Jump to content

Duncan_Andison

Verified
  • Content Count

    1,042
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Duncan_Andison

  1. Haha... yeah, exactly. I try to work on a "zero cost to shoot" policy. Of course, I've invested in various pieces of software for motion/stills graphics etc but once they've been paid for, time is my main expense. A few props here and there and that's it. I would never pay to go to XYZ to just to take photos for stock. Takes too long to recoup costs before making a profit.
  2. Exactly, but that should be by submitting better quality images with better quality keyboarding etc rather than trying to workout % of this multiplied by this/ that and the other over time with a weighting of XYZ subject to client needs. As photographers, we should focus on the product and how we keyword it.
  3. I'd imagine CTR will be one of the variables in a search. As to what the weighting of that variable, only Alamy will know. This is the thing. A lot of the variables in a search algorithm will be a numerical value. Image views - what % of images views of this image result in sales.... what % of the sales were editorial/commercial.... is the client an editorial / commercial client..... and so on and so on. To help get the right image in front of the client there will be many of these types of questions being asked that will result in the right image landing in front of the right client.... or at least, that is the goal. If contributors know the variables then they can influence the results rather than relying on the images previous performance / history as well as the clients buying patterns determining the final position. Every contributor wants to be at the top of the search so there has to be way to determine the position of each image and this will inevitably be based on image performance and client needs/history... a scorecard will use a selection of variables that will do this form them.
  4. No. The problem you're facing / confusing is the difference between search scorecard and search policy. Two entirely separate things. The scorecard will rank images based on their performance, history, age and other AI learning variables. Policy would be.... images need to be the correct size, right cameras, color space, must be keyword and have all required releases etc Contributors need to know the policy but not the scorecard. Good behaviour will be following policy and it is not expected for contributors to understand or, need to learn all variables in a scorecard design.
  5. Hi Mark. I used to work as a Credit Scoring Analyst for12 years before going full time photographer, designing scoring systems and applications. It's industry practice not to reveal this data as people will game the system... human nature. If you tell people what you want to hear, well, that's all your going to hear.
  6. This will never happen, and rightly so. Once you publish how images are ranked it will result in gaming of the system. People will tinker, correctly or otherwise, images so they fit what is being looked for in the search. This results in each image having more or less the same rank and no there'll be no way to define which image should be at the top. For a search Algorithm, scorecard to work it has to be undisclosed and only then will it be affective. If you tell 100 people to choose a random number between 1-100 and that one of these numbers will be picked out for a prize, you'll get a randomised mix. If you tell them the winning number is likely to be between 1-5 then there won't be many selecting anything else other than those numbers. You'll either be splitting the winnings between the 100 or fighting over them.
  7. Agree 100%..... sort of confirms they just took it for granted that they could take money off contributors and that they'd just roll over.
  8. Maybe some but I know there are quite a few that submit to other editorial agencies. It will come down to how much Alamy makes for them. Given the squeeze on fees and Alamy's willingness to cut commissions it would be a brave individual to place all your stock eggs in this particular basket. Alamy would have to come up with a good package and that, may or may not, offset anything they may make from those left at 40%..... if they're the smaller group in terms of image volumes. Especially as it will be the 40%'ers that will be funding Alamy's bright ideas.
  9. That is another risk and there is no way to know or, guarantee it won't happen. No agency publishes the variables used to determine search position as this would leave them open to people gaming the system.
  10. With exclusivity you're tied to the way the one agency works and what they offer you. If they decided to change what is on offer, you are in no position to react quickly to protect your income. Basically, it would take months to build up work with other agencies again in order to get to the point you were at before the next 20% cut. Load the gun, spin the barrel and hope for the best is not the way I like to manage risk. Now, if you're not reliant on the money (not main income) then exclusivity can work as it saves time and might boost your earnings..... provided the fees aren't slashed further. However, it feels like a delivery driver with one van, no breakdown cover and no income protection insurance..... just hoping each day his van keeps going but at the same time knowing at some point you're going to be saddled with a sizeable bill just to keep it going. Edit. Personally, over the last year I've been trying to spread the risk and become less reliant on one/two agencies. All it takes is for an unfavourable change to the search algorithm and, well, you're stuffed.
  11. Personally, Alamy would be the last place I'd allow total exclusivity. They're too liberal with low licence fees at low sales volumes. They'd need a monumental increase in sales to even consider exclusivity and even then, given the way they've treated photographers earnings this time, I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them now. It's just a question of time before they pull the same stunt again. As mentioned elsewhere, damage done.
  12. Let's face it, to get that low at a Micro, the buyer would have to be on a very large subscription package!
  13. Thanks.... they are all greyed out for me, can't select any of them?!? Edit. Just realised they must be RM.
  14. Where do you apply these restrictions? and can it be done to your entire port in one go?!? Cheers
  15. I agree. If Alamy go ahead with this cut then it's obvious Alamy views our commission as their Rainy Day money. Nice easy money for them. And saying it shouldn't happen again means nothing given they said that the last time. The trust has gone and I'm not sure they can recover it. The prospect of further reductions from an untrustworthy agency, lower licence fees with low sales volume certainly means I will be looking to place work elsewhere now. T
  16. Not necessarily. Most agencies weight images by a number of factors when a client searches a particular search term and one of the main variables is image age. In other words, you are looking at a 10 years span but realistically, searches will give priority of images with within a 2-3 year age span then dropping off after that subject to how popular the image has been. You will get some images appearing from way back but this is also likely part of the search design. Libraries like to keep fresh content coming to the fore so, images with no views/sales are brought forward (in smaller numbers) for a 2nd chance. Anyway, the top and bottom of it is, when a client searches for an image, you images is not competing with the full 155m, it's competing with images of the same keyword and each image is then ranked based on a predetermined set of variables. The age variable often pushes a lot of these images of the back of the search leaving newer and more popular at the front with a mix of older stuff as well. At least, this is how I hope Alamy work it
  17. Not bad this month so far..... 4 of those calendar shots as well.
  18. Both. Laptop while shooting in a studio, tethered, and for when I'm not in the office. In the office I use a Mac Pro with a 27 2k monitor and a 27 QHD Cintiq. The most important one for me is the 27 2k monitor as this gives the right pixel density to check image sharpness. The laptop (retina) is too high a pixel density to be able to tell if an image is sharp and the Cintiq is more about drawing than reviewing.
  19. As already mentioned, take a look at the 90mm Macro lens. This lens is an excellent lens, extremely sharp and great for macro, studio and portrait work. It's very much worth the investment!
  20. Mine went up this year... due to go to the max on books etc but I nearly chocked at the $0.96 for magazines & $0 for the books I found and logged. They included quite a few text books etc. I just don't see it being worth the effort (the additional ISBN bit). I could spend that time taking more photos and make significantly more!
  21. I'm sure you'll enjoy it. Take a look at this guys website http://www.markgaler.com/camera-custom-settings there are a few interesting videos about setting up a A7iii / A7riii / A9 cameras. A lot of the ones for the A7riii are just as relevant for the A7iii as the menu choices are very similar. There is a lot the camera can do and he's good at explaining it.
  22. I've just spoken to them as I hadn't received that email advising it was due soon. They've confirmed they're being issued and we should start seeing payments arriving over the next week.
  23. +1 I try to spend $0, or near as possible, on anything I shoot and therefore profit comes fast.
  24. But you also complain bitterly on micro stock about poor sales? 10 hours ago on a favourite thread of yours. Sensing a pattern. "Absolutely atrocious. Abysmal. Apalling. "
×
×
  • 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.