Jump to content

Starsphinx

Verified
  • Content Count

    1,205
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

429 Forum reputation = good

About Starsphinx

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    www.starsphinx.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Twitter as Starsphinx_Pics
  • Interests
    Football, nature, live music, sport, events

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    https://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={BA44BC5B-E892-4660-AD92-C6F2157643FE}&name=Estelle+Bowden
  • Images
    1063
  • Joined Alamy
    07 Jun 2018

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Not sure I am brave enough - and the property has sold at least once as it is a village I regularly drive through and I sort of pay passing attention to "for sale" signs. Looks like an alley worth exploring - although a search for Juniperus communis macro throws up images of everything from scaley type leaves through to an image of a yew branch with a berry - and I know what yew looks like. Thank your for the communis suggestion, just juniper was too large and imprecise.
  2. I must admit I have given up for the day. I cannot find anything close enough to put me on the scent. I dont think it is a particularly unusual or rare thing in my area - one of those that I see all over the place and dont realise how little I know about it until I take its picture and try and identify it.
  3. Zoos, safari parks, game reservers etc can all vary from total extremes and I do not think there is anyway to say that as a whole they are or are not ethical because some are and some are not. A lot of establishments now have exhibits purely from "pet" rescues or illegal smuggling. These animals often have issues from their previous situation that require a lot of specialist care. They cannot be released to the wild so the option is put them down or put them in zoos that are experts at rehabilitation. If you visit a zoo that tells you there is no guarantee you will see any animal because all the animals have access to large private areas, if that zoo is getting breeding results in rare species, and if the animals are long lived then I think that is the best place such animals can be - and totally beats putting animals down because idiot humans screwed them over in the first place. It might not be the wilds but it is still a good result.
  4. My bad. Been back out and looked - it is a tree with a trunk about 10 to 12 ft high. Foliage does well cover it and the bottom is behind a wall . I will look at larch species and see if something comes up. Amazing what we dont see when we are not properly looking
  5. Bush is probably 6 to 8 ft, this is one of those guilty spontaneous shots where I was so fascinated by the texture I totally forgot to get reference shots to help with identification. It was taken last week on the 13th. Edit - definitely a bush not a tree, a roundish hump with the foliage extending to the floor. I have seen similar used in hedges. It is a village near me so I may have to go back and get better wider angle shots
  6. I am really stuck on this one - I cannot even identify what family this is I cannot tell if it is a conifer or something else. Image search results in "grass" which is not helpful
  7. The thing that gets me with the whole "could be DWP(DSS), private investigator, creepy stalker *insert nefarious possibility here*" crowd is that if someone is doing covert shots they are going to be using much less obvious gear. For legal purposes, say an investigator for the DWP(DSS) or a private investigator gathering evidence, the image does not have to be pin sharp noiseless to the same degree as stock and totally acceptable images can be (and are) taken with pocket point and shoots or phones which many people are blind to being used now. There seems to be a distinct lack of thought in the "Tackle the person with the really obvious gear who is the least likely to be doing something questionable" attitude.
  8. If Alamy had not cut the the rates I would have continued only submitting to Alamy - in effect been exclusive. Their change resulted in me changing my behaviour which benefited me.
  9. For me a blessing in disguise. The cut caused me to start offering images elsewhere - which I would not have done if the cut had not happened. Offering elsewhere is getting more sales and more money.
  10. Or of course do what every other sensible company does and put a time limit on refunds so once someone has had an image 30 days or whatever they are no longer entitled to a refund. Or if it is that important to them customers must be able to reject images months after buying them then they absorb the cost out of their own profits - which they do have - without making any more changes to rates.
  11. I do think the whole invoicing system is definitely an area PA can improve. Not just the self reporting/invoicing (which I can see at least some partial arguments for) but the rather nasty sting of full refund after any amount of time. I know this has come up in other threads where contributors have seen triple figure refunds from their accounts for images sold months before hand. It has been said that refunds should be time limited - and if they take longer than say 30 days if Alamy wishes to do them the entire cost should be absorbed by the company not the contributor as it is in no way acceptable for someone to be paid triple figures, spend that money in good faith, then a couple of months later find their account is in the red.
  12. Well I am back in the position where not only am I seeing a greater total figure from figures from those each month than Alamy provides but the highest single sale is more than the highest single sale here. I am not convinced here does charge more than the current industry standard when a smaller percentage in other places returns a larger chunk of money on a single image . (oh and in tune with the thread it was paid on the spot)
  13. Uh I meant they never paid for it in the first place in order to get the refund. I know the theory that it can sit on an editors board for 12 months and not really be used but the fact is for those 12 months that editor is benefitting from the work - even if it is just as a comparitor for other work. I accept that is how things are - does not mean I dont thing there might be a better way of doing things.
  14. No but I would expect the money to be paid at the time every book is sold not have people pick it up take it home read it cover to cover think about it for 12 months and then decide no they do not want to buy it
×
×
  • 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.