Jump to content

Patrick Cooper

Verified
  • Content Count

    121
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Forum reputation = neutral

About Patrick Cooper

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    https://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={74397C6C-B424-4526-ABE4-F0A6C2B790EC}&name=Patrick+Cooper
  • Images
    242
  • Joined Alamy
    16 Oct 2017

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This particular bit of unfortunate news didn't occur today but it was fairly recent. I was photographing a whale from an elevated position with an old 600mm mirror lens. When I had finished, a woman approached me and told me that she was starting up a magazine. She wanted to buy my whale photos for her magazine without even seeing them. Some time later, I e-mailed some low resolution watermarked versions of the images so that she could select which ones she wants to publish. She e-mails back and says that she doesn't want any of them. She says that she was hoping for 'clearer' phot
  2. That's a great thing about a kite. A large kite can lift a lot of weight as long as there is enough wind to support it. Actually, a camera was lifted up into the air by a kite to photograph the aftermath of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. And you could imagine how large and heavy cameras were back then. http://robroy.dyndns.info/lawrence/kitelines94.html A picavet is basically a cross with a length of rope or line running through a series of rings. And the camera is attached to it. As mentioned before, it's a kind of suspension system which is meant to reduce the vib
  3. Yea I first thought of Rear Window when I started reading this thread. Not long ago, I saw a horror movie called Polaroid on Netflix. Low budget B grade movie about someone who obtains an old Polaroid camera that seems to be cursed. Disturbing things happen to people who are photographed by this camera. Not a great film but entertaining and a bit of fun. The Bang Bang Club I haven't seen Salvador in which a photo journalist covers the military dictatorship in El Salvador. Though Ive heard good things about it. Under Fire with Nick Nolte
  4. Indeed, the cameras in many drones have tiny sensors which is unfortunate. Of course there are exceptions like the DJI Inspire as mentioned above but they are extremely expensive. Another alternative within the aerial photography realm is the use of kites to lift cameras high up into the air. People have been doing kite aerial photography for many decades. There is certainly good potential here. A large kite combined with a good amount of wind can lift a lot of weight - much more than what a consumer drone can lift. This would mean you could lift larger cameras with larger sensors. Even so, yo
  5. Thanks for the clarification, DJ Myford. It's been so long since Ive been on Alamy due to sales being so rare. I'm definitely out of the loop on how things work here. I should start submitting photos here again.
  6. Ah thanks again. Yea sure I knew there would be no issues with RF images made available for sale elsewhere (I also sell prints of mine at a market.) I was under the impression that RM images had more restrictions.
  7. John, thank you. So just to clarify, I can offer an image for sale here as RM and also make it available for sale on POD sites at the same time? There are individuals on a microstock forum who reckon that this is not the case.
  8. With Rights Managed images, I'm on the assumption that they cannot be made available on other stock agencies as RF. I guess they may possibly be allowed to be sold as RM on other stock sites with Alamy's consent. Though what about Print On Demand sites? Can an image be RM on Alamy and also be made available for sale on POD sites? And if that is allowed, would you have to remove any exclusive status for that image on Alamy? To be honest, I'm not sure if exclusivity only refers to stock agencies or if it covers all selling platforms like POD sites etc.
  9. Thank you for directing me to the Account Balance. Though even there, things aren't entirely clear. Regarding that latest sale, there is an Alamy Distribution Commission of 30% and a Distributor Commission of 40%. I know almost nothing about distributor / distribution commissions. There's also a 2019 DACS payment. What would that be? I can't see any image sale associated with that.
  10. So not too long ago, I made my third sale on Alamy. The photo in question sold for $15. Though I'm assuming that this is the total amount that the buyer paid for, excluding any commissions? Ive been looking around my dashboard but I cannot find what my share of the amount is. I admit I'm not that familiar with the Alamy site interface because I'm not often here due to sales being so rare.
  11. My patch up job worked. I dragged the 'good' sections from the old version to the new version, aligned them carefully in place and then merged the layers. It looks pretty seamless now (when zoomed in or out.)
  12. Yes one can certainly see it that way. There is certainly a parallel here. And the drawing itself was drawn from a frame of super 8 movie film that was shot by myself. Regardless, I think it's wise to be cautious with this sort of thing which is why I want a form to cover myself...just in case. Apparently, a traditional property release (the kind we're usually familiar with in stock) is not required. Instead, I believe I need a form that shows that I have acquired the necessary rights from the artist. Would anyone know a good online source where I could obtain such a form?
  13. I did take a photograph of it but it looks a bit rough and unrefined. Plus it's only the outline (there is no detail.) The plan was to trace the shape digitally and then fill with black. The guy I hired for the job managed to do so with Bezier curves. And the photograph was provided to him so that he could trace the shape.
  14. Actually, Ive just had another look at 33% and 50% zoom with reading glasses on and I can just make out a slight bump on the line on each side of the circle with the line a fraction lower on the left and right. It is extremely slight. So I doubt it's a display issue. Hmmm....I suppose one solution could be to simply select and cut out the good segments from the earlier version (where the wavy line is consistent) and drag them on to the later version and carefully align them. Like a basic path up job (covering over the inconsistent bits.)
  15. I actually wonder if the pixels have really moved or if it's a display issue. Then again, if it's a display issue, why is it only viewable in later versions of the image and not in the first version? It is indeed a mystery.
×
×
  • 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.