Jump to content

Patrick Cooper

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Patrick Cooper

  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' photos of the whale and I don't have a clue what she means by that. The images that I sent her are in focus and the whale is very large within the frame (magnified by the 600mm.) There are no obstructions blocking the view and no distractions. There is no fog, haze or mist. I don't know how I'm supposed to take 'clearer' photos of the subject. I do have one more whale image that I'm going to send her so I may have a very slim chance there.
  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 vibrations from the kite to the camera. Actually, another nice thing about a kite is that the line can be tied to a post or a stake in the ground, leaving your hands free if you want to. That's also something you do when attaching the camera and picavet to the line. So the first step is to get the kite into the air, then attach the line to a post or similar structure, then attach the camera and picavet to the line and then let more line out until the camera is at the desired height in the sky. There's also another bonus of a kite. Unlike a drone, there are no batteries to keep it up in the air so you could keep a kite up there for hours if the wind remains steady. Though of course the camera requires batteries so that's a limiting factor. I do fly rc quadcopters myself and yea they are a lot of fun. I did buy a delta shaped kite some time back specifically for KAP but the middle spar broke on it's very first flight. Unbelievable. I could see it bending when it was in the air and then it snapped. Here's a nice video of a demonstration of KAP.
  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 Peeping Tom (1960) about a disturbed individual who films people in dire situations with a 16mm cine camera. The trailer for Peeping Tom is also unusual in itself.
  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, you would still have to increase the iso a fair bit in order to use very fast shutter speeds to combat the inevitable shakiness from the kite in the air. Another thing kite aerial photographers do to reduce vibrations is attach the camera about half way along the kite line and use a suspension system like a picavet. KAP (kite aerial photography) has been something Ive been considering taking up for quite a while. Though the general advice is to start off with just flying the kite on it's own without any payload and build up your kite flying skills. Then later on, attach a payload like a water bottle to the kite line and practise with that. Then after that, buy a very cheap and old second hand little digital compact camera and do some KAP with that while still refining your kite flying skills. Then when you think your ready, you can attach a more expensive and serious camera with a larger sensor to the picavet. Though even so, you may be reluctant to send an overly expensive camera into the air with a kite. No matter how good your kite flying skills get, I guess there's always the chance of the kite and camera impacting the ground. So it might be worth getting a second hand camera with a decently sized sensor that's not going to break the bank. I notice some people add padding to their cameras just in case.
  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.
  16. Yes not surprisingly, there is stair stepping at those magnifications. Though it's also clear in the second image that some of the pixels in that diagonal line have moved. They are in a different position compared to the first image. After the point where the circle intersects with the line, the pixels are lower (on the right side of the image.)
  17. Fairly recently, I was working on a project with Bezier curves. I drew a curvey line, filled it with black and then drew a circle and filled that with yellow and deleted the paths of both elements. You can see a zoomed in crop of the right part of the image here. Later on, I filled the white background with orange. Then after that, I dragged another object on to the image. However, zooming into the completed image, it looks like the pixels in that wavy line have shifted. By coincidence, they have shifted at the point where the circle meets the line. And a similar thing has also occurred on the left side of the image (at the point where the other side of the circle meets the wavy line) What could be causing this? And how do I prevent it from happening again? I was working with Tiff files by the way. Saving different versions as Tiffs as I made different changes. And just now, I did a test. With the first file, I filled in the white background with orange temporarily and the pixels in the line remained the same. I did absolutely nothing to that diagonal line. The pixels shifted by themselves. So I'm wondering what caused this. With the second file on display, I did three things. 1. I filled the background colour with orange. 2. I cropped the image below the diagonal line. 3. I dragged an element from another image on to this image and moved it around and rescaled it. I positioned it above the diagonal line. So would any of these things have likely caused the pixels to move? I'm using Photoshop CS4 by the way. I admit this is really bizarre and Ive never experienced anything like this before.
  18. Unfortunately, I don't have a proper written agreement as such. In an e-mail response, the artist simply said that he agreed to all my requests concerning the artwork. Though of course that's not very specific. Though in a later e-mail, he mentioned that he's okay with me having full rights to the artwork. So no signed contract or anything like that. Don't know if those e-mails will be sufficient if there's some kind of dispute later down the track.
  19. Fairly recently, I paid someone to produce a digital artwork for me that was based on a lead pencil drawing that I had made on paper. He basically traced my scanned drawing with Bezier curves. It was agreed that the rights to the digital artwork belonged to me. I am considering submitting the artwork to stock agencies like Alamy. A moderator on a microstock forum recommended that I submit a property release along with the artwork. I guess I would use the same kind of form here? Out of curiosity, with the property release, would the artist I employed sign as the artist / photographer and I would sign as the property owner? Not 100% sure about how to go about this in this situation. Previously, whenever I have submitted work to stock agencies, the images are created by me 100%. So this is certainly something new for me.
  20. Sorry for replying to such an old post but I didn't realise that you had replied to mine. I knew from experience that the light readings I got from the Canon A1 on that particular day didn't seem right. The camera was suggesting aperture values considerably larger than what I would have expected. To be honest, I was expecting a much smaller aperture setting to be indicated. And by the way, I was reading from a mid tone, not dark coloured subject matter. But I had never owned a camera with a defective meter before. So although the readings seemed really wrong to me and illogical, I was so used to trusting the meter and not questioning it - especially when aiming it at a mid tone. In hindsight, I should have trusted my instincts and knowledge, not the camera meter.
  21. Thankyou, I didn't think to check the optional tab. Is there a contact e-mail address for CR?
  22. Just wondering how you can disable a photo from the image database so that it's no longer for sale? I have taken a number of photos at a local event and submitted them to Alamy where they are currently available for sale. Unfortunately, I found out not too long ago that photographs taken on the grounds within the event area cannot be used for commercial gain (making money.) So I would like to remove them to avoid any potential legal hassles (even though he chances of getting in trouble would be pretty slim.) Better to be safe than sorry. Ive removed most of the keywords and the description from the first of the photos but the image in question is still marked as being on sale. I can't see a 'disable' or 'delete' option anywhere.
  23. Thanks Paulette. I looked at the Account balance before. Though what worried me a little is that it indicated: "Total payments to you: $0.00." Does this mean that I haven't met the minimum payout level yet?
  24. Thankyou Joseph for clearing that up. Supposedly, this latest sale is for 'books and magazines' so I wonder how long it takes for those kinds of clients to pay up. By the way, I haven't uploaded to Alamy for ages. Maybe I should start submitting again!
  25. Thankyou for your reply. Yes, this particular image is non-exclusive so 40% to me. I selected the 'Download Sales Report' but it's mostly blank. It includes headings like 'Date Clear', 'Total Sale' and 'Date Paid' etc but there are no details of such. Just blank fields below. Additionally, would anyone know why my balance is still $10 after two sales?
  • 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.