Search the Community

Getty Creative will stop accepting RM material today 6th November 2019, all RM images will be removed from new single licensing by the end of January 2020. Premium Access customers will be able to access RM images until November 6, 2020.

It seems my total revenues on Alamy started to decline as soon as i converted quite all my pics to RF. I only left some pics to RM whose are the ones which sell better at the moment. Anyone experiencing the same?

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

Dear Alamy community and contributors! Please help me, what do you think about this? Which are the best choice : Rf or Rm, if the photography works, only available on Alamy? Waiting for your answers, Many thanks, King Regard, Akos Horvath Hobby Photographer

Good morning, dear forum members. I'm sure you've talked about this topic many times , but I would really appreciate if you could invest a little more time and help me to find out what I am missing. First of all, I want to tell you some facts about me and my pictures - just to clarify a few things. - I am Olympus Visionary/Ambassador from Switzerland - My pictures are constantly published at National Geographic and winning different contests, awards etc. - All my pictures are exclusively at Alamy and I don't sell my pictures anywhere else - QC accepts 100% of my uploads, not a single one has been rejected - All my pictures are RM only - All my pictures got 100% info and optimized discoverability A short story why RM only. Few years ago I did a small test and uploaded 10 pictures to Shutterstock. There have been many downloads every day and I've received around 400$ after 6 months. That was fine and I almost decided to upload ~4000 pictures there. But something happened just before I did, and now I'm glad it happened. One day I came to a supermarket and was shocked to see "Kleenex" tissue packages with my picture on the box. There were tons of those on every wall. I called Kleenex and they told me it was a download from Shutterstock. RF means they can use it as they wish, without limits. There have been hundreeds of thousands packages in every city, in every supermarket. I got 20 cent for the download. More examples came soon after that. SNCF, DB and SBB used my pictures in Paris central station as well as many stations in different towns of France, Germany and Switzerland. Huge posters everywhere, 20 cents for me. Dozens of books were published, using my pictures, 20 cents for me. Every corner of swiss travel websites was full of my pics, again 20 cents for me. Those are only few examples, why I decided to go RM only in the future. Since Alamy is the last and only Website which pays 50% (im exclusive) and got RM option, I decided to upload some pictures for a test here. Half a year has passed, but no sales. Please have a short look at my Portfolio. I cover almost all types of photography with the focus on macro, wildlife, landscapes, astro, travels, portraits, low light, artistic light paintings etc. I would like to know what I do wrong at Alamy now. I know that the test amount of my pictures is very low but is this really the only problem? I thank you for your time. Kind Regards Orest Olympus Visionary

My images are nearly all soft editorial and all are Rights Managed (RM). I always tick the 'Editorial Only' box when there are any unreleased people or property in the image, which is most of them. I also include a 'belt and braces' disclaimer in the additional info box, viz 'This image has no model or property releases assigned to it and is available for editorial use only.' Because I feel sure setting the 'Editorial Only' tick box is restricting my sales, I want to remove that restriction where possible (though I know there are some subjects where Alamy specifically asks that the restriction be present). I do, however, want it to be abundantly clear to the licence purchaser that they would need to seek permission from the people or owners of property depicted, if they wanted to use the image commercially. I know Alamy include a warning in small print on the image details page and again in the licence contract, but I would like a warning to be included in the image metadata, so that where the image goes, the warning goes too. The disclaimer I am planning to include in the additional info box is loosely based on the warning Alamy has on its image details page. The text I plan to use is: 'This image has no model or property releases assigned to it and is intended for editorial only use. If you want to use the image commercially, you might also need to seek permission from any people depicted and/or the owners of any property, estate, trademark or brand shown.' I am not expecting any authoritative legal opinion, but I would be interested to hear contributors viewpoints on my plans to proceed in this way and/or the disclaimer I intend to include. I would also warmly welcome any comments Alamy themselves might care to give.

Hello dedicated photographers! This topic may have been questioned before long ago. But I need clearer answers based on your own experience, not theoretical one. Is it right RF photos are tend to get more sales than RM these days? Because I saw usual buyers are often from repeater companies, like The Sun, BBC, Guardian, and other media from British and Europe. This makes me assume ordinary buyers from another countries are prefer to buy RF than RM. What do you think? Thanks

Couldn't find the answer in the forum. In RM licensing, when someone buys a license, can the image be sold anyone else with RM license again or should it need to be waited for the first license time to over?

I recall a forum thread a while back in which (besides carrying on the eternal debate about the pros and cons of RM and RF), it was said that Alamy prefers RF because this is increasingly what clients want. This has stayed at the back of my mind, and I thought it should be possible to test how true this is by counting the number of searches in Alamy Measures that specify RM and RF. AM appears not to provide any information other than the search terms on all-of-Alamy searches, so I went to my own most important pseudonym and looked up searches from 1st January to 30th June this year. I stopped counting after 100 pages of search results. Here are the results: Searches that specify RM or RF RM: 25 searches RF: 14 searches Distribution of RM and RF in pseudonym RM: 95% RF: 5%. The results should be treated with a lot of caution. First of all, number of searches that specify RM or RF is very small and more data might change the picture. Secondly, most of the images under this pseudonym are RM and this probably skews the results. I used only one pseudonym because my pseudonyms aren't subject-exclusive so a lot of searches show up in more than one. Thirdly, results are also likely to vary by subject matter. But if more forum members were willing to chip in with their own figures, we might build up a more general picture.

After the new AIM was introduced, I began listing more RF than I did in the past. As of this moment, 39% are RF. I just ran the numbers for the past year, and 24% of what sold are RF. Not bad numbers. Quite a few if not most are plants. I didn’t count subject matter, but now I’m curious! I’ll take a look. The reason I’m mentioning this is because in another thread I said I would know more after some months went by and let ya’ll know. I’m a woman of my word. Betty P.S......58% sold are plants.

To better understand RM vs RF battle i'd like to share my 2018 sales: - $$$ RM sales: 35% of total year revenues - $$ RM sales: 60% - $ RM sales: 5% I just started to sell RF on Alamy so i dont't have any sales at the moment . What's yours?