Jump to content

Zollikon

Verified
  • Content Count

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Forum reputation = neutral

About Zollikon

  • Rank
    Forum newbie

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    https://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={254B54CE-E3D2-4C2A-8419-9B140CF95547}&name=Andrew+Stehrenberger
  • Images
    654
  • Joined Alamy
    18 Sep 2018

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Thanks James, I'll check this out. Currently trying Sony tagging app which someone suggested but I may be moving back to Nikon at some point so rather not be tied to one camera. I have to say, would it not be in Alamy's interests to develop an app that did this? Surely they want fast, accurately tagged news pix asap?! I would have thought if they threw 5 or 10k at it that would repay itself pretty quickly and help establish them as a serious (aka FAST) news provider?
  2. Thanks sooo much Mickfly, I will experiment with that workflow. I owe you at least a pint!
  3. Reviving this old thread... I have managed to get Press IPTC to connect to Alamy FTP and the LIve News folder. My problem is Press IPTC can't see any of the photos in my phone, and it also won't let me create a new folder on my phone that I could put photos into. I am going to "Settings", Directory says /storage/self - what or where is that? If I try and create a new folder pressing the file icon top right, I get a svreen that reapeat /storage/self and also has a plus sign. If I click on the plus sign it ask New Directory Name. I put omehting in there, e.g. alamy and then press OK, and nothing happens, it jjst take sme back to the screen that asks choose a diectory, but the folder I just created is not there. If anyone can help me create a folder, list of folders (one per shoot?) that I can then apply IPTC/Exif to and then FTP, that would be great. Losing sales because I can't process and upload till I get back home which is way too slow for news. Hoping it isn't because the app is simply too old/abandoned now?
  4. Did you find any Android app that works? I have the Press Iptc one too and can't get it to work. Mickfly, I have Sony and their Imaging Edge Android app - what do you use to edit iptc/ exif? Hacked off at losing hours and sales.....
  5. Just emailed member sevices re this and got bounced to here by their automated reply. The Sun says "a massive 29.03million people read The Sun online" Alamy says - here's £2 for a photo The Sun leads a web page/story with. Is this really sustainable? Not for me, I've given photography the heave-ho for a few months to concentrate on actually earning some money. This kind of payment is an insult. Am I right?
  6. Sorry, got caught up in boring work for a few hours there! Thanks for all the input. Just re-checked in AIM and there is one submission of 2 photos and one of 91 photos - all the same night shoot. They all have exactly the same QC fail text and I can't click on any individual one to get more info - all are 'unclickable'. So, whilst I reckon I know why they failed, I can't be completely sure except by submitting them in smaller batches, maybe even one by one. I can see very clearly that some of the images are not sharp, though as I said, the two initial slightly unsharp fails that I simply downsampled and resubmitted, then passed. Maybe they were marginal. I think in future I'll DS and lightly sharpen any I think are borderline and bin any worse than that. I should perhaps say that I am using a new camera who's sharpness is incredible, way, way better than the Nikon D7000 and Nikon lens I sold to part finance it. My "pin sharp rate" is at least double with the new camera and so I am a lot more critical when pixel peeping. I don't want to waste Alamy's time or be sin-binned - just keen to offer photos that I think have a market. If I were Alamy, I might introduce a sharpness or useable size scale from 1-10 - lots of slightly unsharp 6000x4000 photos would be fine used on a web site at 600x400 or even full screen. Maybe that's getting a bit complicated - Alamy have been incredibly successful and I am simply not qualified to start telling them their job! This is all good, I am learning...
  7. Thanks Starphinx, I know they fail all in a submission and that does make sense - but it would be nice to know which one they objected to and why to save us guessing. I know also they relax the rules or News and then those news shots go into the stock library after 48 hours - so quality and saleability is not an exact science. That's interesting about adding a comment in EXIF. I currently tag using Alamy's web site but could add an editorial comment for QC before uploading - assuming might see it.
  8. Just had my first fails - tricky hand-held, bustling city street, night shots, in the rain. My uploading got cut off after 2 pics and they both later got rejected - no reason given. I downsized and resubmitted them individually - both passed. How does this make sense?! They 'look' sharper because you're not zooming in as much at 100%, but they obviously they are not actually any sharper - I don't get it. Can Alamy not offer a 100%/variable loupe view to potential purchasers so they can judge for themselves? Should I just batch downsample ALL my images from now on? The second point is more serious. I uploaded the remaining 90+ images from the same shoot (before the first 2 had been rejected) and they all got rejected. The notice says "One or more images failed QC. This means the remaining images have been rejected without being assessed." Having looked closer, a few are not that great - fine for web or TV use or maybe quarter/half page, but not a full magazine page. No complaint from me, I'm still gauging Alamy's thresholds. My point is, I don't know which they failed nor why. I can understand they don't want to trawl through 90+ images failing lots for the same thing - but could they not at least tag the one/s they did look at and fail and let me know why? I don't need an essay, not even a sentence - just a sticker saying 'blurred', or 'WB' or 'noise', or 'CA', etc. In this shoot, I liked the vibrant artificial street-light colours - did they want them WB corrected? (I guess not, they accepted my DS'ed retries). I have have deliberately blurred people and buses in the shots to portray feeling/movement - did they not like that? How about neon lights on rain spots on the lens - they add character and tell the story - but they are a fault... My point is, I'm guessing. Surely they could give me a clue? I really like this shoot, I have literally thousands of other photos that will pass QC awaiting my processing but I want to learn why these shoot pics failed and get some or them on sale (I've edited magazines and they will sell!). So, I'm going through them one at a time at 100%, cutting out any with more blur, downsampling and sharpening those with fractional blur - but am I wasting my time? In the absence of any words or guidance on my images, the only way I can think to learn is by submitting these one at a time (maybe 60 or 70?!) and seeing which ones pass and which ones fail. But given that they accept exactly the same image just because I down-sampled, I am wondering about the quality of quality control itself. These thoughts are probably more for Alamy as I am suggesting extra features. But any help/thoughts appreciated. (I'd rather not too many just telling me to assess at a higher quality or look at Alamy's QC PDF, that's a given.) I seem to remember that Alamy suspend you for 28 days if you fail QC too many times - anyone know current policy on this? I don't want to be banned just for trying to learn their thresholds/preferences. Thanks!
  9. It's sad, I only recently got back into photography (Camera Press, back in the day) and signed up with Alamy because their 50/50 split seemed like a fair deal. If Alamy want to grow, great. Many businesses want to grow, and they fund it by reinvesting profit, issuing shares or getting a loan - because they are confident of their business plan. Trying to fund your growth by squeezing your suppliers is a sketchy way to try and grow - especially when there are other routes to market for those suppliers. I think the real kicker is the huge size of the cut. It's not a 5% or a 10% cut, it's a 20% cut. TWENTY PERCENT! That is massive. And, with regret, it's enough to make me look into some of those other routes to market. I'm genuinely sad, but I guess that's business. I'm not going to tell Alamy how to run their business, but I sure know I have to look after mine.
  10. Quick update - the BBC sale has just appeared on dashboard. I think that's pretty fast sales/order processing. I think they got a good deal, I think I got a good deal and Alamy have their 50% too. Overall, happy. Such a shame about the 20% cut for contributors just announced, which is sadly prompting me to take action.
  11. Hi Cryptoprocta, I never thought of that - good point. It's not a great drama for me, more an annoyance. But now you have explained that, it makes much more sense to me and that helps me to feel good about things. So thanks!
  12. Thanks all - I now know a lot more than I did 24 hours ago. Re slowness, in business 'might is right'. I don't understand why it would take a big business any longer than an individual to pay a bill, especially in these days of electronic payments - they even have accounting departments dedicated to it if they want to centralise things. When I used to sell direct to newspapers and magazines it was quicker and that was by cheque! - unless the business was failing or had a cashflow issue, then they would screw the little guy with slow payments. I could understand if one cost centre was bulk buying lots of images, but this is an independent production company selling a show to the BBC - they used maybe 10-15 photos in that programme and, as I say, it's a huge show with a huge budget - pretty sure they could afford someone on minimum wage to spend an hour, maybe two, going through a few e-checkouts! I understand economies of scale but don't really find size as an acceptable excuse for slow payment. Same reason the banks used to take a week to process payments - no excuse for that other than earning interest on our money because they could. The only thing that will change things is market forces or technology (or law, I think parliament has been looking at slow payments from large businesses to small suppliers) - I'd be surprised if this behaviour still stands in a few years as things automate more and more. Anyway, this isn't really my fight, I'm just saying.
  13. I thought someone might say that, drat. So it's probably inflated my ego more than my bank balance. Compared to the £900 NUJ rates value if I'd sold it direct it's an incredible difference. But then as I said, I'd have had 0% chance of selling it to that slot myself (they'd have simply said "no"), so it is what it is - 0% of £900 or 50% of a whole lot less.
  14. Just seen this in the contibutor FAQ: "If you’ve seen an image being used, and it hasn’t appeared in your sales history within 3 months, then please let us know by filling in our unauthorised use form"
×
×
  • 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.