and skill of the contributor. If an image fails they assume a problem has arisen in the photographer's workflow. They reject all images in the queue to allow the photographer to examine whether the problem is a one off or something which affects several images, and re-submit as required. There is usually a short period of suspension from uploading to prevent contributors from simply removing the bad image and submitting all the rest without checking them further first. The system is the same ass it widely used in industry. No company inspects every nut, bolt and widget they receive at goods inwards. They inspect a small sample and if they find a bad one, they reject the whole batch and return it to the supplier for them to sort out their problem. The problem we (you) have here is it's not clear whether the kind of image you are submitting is being assessed in the way that a photograph is. If so, it seems likely to be rejected because (to me at least) they look rather soft focus and grainy/noisy when viewed at 100%. It may be best to contact Contributor Relations and describe the kind of image you are submitting and see if there is a way round these rejections.
  5. The model and property release forms I use are ones I have been using for years, provided by the big G. They don't have a property release number field, and neither does Alamy's own forms. I guess it is imply there for you to use as an internal referrnce. As we are on the subject of releases, for any images you have with 'property', Alamy's advice is they need to be RM or RF-Editoral only. Some potential buyer may see your supercar images and think that being marked RF, they are free to use them for commercial purposes, which Lambourgini may not like. Marking them RM or RF-Editorial only gives a degre of protection against this.
  6. In the interest of fairness to Alamy, the change in commission structure was announced in late 2018 and will only become apparent when they publish accounts for year ending December 2019. We will have to wait another year to see the impact of that 'innovation'.
  7. I agree with your analysis on Alamy's main business. The Manything App gets very mixed reviews on the Google Play store so I can't see a clear way for Manythings to turn around of its own accord. If Alamy are going to invest I'd much rather see such investment going into the mainstram Alamy business. I was going to suggest they reconsider revitalising their video library and reopening it to new contributors, but I know that even well-established microstock video agencies are having a hard time in the rush to the bottom on prices through subscription models at the moment, and a big player has entered the non-editorial video stock market in the last two years or so. Still, Alamy has a unique niche in its richly varied still image content so perhaps it's not too late to offer something similar to the video market.
  8. I think we can be quite clear that if Alamy doesn't get paid by the client then we won't get paid either. Non-payment may be a result of various circumstances, not just that the cleint has used the picture and then refused to pay up. Indeed, if that was the case and it became known, then Alamy has the option pursue the errant client for illegal use of the image, or to tell you you can do so yourself if they aren't able to for some reason. Non-payment (as opposed to refunds) can happen for other reasons, such as clients going out of business. It is in Alamy's own business interest (as well as ours) to pursue as far as is reasonably possible any unpaid invoices or dubious refund requests. Picking up on the later point about microstock sites. By and large with microstock we have no idea when the actual sale was made when the payment pops into the contributor's sales record - effectively all we see from most of these other sites is the cleared payment arriving (and even then, still subject to possible refund). I suspect in most cases the microstock site are quicker to make the payment available to us, but we can't be sure and there is little actual transparency in the process. At least Alamy is open and transparent about the sales and invoicing process, even if we find it frustrating.
  9. Sales show up on your account when Alamy invoices the customer for the sale. Many sales are on customer credit accounts and it can be several weeks or, in some cases, even months before the customer actually sends Alamy the cash to pay for the image licence. When Alamy receives the payment from the customer, it appears on your account as a cleared payment. AAs you say, when you have $50 cleared balance, Alamy sned you your payment. Even those sales which made directly through the website, rather than through an Alamy slaes person, and are paid instantly by the customer are still subject to a delay (45 days I think) before they show up as cleared on your account.
  10. The accounts of Videoloft (formerly Manythings) show a loss in the year up to June 2018 of nearly £1 million (previous year a loss of £1.12 million). I think the £782,612 dividends is from Alamy's accounts rather than VideoLoft. In any case I don't usually associate a loss of some £2 million pounds over 2 years as being a 'solid financial performance', but then again I'm a humble freelance photographer not a multi-million pound business owner or financier.
  11. Not quite sure what this means or how they manage it, but according to UK Charity Commission website, the Fischer Family Trust have managed to spend more than they received in donations and endowments in every year, bar one, since 2014. They do have some assets but I can't see £190,000 bringing in a massive investment income. Anybody with financial nous know how it is possible for a charity to consistently spend more than they receive? Are charities allowed to go into debt?
  12. Alas, sales refunds can appear after many days, weeks or even months. Fortunately, in my own experience they are not too common and many that are refunded are repurchased at a different price later - usually because the new usage licence is slightly different. I'm not a publishing professsional but it's my understanding that images purchased may sometimes be placed in a draft publication. which is then rejected by the final client at final proofreading in favour of some other image (or none). These unused images are, by convention, refunded by the agency. Refunding unused images makes business sense for Alamy in the long term as the client comes back to the agency for their next images, though it many not seems to make sense for the individual contributor who loses the sale. The lead time for some publications, especially books, runs into months, hence some long delays in refunds being processed. It may be that the system is gamed by some purchasers who claim refunds simply in order to get their hands on a high resolution file, but I think that is probably less common than we sometimes feel. I've never tried it personally, but I suspect there are almost certainly easier ways of pirating images than buying them from Alamy and then claiming a refund.
  13. I tend not to crop images too much at all - the purchaser can alway crop if they want to, but they can't uncrop soemthing the contributor has removed beforehand. I wonder how much clipping on a phone thumbail is an issue. Do many photo buyers (especially professional ones) search for and buy images using their phone? I tend to assume that anyone who is serious about their work uses a computer. Or am I showing my fuddy-duddy face again??
  14. If your cleared balance was over $50 by the end of the month, you should be paid within a few days by whatever method you've chosen. Some methods take longer than others and overseas payments may take longer. If you are concerned contact Contributor Relations and they can tell you for sure if there is a problem.
×
×
  • 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.