Jump to content

Cal

Verified
  • Content Count

    443
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

244 Forum reputation = neutral

1 Follower

About Cal

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    https://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={CFA9E1F6-4FA5-43B8-B016-7D784A6C27E0}&name=Callum+Fraser
  • Images
    1899
  • Joined Alamy
    05 Feb 2019

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. It is nice to have the choice on Alamy though. On another well-known microstock site I submit to the choices are simply commercial use or editorial, with quite strict rules on what falls into each category. It makes submitting stock more difficult, but the lack of grey area is also nice as you know where you stand. Still, I like the ability to choose on Alamy what I limit to editorial and what I don't, which is separate to whether you simply state the property or people within are or aren't released. The editorial rules on Alamy are also quite relaxed - on the aforementioned other site I use t
  2. I quite agree with this. I wouldn't say I use the editorial-only limitation indiscriminately but liberally. Basically if I have an image which clearly has property/IP in it and/or recognisable people I will most often just bite the bullet and mark it as editorial only, unless I feel that the content of the image (such as a panorama or skyline) can be used commercially under the likes freedom of panorama etc. I am aware that this isn't technically needed as the declaration from me that the image contains property and has no release should be enough, but we were also told not too long ago that A
  3. it was a below average month for me with only one sale, for $5 gross. The image is a regular seller, one of the few editorials that carry my port, but it normally sells for much more. I had two zooms and my CTR is a bit below average.
  4. The fact that they didn't offer some explanation of why it might have happened, or reassurance that it definitely wasn't in future plans before simply locking the thread has got my back up to be honest. Seems to be a recurring theme whenever anything crops up that calls our relationship with Alamy into question and is no doubt an operational/management decision to just lock and walk away.
  5. No errors in my account balance here but I don't think anyone in their right mind would pay per image to be here, and I sincerely hope what's happened is just another gremlin in the system. Stock is now a low price high volume industry pretty much across the board. Making a measly amount of earnings is one thing but being permanently in debt to the agency because you have to pay them per image is another. People would leave in droves, it would literally make no sense to host your images to lose money every month. Right?!
  6. I'd opt for the second, as you then have the combination of the two different backup solutions. I use TM to back up my Mac, but when I got my current one I restored my TM backup from the last one and it completely failed to carry over any of the settings, which was not fun. Thankfully TM is a reliable way to back your files up and even if the restore process fails you can just copy the files across the discs manually, but as a migration solution TM didn't/doesn't fill me with confidence.
  7. Very dry here, unusually for me so far no sales or zooms. I suspect there will be a few at the end of the month from the usual publications that report then. Had begun to wonder if it was a result of me switching a fair amount of my content to editorial only and to disable PU, but I don't get all that many PUs and all but one i've ever sold is editorial use anyway so probably nothing in that.
  8. Same here. No refunds that I can see or anything that would indicate this in the sales report. Mind you, last time I had enough for a payout, Alamy decided they weren't going to pay me that month and moved the payout date to the next month instead. System seems to have a mind of its own nowadays.
  9. Look at the outline of the statue against the sky. The area around the outline of the statue is significantly lighter than the rest of the sky exposure. Normally this happens if you push and pull the highlights/shadows in an image to a significant degree, and these "halos" can form to varying intensities around sudden boundaries of exposure change in an image, like at horizons or around tree lines. I think the effect, while usually unwanted works well in the image as the halo or "glow" around the statue goes hand in hand with the subject.
  10. I sincerely hope you have involved the police at the bare minimum. I don't know whether you rent or own, but a lot of people I've talked to who rent (it sounds like you do here) don't know their rights. A useful tidbit of info should you need it: when you rent under a tenancy agreement you gain the same Exclusive Possession rights that you would if you owned the home. This means that you can bar anyone you like from entering without your express permission (even the LL themselves) unless they have a court order. It also means that your LL or their agent cannot simply give keys to s
  11. This argument used to hold up well, even as little as 2 years ago when I first became active, and it was not uncommon to be getting $50+ for most image licences that came in. I went mostly exclusive on the basis that I had no plans to spread my workload elsewhere, but the incentive to do that has died a death. In the last three months, 4 of my 7 sales have been in single figures, two of those below $5. All four of those once cleared will net me an amount barely worth mentioning. Alamy is now increasingly offering what are effectively microstock prices, but without the benefit of very frequent
  12. The part about it being unreleased on your part won't matter as the company that owns the IP in the image have bought it, so they can release it themselves for commercial use if they want to (assuming it only contains their IP and no-one else's...). The fact that it's RM though and seemingly being handed away for free doesn't sound right, but only Alamy can say whether it's a breach of the agreed terms. I would think that even if a company buys an unreleased photo containing one of its own brands with intent to use it commercially they must still specify that when buying. What does
  13. For me, no. My best selling photo by far is one of a certain person at a certain protest that, shall we say, goes against mainstream views. The views don't contribute any of the common 'isms or 'ists but do upset people from time to time. It's editorial photography and serves a very valid purpose in an overall wider ecosystem of the free press. It stays. I think as long as you report your editorial photography in such a way that does not portray bias (which it never should anyway) and isn't overly intrusive/in breach of IPSO etc then there shouldn't be an issue.
  14. For the latter half of 2020 my CTR averaged something pathetic like 0.15, some months I was getting no zooms whatsoever. I was however getting a decent number of sales (using the 1 sale per 1000 images per month rule I have averaged consistently higher since exceeding the approximate 1000 image mark) and in a variety of subject searches my images are placed surprisingly high - as in the top half of the first page. I've come to the conclusion that zooms really don't make or break the system as a whole and I think most of my sales haven't resulted from zooms anyway.
×
×
  • 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.