Vitor from Portugal

Best sell so far dropped this morning. Happy new year to all photographers!

Low $ Country: WorldwideUsage: Editorial, Editorial Website, 10 year, Worldwide, single article with archival right in perpitutyMedia: Website, app and social media61 MB3904 x 5425 pixels2 MB compressedStart: 27 November 2021End: 27 November 2031

Flavored and delicious 😁 sell for mid $$. Best part, i only get 25% of the sell! HAHAHAHA France, Travel guides -print and/or e-book

The owner artists is aware of this book usage?

No Sales 😢

That's the correct way to do the job, and the responsibilities of the illustration tags on the articles is without any doubt a responsibility of the publisher. 👍

Thank you for the information MizBrown.

Everything have a brand, people, a design, a company that built something, a gardener that make some changes on urban spaces. Can we only take pictures on the wilderness "if not a protected area"? Why is Alamy asking pictures with smiling people if we can't take it safely? To pay a model and get the release, we will never get it back with the 0.10$ commission...

We don't even know where are our pictures on the world wide web... You post them on one agency and they just go to a bunch of other websites... Exclusive to Alamy doesn't mean what i was thinking about exclusivity 😂 Someone needs to put on the resellers contract that is mandatory to use watermarks on our work. Those pictures can easily be used on presentations without the watermarks and without the need to pay for them.

But the general public can access them on Alamy?

Big thumbnails without watermarks... What a joke... By pressing on the thumbnail you can download it with a clean 450X320 picture without watermark.

Some in the business told me, you can fill the "notes about the picture box" with the restrictions you apply to the picture if you want to defend your self About misuses.

But if the story is offensive, using the "illustration" with no story related with the subject written on an article it means that the story is the problem, no the illustration "photography" right?

The photographer here, he's the only one who don't have full responsibility for the use of the photography, if the photography is not legal by showing a brand with no release or a person, alamy needs to review and just delete those pictures. Or just add more options on the posting board like: Do you submit for political uses? For advertising?.... We can't even select the restrictions.

I believe that Alamy, has a seller of photography posted here, where they get directly the money from costumers have the legal accountability to check what they are selling and help the clients to found what they need... Otherwise, they will have to contact the photographer about every single sell and inform the use of the photography so the photographer can aprove it or not. That's the way to input the accountability on the photographer. The other way is Alamy only sell by request, and just ban hobby photographers. They just can't get rich and don't care about the "work force" this looks like