Jump to content

Ed Endicott

Verified
  • Content Count

    706
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ed Endicott

  1. 1) FTP for all image submissions (just set up another folder in the FTP upload area aside from news) 2) Merge the keyword sections 3) keyword separation (i.e. "phrases") by comma
  2. Mike, this is exactly what I was trying to avoid. In my first attempt, I wanted to have everyone up to vote....I tried, but unfortunately that didn't work out (hence the v2). I was asked to narrow it down to 8 and to include all images in the voting thread. I didn't want to be the judge of that. The polling options allow for only 20 slots...I tried to narrow it down to those that had two or more likes and I had 21 images. Hence I went down to 3 or more. The images were fantastic, my favorite image was not included based on the way the polling results ended up, but a method had to be chosen...and that's what I did. My apologies if you feel there is ill-will or if you feel it was not fair. I've put up the polling thread twice - it takes a lot of time and much more effort than I expected. Maybe next time post more toward the beginning of the month? You might also note that the most votes/likes/"greenies" came up on page 3 (collectively). Thanks.
  3. Two licensed images reported at $41 gross. My best month was in February with 1,150 less images available for sale than I currently have online. I've already written off this year (it has been a good year, but I've put in a TON more effort this year than in the past). I've reached the 5,000 image threshold and have made it a goal to increase the portfolio size at Alamy to 7,500 by the end of 2015 with more topics I've not already hit on. I am hoping for an epic 2015.
  4. LarsMadsen Bryan TABan Vincent Lowe NYCat Graham Morley
  5. We had quite a few submissions for October. The instructions for the challenge were: One image - captured within 5 kilometers of your home. The finalists listed in the pole 1) only submitted one image; and 2) had the most 'likes' (greenies) given to their image during the month at the time of this posting - in this instance 3 or better. I think that's a fair way to narrow things down. Voting will close on November 5 - NOTE IMAGES ARE IN TWO SEPARATE POSTS BECAUSE OF FORUM LIMITATIONS Thanks and good luck everyone! Abiyoyo Allan Bell AlbertSnapper Joseph Clemson British Gent
  6. It's not working as intended. There are three groups because the forum only allows for 20 voting options per question. I'll figure something else out....may have to narrow it to the top 20 (I didn't want to do that). Thanks.
  7. Post revised due to technical difficulties
  8. That's perfectly fine. CNN licenses their images from Shutterstock. I'm perfectly happy to pass up a low paying customer to continue to provide value to those willing to pay more. Oh wait, you mean Shutterstock doesn't have that same newsworthy image from that one event 7 years ago? I guess you're going to have to loosen that pocket book a little bit aren't you?
  9. Yep - that's not the only place it was found...but that's where it originated from. I've sent a DMCA takedown notice to YouTube, and I've sent a message to the photographer/videographer that created the video (no telephone number listed and a P.O. box listed for an address). I've also notified the agency that it was lifted from to see if they can pursue it. I've determined if there is no response then I will pursue their client for the infringement....but again, if I am limited to 3x commercial value, I'm stuck at $18 if Alamy is making these deals....and I don't know of an attorney out there that would pursue this for $18. It's frustrating and disheartening.
  10. Yeah....unfortunately, this is an image that was also pirated from another agency by a local photographer here in Colorado and used in a YouTube video that his company produced in 2012. Image starts to appear at 1:32 (with watermark) http://youtu.be/raC-bxSx2QQ?t=1m34s This is the image licensed.... I certainly hope that Alamy licensing this image at $6.00 doesn't establish the "commercial value" of the image from a copyright perspective or I'm screwed - and that's EXACTLY why I left microstock.
  11. I'm not one to usually complain about a license...but.... Country: Worldwide Usage: Editorial Media: Editorial website Placement: Single Placement Image Size: up to full area Start: 01 November 2014 End: 01 November 2017 Use on website and social media, worldwide for 5 years. for $6.00 gross ($3.00 net to me)? What's this all about? Is this Alamy or a microsite? There has to be an error in the terms...it states three years but goes further to detail 5 years. But seriously, $6.00? I'm hoping it's a novel use license even though we don't do those anymore.
  12. Ahhhh...yes. and this morning I discovered an alternate spelling for kefir. Apparently it's synonymous with milk, and yogurt, and even plum pie. Kefir and milk are different things Kefir and yogurt are different things Kefir and plum pie aren't even in the same food group.
  13. I hadn't heard of them before....scrolled through their website. It appears they are in bed with Getty. I would also like to hear about experiences.
  14. I think it may be a brand thing....I've also noticed.... Hommus and Hummus Yogurt and Yoghurt Then you have the not so obvious like coriander and cilantro ...and yes, sometimes I mis-spell on purpose...and other times I accidentally misspell.
  15. Christian, there are a few folks that do that - and they are also here. With relation to my original question, I wonder if they are licensing these images as RF so they can also license them via the micros (there are a couple of people who I will not name that disregard the contract that states we must sell RF as RF and RM as RM, but that is a different topic) or if they are licensing them as RF because that's what the customer wants? I think one financial disadvantage to licensing food as RF (or anything for that matter) is the inability to track the image usage which is a disadvantage for DACS claims and textbook sales....but then again, would an image of food make a textbook on a regular basis?
  16. For yesterday - 199 views, one zoom, one search was for a specific image number (image zoomed last week). I'm doing just fine in my book and it looks like an image license is sure to be on the horizon.
  17. Editorial use should be fine. New York Times Book Review comes to mind.
  18. I have actual book covers in my collection with the keywords "book cover" in them
  19. When I search "Croissant" I see a pattern of two RF images for every RM (RF RF RM) Same pattern when I search "Spaghetti" Same pattern when I search "French Bread" Of two "holes" I've found in the collection and attempted to address - first item - 50 images returned - the pattern is RF RM RM, RF RM RM Second item - 21 images returned - all of the images are RM So that tells me that in saturated subjects, the majority of the photographers are submitting RF images and there aren't enough RM images to follow the pattern.
  20. p.s. - I don't really usually eat that many ready meals and I usually buy many more generic items....but I've found some that actually taste pretty well (the side effect I am looking forward to on this experiment) and it is an experiment in finding a variety of foods to eat
  21. I recently set up a small tabletop in my front room....I've resolved to shoot my groceries and anything else I buy (my "cold month" resolution this year). It's something I started to do about a month ago. Surprisingly, I've gotten a couple of zooms on these images. I have no idea if they will lead to licenses, and I don't think I'm going to get rich quick, but it is something I am trying. With relation to the food, I am not a food photographer at all (setting up the shot appears to be an art all its own) and it's just an occasional item from the kitchen...I just noticed there are a lot of photographers and agencies on Alamy that do specialize in food and that appear to have their images set to RF....which is why I asked the question.
  22. My plan in the cold months is to shoot from home a lot more. I've been doing some research in the collection for "holes" and it appears that the majority of the time, images of food are available as an RF license. Images of food that are RM tend to be more related to branded items (such as ready meals). I know there are a TON of food images out there these days but are studio food photographers all shooting RF or is this simply a result of the Alamy search algorithm favoring RF (which tends to happen in the shuffle)?
  23. My thoughts exactly. I have the 100-400 and the 70-200 f/2.8 II version. I ABSOLUTELY love the 70-200 and I've taken some incredible images with it in low light. I'm much less impressed with the 100-400. My biggest complaints about the lens: 1) it is not as sharp as other options currently on the market and it is terribly out-dated. Images shot even at f/8 appear soft at times. I attribute this to the image stabilization system in the lens more than anything else. 2) Focal plain is a bit shallow even when photographing at a distance. This can be a good thing and a bad thing...for me it's a bit of a bad thing. 3) Bokeh is much less smooth as butter and much more like worms and wormholes in wood. It's tough to explain. I don't have any experience with the Sigma or Tamron. I was fortunate enough to be able to play with a Canon 400 f/2.8 and I will say if it's a lens you'll use regularly, then it's worth every penny. I have used the Sigma 1.4x multiplier on both the 70-200 and the 100-400 and I would say it was acceptable but not ideal. There was quite a bit of chromatic aberration in bright light.
  24. I was in Calgary, Alberta Canada for about 36 hours last week. I only got about two hours of free time - one was spent eating dinner, the other walking around downtown with the camera (while looking for a place to eat). I ran across Juame Plensa's "Wonderland" sculpture in the plaza outside the Bow Building. It was breathtaking. This is how I saw it....
  25. Alamy has no control over Google searches. Google searches are based on your historical use of Google. That's why you're getting differing results. http://www.google.com/insidesearch/howsearchworks/algorithms.html Google has recently changed it's algorithm to prevent piracy....which is why you are seeing changes http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/google-thwarts-piracy-with-search-algorithm-changes-1.2805809 I use two computers to perform searches through Google - one computer connects to the internet via a proxy server in Calgary, Canada and the second computer connects via a server based in the U.S. I get differing results from each search. We aren't all going to see the same thing when we search for stuff on Google
×
×
  • 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.