Cryptoprocta

I got a sale for a file of a 'known person' whose name I had unknowingly mis-spelt, i.e. I had no idea there was an alternative spelling of her not-uncommon surname. Presumably the person searching was the same. So now I've added the correct spelling but left the wrong one 'just in case'. Otherwise, I do put in variants, and sometimes also foreign words if relevant, e.g. Roma, Firenze or a particular building or bridge. I.e. only if the photo has been taken in a particular country.

That's not how pricing on Alamy works. I've had an 'alamywhack' (a subject for which, at the time of sale, I had the only image on Alamy) sell for tiddlers. The prices are what the buyer negotiates, presumably based on the amount they guarantee to buy. We have no negotiating power. If you doubt that, just check the Alamy 'rack rate' prices for common subjects and under-represented subects, and you'll find they're the same prices. If thousands of something exist, we have a lot more competition, for sure, so our image either has to be better or different enough to catch the buyer'

Sales: -13%, compared to 2019. Revenue: -30% compared to 2019, -47% compared to 2018. (gross, from chart on dashboard) Worst full year for gross revenue, only worse year was 2009, the year I started. Admittedly, due to personal circumstances, I hardly uploaded anything this year. These circumstances have changed, but I'm not sure whether it would be worth the effort: there is almost no 'live news' down here which is of interest to the nationals, and the local papers don't pay for images, or at least they don't use Alamy/other agency images. General stock prices are shooting dow

Six tiddlers and a refund from May 2019 (default, probably) meant month ended on -$10.52, so technically worst month ever; though as the sale was never paid, I'm not actually paying back money received, thank goodness.

That is where there is a problem interpretation. Generally undermining sales of 'teaching materials' is understood to mean published textbooks etc., though you are clearly interpreting a photo as a 'teaching material' if is used that way. I suspect you'd be relying on "the man on the Clapham omnibus" to settle that.

As you well know, in the UK, if teachers are using them within their own classrooms, it's almost never theft, it's an allowed use (exception to copyright). "the copying of works in any medium as long as the use is solely to illustrate a point, it is not done for commercial purposes, it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement, and the use is fair dealing. This means minor uses, such as displaying a few lines of poetry on an interactive whiteboard, are permitted, but uses which would undermine sales of teaching materials are not" https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyrig

Nine sales, minus a refund* from last month, $90.70 net, which is my best earning month of 2020. Zooms and CTR low. * which may well have been a genuine error as it sold twice with almost identical details.

If they remember to report that they've used the image in the first place.

Hmmm, it's complex for sure. Hadn't thought about the freelance thing. Thanks for the reply.

I've had an Alamywhack net me less than an average UKNS sale. We're always told it's not about the rareness or beauty of the image, but the discounting ability of the buyer. Pretending otherwise is having our heads in the sand.

I'm opted in; but still, this post further erodes my trust in Alamy. When I was opted out, all that happened was that I got fewer sales. It has been said many times that UKNS buyers just didn't see opted out files. How can that be a "more complex and confusing search experience"? How stupid do you think these customers are? How stupid do you think we are when you feed us this guff? If I'm buying anything online and filter my options by price, I get options which are within my budget, and I don't need to see more expensive (or, indeed, cheaper) options. That's a sma

Many thanks once again, Bryan!

Oh, I hadn't thought about bankruptcy! Thanks for the suggestion.

I know about refunds, we don't like them, but hopefully it helps to keep customers happy therefore coming back and buying in future. This one I had seems a bit strange. Before I take it up with Alamy, does anyone have an explanation? Date of invoice: 11th June 2020 Use: Usage: Magazines and books ; Start: 17-June-2020 ; End: 17-June-2025 Paid: August 2020 Refunded: September 2020. If they didn't actually use the file in June, why did they pay for it in August, then get a refund? (It hasn't been repurchased) Surely they'd just have said "we're not going to use it"

A 'better month': 8 sales, $77.16 net. Views and zooms very low.

Ooh, Elisabeth came to one of the Scottish Alamy meetings. (if anyone can remember what a meeting was)

Very sorry to read that, Betty. 😘

8 sales for me, but an unrebought refund left my month on $34.20 net. Worse, only 14 zooms over the whole month. 😞

Thanks again, Bryan

7 sales, $27.62 net, worst month for a long time. Funnily enough, I sold a file via my own website (I don't sell online, the buyer contacted me directly) for $10 - a photo which Alamy wouldn't have accepted because of the camera!

Unthinkable to me, but there must be desperate people in many countries who fall on what seem like cheap meds.

I went back into all my medication photos and as well as the note in the extra information, to the effect that this was a photo of the medication, not the medication itself, which I already had but the desperate or stingy weren't looking at, started all the captions with "A stock photo of ...". So far, so good.

It seems you need to find unreported uses, report it to Alamy, get paid your peanuts ... then they ban you! Worked for me! (OK, that's a 'conspiracy theory', but it's an incredible coincidence that they've used none of my pics since, not even the one they used many, many times and didn't report over 20 of these uses ...)

That is super depressing when I see your port.

5 sales for $47.42 net. Zooms and CTR well down on last four months.