Patrick Cooper

Congratulations!

Yes that's another example - a cityscape / skyline image that is semi-distant.

Thankyou Wiskerke for your reply. I also have a related query about property. Suppose an image does feature recognisable property but it is not the main subject. For example, it could be a landscape image with a building or two in the distance (but still clearly recognisable.) Would it still be advisable to select 'yes' to the property' question? Normally, I would submit such an image as commercial to the microstock sites. Though if it's recommended to declare that there is property visible on Alamy (even though the buildings are very far away) , it looks like I'd have to submit them as editorial.

Excellent point!

I guess you could always climb a tree if you're allowed to!

Ive got a query about this letter sent from Alamy and their comments regarding property in images. I also contribute to microstock sites and over there, there are certain scenarios where you can have visible property in commercial images without a release. For example if you've photographed a house from a public place that features generic looking architecture and it does not reveal street numbers or any other such details. So is Alamy different in this regard? And what about closeups of sections of generic looking architecture where the property isn't really recognisable? Do we still have to mark 'yes' to the property question and select 'editorial' as well?

Umm possibly. Ive noticed some buyers on microstock sites have no idea how to resize images to a smaller size. I remember one client who accidentally purchased an image size that was too large for his project and he didn't have a clue how to rectify the issue. The only solution he came up with was to get a refund and then use credit to buy a smaller version of the same image. Back in the film days with traditional stock agencies, I guess photographers could have had dupes made of their transparencies and send those to the companies, keeping the original slides in their possession.

A very useful resource, thankyou. It's interesting going through all the subjects that are being searched and it's so random - 'vintage newspaper', 'naked woman', 'fidel castro', 'storm sun sea.' By the way, what does UCO stand for?

That happened a few times with my Canon AE1 (while exposing slide film.) Though I'm sure I didn't have the Depth of Field Preview button pressed so I don't know what caused it. I also had a Canon A1 for a short time and the internal light meter developed a fault, causing extreme overexposure. I couldn't believe the meter readings I got at a rodeo on a sunny day with the A1. I thought surely this can't be right but foolishly I placed my trust in the meter. As a consequence, my rodeo images were ruined.

If you don't mark the images as "editorial use only", then they would be available as commercial. Though if that's the case, wouldn't Alamy, the photographer and the client who purchases the license receive legal action from Land Rover? I'm not sure if Land Rover would be happy about one of their cars being used to promote a product or service without a property release - in other words without their permission. Correct me if I'm wrong. Unless it's up to the client to organise a property release? I come from the world of microstock so I don't know all the finer details of midstock.

Good points regarding the use of negative film for weddings. Yea the Koni is rather clumsy and clunky. The camera was designed in North America and built in Japan. It was aimed at aerial and newspaper / press photography markets but became popular with wedding photographers. I think this may have been due to the fast winding action. The way you wind film with this camera is a little strange - there's this long mechanism that you pull out and then push back in. I did have a very annoying problem with using cable releases with this camera. Often, a new cable release would work fine with the Koni for about a week and then after that, it would work only sometimes (very randomly.) Once I hiked uphill before sunrise to photograph a landscape at first light (carrying a tripod etc) and the cable release refused to work ( I tried again and again but no luck.) Back to weddings, my brother got married last year. The wedding photographer produced some beautiful images but it would have been nice if she was a bit more thorough with her editing. She also included some photos that were a bit average and had distractions in the background. And I recall at least one image which had tilting vertical lines (which she could have easily corrected in Photoshop in less than 5 seconds.)

That's a nice bit of equipment you got there. For a long time, Ive lusted after a Mamiya RB67 but never owned one. I do have a Koni Omega Rapid which Ive heard was a popular medium format camera for weddings during the 1970s and thereabouts. Though I used mine for landscapes. Out of curiosity, did you shoot on slide or negative film for weddings? I'd imagine that a lot of wedding photographers would choose negative for the extra latitude. I'm thinking of getting into wedding videos myself.

My comment relates to timing. I was under the impression that students were only accepted when they signed up as such initially - when first joining Alamy. I didn't think it was possible for a student to register after they had joined. If they accepted me into the student program after that point in time, it would be down to luck. Though regardless, it looks like I can't join anyway because I'm not a photography student.

I am a student.

Sounds like a great experience - teaching and travelling, and also adding photography into the mix. I did part of a practicum in my course and although I enjoyed some aspects (like interacting with the students) I found it incredibly stressful, overwhelming and I made heaps of mistakes. Plus I have an introverted personality so it's hard for me to be a 'people person.' Nerves were an issue too.