Search the Community

I have some old medium format images taken 30 years ago as a student that I think still have merit. Random street folk and other people who will probably died as they were old then. Some groups of kids on the streets etc. I have no way of tracking them down so can I submit here as editorial having no model release ? Thanks.

Just after some advice I have been offered an Apple iMac "Core i3" 3.06 21.5-Inch mid 2010 computer for £150.00. I have looked at expanding the ram, 8GB would cost £87.00, and a SSD around $120.00. Currently i am using a 6 year old Compaq laptop which is showing it's age. Mainly i need it for Photoshop CC, Lightroom and Microsoft works I was wondering if it was worth buying and upgrading or whether I am better off waiting and saving for a brand new model. Thanks Chris

I have some family photos from the Victorian era and slightly younger. say 1900 through to 1950s. Many of these were taken in studios, now long defunct, of my family members or their homes. Some are simply family "snapshots" Do I have any right to sell scanned versions of these on Alamy, or are they the Intellectual property of the original photographer?

I've uploaded some photos that were scanned from medium-format transparency film, and, given that they were old images and I was uncertain how scanned film would work with QC, I bypassed it by using the "Archival Upload" option. Later on, after reading some threads here, I uploaded some images from the same camera/film/scanner as regular stock images and they passed QC. Of course, the ones designated as Archival include the proviso, "This image could have imperfections as it’s either historical or reportage." Member Services has advised me that designations cannot be changed, so I would need to delete the images and re-upload them as stock. My question is whether you think the caveat about imperfections would limit sales potential, so deletion and re-uploading would be worth it. Thanks for any input, Don P.S., E9EC8A E9EC7N E9ETJ7 F7DY40 F7DY4A edit: typo

In 2006, when Alamy insisted on upscaling DSLR images when were then (almost) all below 17 megapixels up to 17 megapixel size, I filed a 2004 shot taken on a camera which was permitted then but now is not - Sigma SD9 or 10. I had a good number of sales and the 5000 pixel+ images looked just a touch softer than 6 megapixel DSLR shots on Bayer sensors treated the same way. Yesterday I made a $400 travel brochure cover sale from one of these and decided to look at the image, as I was curious to see if I remembered the origin of it correctly - and I had considered, last year, trying to locate the shoots on this and several other early 2002-2004 camera choices. My standards today are so high I expect to see pin-sharp detail at pixel level. Boy, was/is this image different. I know it will reproduce perfectly well on an A4 cover, as repro and print are my business in effect and I'm aware of the potential for quite soft large files to look perfect when correctly handled. But I am a little worried about what the client may think if Alamy provides the full size file from these early images - pretty much all my output from 2002 to mid 2006 being sub-10 megapixel. Then again I do not want to remove images when sales like this, $400 ten years after the (visible to the client) capture date, can still happen. Weighing the risks - of refund, versus of no sale at all?