Search the Community

How's this for missing out on what should have been huge licensing fees--it appears this image was exclusive to a particular "other" agency: Single photograph used by political parties again and again and again . . . for a few quid. DD

I recently noticed an image of mine DH83W1 licensed for 3 months as editorial in 2017 for $28.48 is still being shown online. It also has advertisements embedded around and on the image!!! This does not qualify as editorial if ads are on the actual photo. There are ads for United Airlines, New York Life and Kaiser Permanente that show up on the image when viewed from a mobile phone or other devices. Clicking on the photo plays a video advertisement or takes you to another page. Doesn't this qualify as advertising use? The image of the uncooked wagyu beef rib roast is about half way down the page. Here is the link: https://www.countrylife.co.uk/food-drink/british-beef-deserves-just-much-acclaim-kobe-beef-149880 Regarding editorial and advertising: https://www.stockphotosecrets.com/questions-answers/licensing/what-are-editorial-images-licences.html An editorial image can only be used in ways where this is no personal benefit or commercial gain. An editorial licensed image can not be used for the following: Any commercial purposes including advertising or promotions To receive any fees from a third party sponsor or endorsement

I've had several sales recently for "marketing - excludes advertising". The latest is for a travel company for 'marketing package use'. Sounds like advertising to me. Can anyone tell me what the difference is?

When I started out in photography a year or so ago, I instantly created a website, a brand and logo, the whole nine yards. I dreamed of being a lone ranger in the world of photography and doing it as a business. The reality of that all crashed to earth the day I joined Alamy. Also in the months on the forums reading through the experiences of other people who are living pro's. I'm not talking about hobbyist forums where people buy kit for fun and share every picture they ever take on Flickr, but real working working pros. I quickly realised that they are a closed bunch who hardly share a thing, not even tips. I don't blame them, but I noticed they didn't even have an online portfolio, and those that did kept it short and sweet. I would ask, how important do pro's and hard working moonlighters see a website with regards to advertising your craft? I'm seeing it less and less important these days, however, I still think an identity on line is important in case an opportunity comes up (like the 3 weddings I have booked in the next year) I've been creating and managing websites for about 6 years now (another task of IT Support), but the thought of adding this personal work to my day fills me with dread, so I was going to go with Zenfolio or one of the other hosted brands. Creating your own site, if you are not all that technically minded can open your images to theft. I can delve into the web server files of most peoples websites and take any image I want. I don't, but if I can do it, then anyone can. Cheers, as always, Paul