RF editorial question

[John Mitchell]

Awhile ago I changed a small number of my RM images to RF Editorial (editorial and personal use only) as an experiment. Today I notice that one of them has licensed (direct sale) for a price that would make the average UK newspaper scheme sale look good. Now I'm thinking that I should switch these images back to RM .

 

I don't want to sound like a whiner, but how common are super low prices for RF Editorial sales?

[John Mitchell]

2 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

I don't think that it has anything to do with the licence

 

Probably more to do with my naivete. I thought that RF might bring higher prices.

[Cryptoprocta]

3 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

 

Probably more to do with my naivete. I thought that RF might bring higher prices.

It should, logically, but RF files can sell under the same conditions as RM (check the file selling page to see what I mean). Or maybe the buyer is in the UKNS or otherwise has a huge discount.

For tiny sales, you're better IMO to sell RM to get the benefit of resales, but some RM licence terms are so wide allowing reuses etc, it's pretty moot.

 

 

[John Mitchell]

24 minutes ago, Cryptoprocta said:

It should, logically, but RF files can sell under the same conditions as RM (check the file selling page to see what I mean). Or maybe the buyer is in the UKNS or otherwise has a huge discount.

For tiny sales, you're better IMO to sell RM to get the benefit of resales, but some RM licence terms are so wide allowing reuses etc, it's pretty moot.

 

 

 

Yes, I realize that most RM sales are now really RM/RF hybrids. I'm quite familiar with these. All my almost 1000 sales on Alamy have been RM with the exception of this latest one and another one last year. Still, I was surprised that an RF-designated sale could be this low. As you suggest, it must be a bulk discount of some kind. I don't know yet if any licensing terms will be supplied, probably not.