Jump to content

meanderingemu

Verified
  • Posts

    4,476
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by meanderingemu

  1. 16 minutes ago, NYCat said:

     

    Thank you, James. Very helpful. I had wondered if the India pics were considered unsafe because they are in a National Reserve. We had paid extra for better access and that may or may not have included the right to sell the images. I don't think I'd want to chance it anyway because they had a way of surprising us with their "rules". It was a great trip but India can be problematic. So I think I understand now. 

     

    Paulette

     

    this is an interesting matter, because if you only put the name of the Park then in gets assigned to Vital.  so i guess it is now important to have National Park in the Keywords. 

    • Like 1
    • Dislike 1
  2. 51 minutes ago, gvallee said:

     

    With respect, I might not have been clear but my question to you was should I delete 'lifestyle' as a tag? Nothing to do with categories.

     

    I have taken your comments on board, I thank you for that and will review my lifestyle tags.

     

     

    though this might not be the definition Alamy wants it to be, there are 300+ search for Lifestyle quite a few not fitting Alamy's view, so you would possibly penalize yourself by not using the keyword.  Also plenty of images that seem to fit what Alamy thinks but for some reason they think are better directed to Uncut

    • Like 1
    • Dislike 2
  3. 23 hours ago, Ed Rooney said:

     

    I don't submit as Live News. If when I'm walking around, I come upon something that could be news, I snap it and submit as editorial stock. 

     

    I forgot to list signs. Signs sell well but never for anything but a small fee. 

     

    good

  4. 6 minutes ago, Ace said:

     

    That was my point. It seems to be since the new side bars were introduced things have gone `Q` in every way. Just hoping the people searching are getting the results they need as quick as before the side bars. ...and no, I have not left any filters on. Was just hoping decent keywording was going to be enough to be found as it used to be. (um, since June this year) 

    But heyho, good luck everyone ! 🙂 

     

     

    as James said in another thread

     

    " to be absolutely clear once again, the best approach for any contributor to Alamy is to submit their best work and keyword thoroughly and accurately - let us work on directing the customers (and the images) to the right place"

  5. 1 hour ago, Alamy said:

     

      

     

    Happy Thanksgiving to you, I've got some insight for your previous question about seemingly very similar images in nature appearing across Uncut and Vital.

     

    First off I need to explain that I am not able to divulge all the detail and intricacies of how our search engine operates - it would be too commercially sensitive for me to do so and I would really appreciate your understanding on this. I will give as much info as I can though to provide clarity.

     

    Your situation in the examples you cite are quite unique, because your images contain keywords that will affect whether or not your images end up in vital or uncut. The Vital collection is the more commercially safe collection of images for those customers that need extra levels of indemnification and images less likely to have legal issues when it comes to commercial use.  For this reason, in addition to the other metadata rules like release information, age of image etc, there are some keywords that, if present, remove an image from Vital. I can't provide a list of these words, but they might be as you expect - brand names, certain locations or certain themes that we know can generally be problematic when it comes to commercial use. This step is taken to help protect you and the end user of the image from potential future legal issues. It means that these images could be taken out of Vital and end up elsewhere, such as uncut, which has less strict rules.

     

    It's also worth bearing in mind though that again, the vast majority of wildlife imagery searches happen in ALL so you shouldn't be overly concerned with which collections your images are directed to (or not).

     

    To get to your examples:

    • FA4XAR people value 0, property value No, taken less than 10 years ago = VITAL
    • JBP09F people value 0, property value No, taken less than 10 years ago = VITAL
    • W9EKP4 people value 0, property value No, taken less than 10 years ago = VITAL
    • ERM67T people value 0, property value No, taken less than 10 years ago, contains a stop word for vital such as "BANK" = UNCUT
    • K2WFXN people value 0, property value No, taken less than 10 years ago, contains a stop word for vital such as "TOWER" = UNCUT
    • MBTFDX people value 0, property value No, taken less than 10 years ago, contains a stop word for vital such as "NATIONAL PARK" = UNCUT
    • W9EKPD people value not filled in, property value not filled in, no restrictions and uploaded through stock route = UNCUT

     

    I hope this provides some clarity - to be absolutely clear once again, the best approach for any contributor to Alamy is to submit their best work and keyword thoroughly and accurately - let us work on directing the customers (and the images) to the right place, based on wealth of data we have available. Many approaches can never be perfect but they are constantly reviewed and implemented to maximise suitability for the majority of situations.

     

    All - this will likely be the last post from me in this thread, please keep any future comments on topic and direct any questions to contributors@alamy.com - the team will be happy to help.

     

    Cheers

     

    James Allsworth

    Head of Content

     

     

     

    Thanks James, this is good information and reassuring.  

     

     

    is there a way to get to most commons such words, so that we would avoid making references to "river BANK" for example. 

  6. 15 minutes ago, Ed Rooney said:

     

    Is it the subject? The location? The tech? Hmm. 

     

    I don't shoot sports, wild life, or rual landscapes . . . and I don't shoot Live News.

     

     

    you say you don't shoot Live News, is that the submission way or the subject matter.  I have found signs from protests of global subject matters do OK on the stock side and they don't need to be uploaded as LN. but fees are generally below Alamy stated average

  7. 15 minutes ago, Steve F said:

     

    22nd August to date. 74 zooms and 50 sales.

    Breakdown per licensed image/zooms:

    • 6 zooms, 4 sales
    • 4 zooms, no sales
    • 3 zooms, 1 sale
    • 2 zooms, 1 sale (refunded and resold for slightly less)
    • 4no. images with 2 zooms, 1 sale
    • 2 no. images with 2 zooms, no sales
    • 2 no. images with 1 zoom, 2 sales
    • 16 images with 1 zoom and 1 sale

    So out of 50 sales, 28 were zoomed. Hope that makes sense above, it's all for a single image per bullet point unless stated otherwise.

     

     

    thanks for that.  This is reassuring, that my experience is not an indication of a bigger systemic issue.  

    • Thanks 1
  8. 27 minutes ago, Steve F said:

    It seems to me that the time between a zoom and a reported sale is generally shorter now than previous years, but I haven't checked it thoroughly tbh. I am getting sales reported up to about 4-5 weeks after a zoom, but generally it's not more than a week or two.

     

    thanks.  It seems all i am getting Zoomed-Sales are the $0.14-$3.00 discount deals, where is in prior year i would get once in a while $$-$$$ images that were zoomed before. 

  9. Looking through my licences so far this year, and looking at images that were also zoomed and it seems the only time i get a licence for a Zoomed image it's a sale that was reported on the same day.  Gone are the Zooms licenced a couple weeks/months down the road.  

     

    I know Alamy made undisclosed changes last fall to the tracking methodology of data, and many people are reporting changing in cardinality of views, but this feels off to me. 

    What worries me is it a change in tracking, people no longer buying, or are more images getting delayed/missed in sales reporting? 

  10. 3 hours ago, Avpics said:

    I've had the pleasure of this agreement today, of a protest placard image stating 'Trans rights are human rights'. No mention of photographers rights.

     

    🤔

     

     

    Would have loved to see the meeting when they came up with this agreement. PA looking through the Contributor contract, "Hey Alamy what is this Novel category?",  "it's for new experimental licencing to market to new potential buyers"....  "Have you ever had a penny arrangement with your parent company before?"

    • Dislike 1
  11. @Alamy wrote in another thread

    Quote

    Now, if we find (via data analysis) that the tab being named "Editorial" in it's current form is not working as we would like, we could and would change it after doing some A/B testing to find a suitable alternative.

     

     

    so not sure saying Alamy has already indicated that they track buyer experience to make sure changes don't affect negatively in inaccurate information

  12. 1 hour ago, BidC said:

     

    True ... but the search starts at 'all' and the other categories are curated, hence those clients may ask Alamy for the specifics on what they are looking for. I always clear the cache with anything if there is an issue, and I imagine most seasoned image searchers would know that also, or contact Alamy themselves.

    I guess I'm not a seasoned buyer,  when a seller makes it hard for me to find what i need,  i just look elsewhere. 

    • Like 1
  13. 23 minutes ago, Allan Bell said:

     

     

    In view of the comments made from my original posted question I have now made all images on Alamy "Exclusive to Alamy".

     

    There is no benefit other than they will chase "found" images that are not paid for.  Good luck to them with that as I have never found any of my images being used which were not licensed from Alamy.

     

    If Alamy reads this post then yes I am issuing a challenge. They only have just over 6500 images to chase.😃

     

    Allan

     

     

    Since Alamy wrote that the main issue is when they find images that were used they just send a note  for person to confirm that they have licence i have been quite wide with my interpretation of "exclusive" based on various comments from Alamy. If person actually stole from elsewhere in past, i have no issue with Alamy going after them .

     

     

    Now i wish Alamy would also focus on ones they have extra information on.  Downloads and Actual Sales Usage terms. 

    • Like 1
  14. 2 hours ago, Alamy said:

     

    Not necessarily, because when a stock customer needs images for a non-commercial use they usually don't want News, so they would typically search in All anyway.

     

    Many customers who buy "News" are actually interested in "News / Sport / Entertainment (NSE)" but refer to it collectively as "Editorial", so would be looking for that Editorial search option.

     

    Now, if we find (via data analysis) that the tab being named "Editorial" in it's current form is not working as we would like, we could and would change it after doing some A/B testing to find a suitable alternative.

     

    James A

     

     

    thanks, So we should make sure that images that customers who buy "News" would be interested find themselves in "Editorial" categories, and vice-versa? 

  15. 1 hour ago, Ognyan Yosifov said:

    I don't have a link, just the email address I got emails from about my requests on infringements.

     

     

    same, but nothing about contacting them upfront directly.  The issue is the submission form restrict what can be sent as infringements, it's actually more restrictive than the "Exclusive Rules" 

     

     

    "This image has never been for sale or display on any other website and it’s not in the public domain / copyright free."

     

     

    So for cases that don't meet this requirement, and Alamy has pursued cases successfully (image with Alamy watermark in my case), we need to contact through other mode, and as i mentioned above i am reticent to contact CS due to bad experience, so this is why i wondered. 

  16. 35 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

     

     

    There is also the online form to report infringements.

     

    which now thankfully goes directly to the Infringement team so that the CR team can't damage infringement claims, which they did for one of mine.

     

     

    1 hour ago, Ognyan Yosifov said:

    Did you mean if you could contact them directly at infringements@alamy.com? Yes, you could!

     

    Never saw the announcement, probably went to spam,  do you have a link

  17. 14 hours ago, Nick Hatton said:

    I checked with them yesterday that it was fine to supply a calendar publisher direct, there answer was yes fine but let them know so they can inform the infringements team.  

     

    Did we ever get the direct contact for the Infringement team? I kind of remember a post that it would be upcoming, but don't remember ever getting the notice. 

  18. 10 minutes ago, Harry Harrison said:

    Yes, good that the are marketing it since that's where most of our non-editorial images will reside.  I haven't looked closely at the captions & keywords, or indeed the source of those images but I'm wondering if a buyer wanted images like that how would they go about finding them in Uncut, or even in Vital. The Alamy PR team must have found them of course. They had time to do it though, each of the collections had a sample of 500 images or so at launch.

     

     

    still seems confusing for a buyer looking for "Pelican Landing" that you can find images similar in content in Vital, Uncut, and Editorial .  But hey at this point i will go with what Alamy seems to think is the best approach and adapt to it to optimise my chance of buyers finding my images 

  19. 17 minutes ago, Harry Harrison said:

    I checked a few of these that looked like they could/should be in Vital. Strange, perhaps they are listed as having Property but No release, 

     

     

    i assume image with the fields not filled also end up in Uncut, or beyond the 10 years time limit.  But it is still interesting that Alamy would pick such images to illustrate Uncut, as most of similar would be found in Vital. 

×
×
  • 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.