Jump to content

Cal

Verified
  • Content Count

    208
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

80 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
    1520
  • Joined Alamy
    05 Feb 2019

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Absolutely, otherwise anyone who doesn't fill out the optional field (and I suspect there are lots) would be leaving themselves up to potential financial ruin. It would be absolute madness to have an optional field in its default state behave in any other way. The data that Harry mentions is likely an anomaly of how this default state of these fields is stored as data, I am happy enough that images annotated this way go on sale with both their property and person releases marked as none. I tried explaining what I mean and to be honest I bored myself... I'd be large
  2. grey area. but as the blog post I linked to says, cityscapes can be sold commercially without a release. it then logically follows that if you sell a large print of a landscape commercially, with a distant house nestled in the hills that's tiny and to all intents unrecognisable, that the owner would have a bloody hard time proving in court their hardship over you selling that image. In fact I'd like to see someone try. That said, such an instance is exactly where I'd leave the optional fields alone. No-one needs that hassle.
  3. I'm wondering if we should seek clarification from alamy. to me it seemed perfectly clear cut; don't fill in the optional field and the image will go on sale marked as unreleased, therefore it can effectively only be bought for editorial purposes if it has people or property, or the buyer themselves must release it. the blog post "A comprehensive guide to buying stock photos" reminds us that the buyer must do their part too. If a buyer purchases an image that is marked as not having releases and it contains people or recognisable property, then goes on to use it commercially witho
  4. Thanks Steve. I don't have any credentials at all where the protest photography is concerned, but I fancied trying live news and there were some happening near me so I gave it a go. On the last one I went to there was a guy there who got some incredible shots that made a good few of the media outlets, I looked him up and he's a professional journo so it stands to reason. I have a lot to learn in this area but the one thing I do have nailed down is the ability to effortlessly move through crowds without p1ssing people off - folk wielding cameras are sometimes seen as the enemy - but if you talk
  5. Good advice as ever Steve. But I will play devils advocate a bit too. I have images on my port where I have and haven't corrected for converging verticals, so far only the non-corrected images have sold. I think in some cases it is acceptable not to correct. I would also add that in all three of the above images if you corrected them they would either crop parts of the tops of the buildings/monument out (images 1 and 2) and either do the same for the third image or leave the crop very very close. IMO the image would then look so undesirable as to be worse than uncorrected. You have to plan you
  6. I assume you were er, choughed, with that one.
  7. You need to be careful with your keywording. Your photo of the Heron, 2CXTPA9, has a lot of unrelated keywords. Kingfisher, cycling, dog walking, ducks are just four that don't need to be there.
  8. I view at 100% but occasionally go further if I feel the noise is borderline. As we've discussed before, any chroma noise needs to go, even if you sacrifice sharpness somewhat to get there (at which point I either downsize or give up).
  9. location box is not searchable, nor is more information. Put the location in tags/keywords if you want it to be searchable.
  10. I would agree. I had zooms reported in September, to which the corresponding sales came for two of the images on the 30th of October... over a month later. The payment still hasn't cleared and whenever it does (wouldn't be at all surprised if it was December or later) you then have to wait for the payout date and finally for the money to arrive. My experience is generally that it takes several months for you to have the money, and certainly for me this is entirely typical.
  11. Can't answer why people are zooming and not buying myself. EDIT: Only thing I can add to this is I looked at your port and everything I saw was RF. Though I shouldn't think that would hamper sales, I have only ever sold RM images. I have around 100 set to RF. I'm not convinced having the same collection for sale on other sites (which are no doubt selling them cheaper) is a particularly good idea but then I don't know much. I'm mostly exclusive to alamy and based on how much time I spend making sure keywording and the other aspects are in order, I think one agency is enough for me.
  12. June was only 5 months ago and I'm guessing it maybe took most of June or even July to get all 3000+ photos online. Amounting to a little less than 1 photo per month sold which isn't great but it isn't terrible either. Your zooms and CTR doesn't seem too bad to me, CTR just a smidge under the alamy average. No point comparing one port to another but it may make you feel better to know that I've been uploading since 2019, consistently since March of this year adding around 1200 photos this year and total zooms for me is less than your 31, I also have a very low CTR. Thankfully a lot of what is
  13. Yes. What I'm noticing is if I update some keywords, spellings in caption etc if I click through to the image the next day the update is there, but the updates are not searchable until perhaps the day after. It's not so good for keeping up with moving trends or tweaking images to match common searches. perhaps unrelated but I'm also seeing that at least one keyword phrase (which doesn't just pertain to my images) returns literally 0 relevant results, almost as if that keyword phrase is being shadowbanned/blacklisted.
  14. The alamy QC guidelines actually state that white/black should be "within 5% of" 0/255 respectively, which is perfectly realistic. Remember, this is referring to white/black values, it doesn't mean that an image largely composed of shadows or bright areas needs the exposure artificially pulling to satisfy the histogram. As long as the image has good dynamic range, good exposure and doesn't have large swathes of clipped blacks/whites it will be fine.
  15. I've heard it said that you are your own worst critic. As photographers we train our eyes to see things that are likely rather insignificant to what I see as the average stock photo buyer. A little bit of CA here and there will go largely unnoticed to many people but it's the content of the image that wins the prize. I am not so sure. Many people still can't hold the camera straight or compose to the rule of thirds etc. I think at one stage the market was cornered simply by being able to afford decent gear, while everyone else was shooting with film compacts o
×
×
  • 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.