Cryptoprocta

Lucky you: this is my last sale: Country: Worldwide Usage: Editorial Media: Editorial website Image Size: Any size Start: 01 September 2019 End: 01 September 2024 Estonia, Editorial website, Bulk Discount, Flat Rate Gross $2.10, and it's a distributor sale, my net income is 63c

@OP, after seeing what the others wrote, I looked at your pics, and they are indeed lovely. Have you considered putting them on sale as prints, somewhere like FAA. So long as you don't tick to sell your images as stock here, they are still considered exclusive on Alamy.

1. Yes, but it probably won't be very helpful 2. Not in my experience. But we have no way of knowing what the overall picture is. 3. We have no way of knowing this either, as we can't see by clicking on images whether or not they're exclusive. 4. You get 50% of direct sales if the files are exclusive, 40% if not exclusive, so 20% less, which could be a few cents or many dollars depending on sale price. 5. See 2 - we (the suppliers) have no way of knowing. Also remember only a very tiny proportion of suppliers are active on the forums. Bottom line is if you sellelsewhere, you're probably better keeping your files non-exclusive. If you're wondering whether to spread your wings to other agencies, it can't hurt to try. Remember, with 489 images, you're a very tiny fish here.

So sorry to read this, thinking of his family.

Hope all is well with Keith - that's worrying,

Mine directly claimed last year was £156.97 (directly claimed). This year I sent the same form with the latest year's sales added (not so many qualifying sales in that year to be fair), but this year it's only £69.68 (also claimed directly). That's a shocking drop!

With your animals (shot in captivity), do a sitewide search on each species and see the competition you're up against. Then ask why a buyer would choose to buy yours rather than theirs. (Hint: You seem to have quite a lot of pics with bits of wings etc chopped off randomly.)

He split up with his lover, Marianne Ihlen. He remained friends with her for life (she sometimes came to his concerts), and just before she died he wrote her a lovely little note, and he himself died not very long afterwards. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/So_Long,_Marianne A movie about that part of their life was released this summer, to mixed reviews: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9358196 and is available to those with access to the BBC iPlayer https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0008yzr/marianne-and-leonard-words-of-love

Yes, and stupidly I had read the OP here, and replied on the thread without linking them in my head. Sorry.

Huh? Was there a deleted post I missed?

Thanks. Let's hope it's just a glitch.

another poor month for me: 7 sales for $36.65 net, which is an average of $5.23 net rpd

My surname is Leyden, which is a perfectly acceptable alternate spelling for the Dutch city also spelled Leiden. I understood that the name field did not feature in a general search, yet today when I was idly looking at my Measures since Thursday, I noticed the search LEYDEN for which I had 494 hits. So I chose one which had been searched and I'm blasted if I can see Leyden anywhere other than the name field. https://tinyurl.com/yyapp84s and just in case you think it was a keywords which isn't shown on the file page, of which there are many, here's a screendump of all my keywords from IM: https://www.dropbox.com/s/z4p4xjqrwh69mp9/NotLeyden.jpg?dl=0 Anyone got any ideas? That's going to hit my CTR a serious whack, not to mention p*ssing off potential buyers by showing them irrelevant files.

I've had a search on Margaret alone, which isn't my name but was legitimately in the keywords. Maybe writing a book about Margarets?

And I've had a few for images of boxes of tablets when that's what the buyer thought they were getting. After getting a few, I wrote in the extra info something like "NB, This is a stock photo of medication, not the medication" and haven't had any of that type refunded since. Support says we'd be surprised at how often people think they're buying a product. Not everyone has a clue what a stock photo is.

One thing you need to realise is the search algorithm is changing all the time. For example, for a long time caption has been trumping keywords, but that could change any minute, and as I haven't done my own tests for at least a month, it could have changed already. For at least a year, some searches have a different result when searched by relevant or 'creative' and some subject had the front page the same in both searches. I dont' think anyone ever knew what 'creative' means on Alamy anyway. From series I had, when the relevant/creative searches are different, I can't work out why some in the series are deemed more 'creative' than others. You also need to know that any word in the caption or keywords can be merged with any other word from the caption or keyword, even out of a keyword phrase to give search results you never considered and which are totally wrong for your image. That can mean for example, if you had a photo of Joe Bloggs and Jane Doe, your photo will be returned in searches for Joe Doe, Joe Jane, Jane Bloggs and Jane Joe (etc). In the particular search I test that on, that particular issue wasn't so bad last month, but in previous times, the wrong searches have trumped the correct names. But again, that could vary between different names. Nothing we can do about that (other than to mitigate it by not adding irrelevant words to the mix. Look at Alamy Measures. You might be very surprised and bemused re what people search for. Also most searchers are not very specific at all, but a very few are very specific. Some only look at one page, some look at thousands of images. Also you have no control over which of your images comes highest in a particular search. For example in your case, maybe lots of your photos have Wisconsin as a keyword. But you have absolutely no control over which one comes first, and the top one might delight you, or might dismay you. That might be the only one which shows on the front page, or maybe you'll have a few. All we can do is keep our keywords as relevant as possible. Adding extra (relevant but marginal) keywords might gain you a sale from one very specific buyer, but the more keywords, the more likelihood of false juxtapostions and possible lowering of your CTR and the mysterious Alamy Rank (if either of these are currently as important as they once were). We have a lot less control over search than many of us think. And an algorithm change can turn that tapsalteerie overnight. For what it's worth, add my voice to those not using auto keyworders. I have looked at them, and the time taken to delete irrelevent words and insert others make it a waste of time. Also a lot of them seem to rely on what previous 'similar' photos have used, but if these keywords are irrelevant, it's GIGO, and a vicious circle.

Both. But for the Alamy internal search, captions are currently extremely important.

I thought about contacting Glow and seeing what they offered to take pics (if anything!) but I couldn't ever find any contact, and even the school head didn't know. But probably there was no renumeration on offer, but in that case it was surprising they weren't encouraging crowdsourcing by staff.

We absolutely had local management and control of budgets within every school, and department within a school (at least until 2010 when I quit). Central ordering, however, saved us a lot of time and money, as firstly Strathclyde, then abc had a lot more bulk buying discount leverage than any individual school could have. In the old days each dept had to wade through (paper) catalogues and source the cheapest jotters, pencils, drawing pins, poster paper, everything individually. Took many hours and many forms to fill in. In my latter school, one of the deputes kindly made the job easier by doing the donkey work each year and telling us, Pencils are cheapest from X, rubbers are cheapest from Y etc. But when the bulk buying system came in, all the individual catalogues still came in to school but we ordered our 'general' stuff like stationery, furniture etc from the big abc catalogue. In theory, if we could find a cheaper source of e.g. pencils from elsewhere, we could order them. If we wanted to buy a more expensive grade of e.g. pencils from elsewhere, we had to be able to justify it, but if we could, that was fine. Also we were always autonomous in buying specific things which weren't in the big 'catalogue' (which obviously moved online). What we lost though was the ability to buy e.g. an artefact we had seen on holiday and being able to claim that back as that just couldn't be moulded into the system (then). (Which thereby gained a mild advantage that we could move it on with us if we moved, as it was ours). Also the 'subscription thing' which you seem to have solved, unless your schools were outwith abc.

It's a minefiled for sure: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/changes-to-copyright-law BTW, I'm really curious. When you sold to Scotland, did you sell to abc (the authorities' buying consortium) or (older) Strathclyde? These were what I worked under where subscriptions were not allowed from per capita.

The CLA licence which was above our photocopier said we couldn't take a photo out of its context (for use in a different context, implied). That was specifically for photocopying of course,as the rules were made before digital. They've probably been updated by now. BTW, you're right, the GLOW images weren't great quality, at least in my subject, but GLOW had only been in use for a short time before I quit.

Yes, indeed, a CLA licence is necessary.

I don't think that primary schools or secondary schools are likely to be purchasers. Primarily (in the UK) because there is no need if the images are purely for educational use https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright . Also because of the closed resource sites you mention (in Scotland, it's GLOW). You did very well to get buyers for your site. I could never have taken out any subscription because we had to have the goods in our hands before we could pay for anything. I had to pay for my subject periodical myself for that reason. I'd think any sales would be for university students for theses, and that is probably the reason for their unlimited duration of licence. They probably should be low-res, but do we know that this definitely isn't the case?

Who indeed? My first sale of the month popped in and it was one I'd taken this year after the Alamy social meetup in Edinburgh. 🙂

If you click on a contributor name you can see their posts in reverse chronological order, from which it seems you must have been thinking of someone else.