Commission change - James West comments

[ChrisC]

10 minutes ago, KevinS said:

On Oct 18 Alamy said;

 

Hi everyone

 

We are sorry to hear not everyone have received an email yet. Because of new regulations it's harder than before to email large groups of people who have unsubscribed from our mailing list. We are working on a fix for contract notifications and an email should be with all of you as soon as possible.

 

Still working on a fix?

I haven't unsubscribed

 

[ChrisC]

11 minutes ago, Alamy said:

 

For clarity, everyone who has images on Alamy was emailed this advanced notification of the upcoming 45 day notice period on the same day.

If you have unsubscribed from our emails then it does mean that the process is not as straight-forward, but the email was still sent to the same email address you registered with. The quote above refers to us looking at other ways to notify you in the future, perhaps through your dashboard, but for now we can confirm that everyone who has images with us was emailed.

 

This thread is for feedback on the commission change so if you have any concerns regarding email notifications from Alamy, please email contributors@alamy.com who will be happy to help.

 

Thanks,

 

Alamy

Personally, I don't remember the 45 minute notice either, but I will double check, as I haven't unsubscribed and then check with Contributors

 

[Colblimp]

18 minutes ago, Alamy said:

 

For clarity, everyone who has images on Alamy was emailed this advanced notification of the upcoming 45 day notice period on the same day.

If you have unsubscribed from our emails then it does mean that the process is not as straight-forward, but the email was still sent to the same email address you registered with. The quote above refers to us looking at other ways to notify you in the future, perhaps through your dashboard, but for now we can confirm that everyone who has images with us was emailed.

 

This thread is for feedback on the commission change so if you have any concerns regarding email notifications from Alamy, please email contributors@alamy.com who will be happy to help.

 

Thanks,

 

Alamy

Well I didn't receive any email, so don't claim you emailed everyone who has images on Alamy because that clearly isn't true!!!

 

Edit: I haven't unsubscribed from Alamy's emails.

[Martin Carlsson]

20 minutes ago, Olivier Parent said:

 

This time, I feel exactly the opposite. The cut in commissions will affect mostly photographers who try to make a living out of it. "Camera club" contributors will be much less affected. I may be absolutely wrong and I will not speak for anyone but myself, all I can say is that I will continue to concentrate on direct sales (my very last assignment earned me 6000 € - no commission, no cut) rather than hoping for a brighter future with Alamy. 

 

My point/post has nothing to do in regards as to whom would be most or least affected. Just saying.

 

Congratulations on your good fortunes, but that was an assignment correct, not direct selling (licensing image(s) on your own, through your own website), two different things, although not having to be mutually excluded from each other.  

 

Yes doing stock is a tough sub-segment, not recommended to try to rely on fully, more a supplementary part to an all-encompassing photography business. However it is addictive and fun, hard to kick it altogether even when time spent on other segments are more justifiable financially. Again, congrats!

[Martin P Wilson]

2 hours ago, MilesbeforeIsleep said:

Well that's fine.  But what evidence do we have that Alamy has coherent plans to achieve these things?  All we've been told is that James sees "storm clouds coming", and they have a million (or was it only a thousand) "things" they want to spend our money on.   And in any case, an immediate 20% reduction in income is a show-stopper for almost anyone except, apparently, you. 

        Having had (in a part-time second profession) considerable training and experience in reading the behavior of sketchy characters, Mr. West's performance fits a classic profile of someone who may try to cut your throat in the next few seconds--nervous, rambling monologue, avoiding eye contact, thousand yard stare.

        My point is simply that we haven't seen, and you haven't provided evidence for, any of what your dreams for the ambitions and plans of Alamy might be.  All the information we've been given is that they intend to reduce payments by 1/5th.   

       And in spite of claims by politicians and James West, hope is not a strategy.

 

Post Edit:   I apologize for the unsavory analogy and critique of Mr. West's character above.   I would delete it, but it's already been quoted in another post.   My own background and circumstance makes for a rather hard-edged view of the world which is not appropriate for all audiences.  Again, Mr. West, I apologize for the personal comments. 

 

I would suggest there are a lot of storm clouds on these two commision threads !

[spacecadet]

On 13/12/2018 at 14:24, regen said:

 

The Royal Horticultural Society (RHS), founded in 1804 as the Horticultural Society of London, is the UK's leading gardening charity. ... It also supports training for professional and amateur gardeners. Charity no, 222879

 

Regen

 

i know what it is, but what relevance does it have in your reply?

On 13/12/2018 at 09:45, spacecadet said:

Alamy is a legitimate British company with charitable objectives.

 

So is the N.T and R.H.S

[M.Chapman]

27 minutes ago, Colblimp said:

Well I didn't receive any email, so don't claim you emailed everyone who has images on Alamy because that clearly isn't true!!!

 

Edit: I haven't unsubscribed from Alamy's emails.

 

Just a thought....

 

I've found from bitter experience (with BT/Yahoo) that email is not always a 100% reliable way of communicating. It may not be Alamy's fault. Emails do sometimes seem to "disappear". In my case I found that emails on BT Servers were not reliably synchronised with my Apple devices using IMAP. Logging into BT's on-line webpage email service I found multiple emails in my Inbox that never appeared on my device. Even wiping the account from my device and re-synchronising didn't fix it, different emails never arrived. There's quite a lot of discussion about this on BT forums. BT blamed Apple, Apple blamed BT. At one point BT even said "we don't support IMAP you have to use our App".  Mmm...   

 

Mark

[andremichel]

4 hours ago, Martin Carlsson said:

 

I didn't insinuate that, at least not deliberately. Stand up all you want for what you believe in, of course you should. Be careful on cracking down on me for doing the same or it starts to look hypocritical. Anyway, I'm not here to exchange insults. I see your position, I respect it, yet I can't turn a blind eye towards the fact that pretty much all libraries don't have a good BP then as very few come close to 40-50% , and let's not even get started at what the more successful ones are at. Why do we expect that Alamy miraculously could be different? It's a logical question, at least I think so. 

 

I think part of the outrage comes from Alamy's history and from their own PR used to attract contributors. There is now a sense of betrayal. Alamy were supposed to be different, offering photographers a fair deal. But now it is crystal clear that they aren't what they appeared to be and they actually aspire to be the same as those who have caused so much damage to this industry.

 

We all know about these other libraries that charge outrageous exploitative commissions. For many years they've got away with it due to the high quantity of sales they got for their contributors. But I think even these "more successful ones" (as you call them) are now at a crossroads with RPIs falling precariously coupled with ridiculous commission rates, no longer adding up for photographers. The industry is worth X billions and the libraries are taking most of it, while photographers are on their knees.

 

 

[KevinS]

1 minute ago, JeffGreenberg said:

Issues with exclusivity to maintain 50/50:

 

a. is that image by image?  66% of my images are exclusive to Alamy,

so 50/50 for most, 40/60 for some?

b. one other agency licenses 600+ monthly, very active, almost all

others only a handful monthly or none;  I can understand the former

equates to non-exclusive, but the latter? (Alamy licenses ~150/monthly)

c. there can be long long periods between asking slow-selling agents to

remove images from their site & distributor sites, what if Alamy Exclusivity Police

report non-exclusive situations?  One can only repeat request for removals...

Asking for exclusivity in exchange for 50/50 is asking photographers to put all their eggs in one basket..theirs! This is something that has been advised against in the past. Some who did now have regrets. If Alamy proposes this, I hope they address your points.

[Martin Carlsson]

7 minutes ago, andremichel said:

 

I think part of the outrage comes from Alamy's history and from their own PR used to attract contributors. There is now a sense of betrayal. Alamy were supposed to be different, offering photographers a fair deal. But now it crystal clear that they aren't what they appeared to be and they actually aspire to be the same as those who have caused so much damage to this industry.

 

We all know about these other libraries that charge outrageous exploitative commissions. For many years they've got away with it due to the high quantity of sales they got for their contributors. But I think even these "more successful ones" (as you call them) are now at a crossroads with RPIs falling precariously coupled with ridiculous commission rates, no longer adding up for photographers. The industry is worth X billions and the libraries are taking most of it, while photographers are on their knees.

 

 

 

Understand and in agreement. I've spoken elsewhere about potential reduction of the role for the "middle-man" and new tech making easier for the individual to harness a "fairer"  share of the revenue.

[Martin P Wilson]

13 minutes ago, Olivier Parent said:

 

That was kind of both in fact, in a certain way. The point is that there are still people and organizations willing to pay for images. But I tend to think that, with lowering prices and lowering commissions, it has become way more efficient (financially) to make images specifically for a client, meeting his own needs, locally, than trying to sell "generic" images overseas through the world wide web.

 

I think that is a good point.

 

I have been arguing for a long while that there is still money to be made by talented photographers (but not in generic stock, and talent may rule me out ) who are prepared to work at their craft, their art and their business - inseperable parts of being a 'professional', whether part-time or full-time. For me, being professional is binary, you are either are or are not; none of the semi-professional rubbish. Until recently (I am not a photographer at all at the moment but working on new plans) I have described myself as a part-time professional (for most of the last 40 years, with spells full-time).

[KevinS]

Just now, JeffGreenberg said:

Exclusivity to retain 50/50 is the only counter by Alamy so far, AFAIK.

I believe that's all they're working on.

 

[Starsphinx]

1 hour ago, Martin Carlsson said:

 

I'm sure the interest continues to converge, but it might become less "buddy buddy"/camera club around here going forward and real world non-sheltered cushy-cushy harsh business. At times it has been very much camera-club feel with all the "got a camera yesterday and today I want to earn money" people popping in today gone tomorrow. Is of course Alamy's prerogative who they let through the door, but personally I'm convinced that it might be more profitable to be less "nice" and personal, and more harsh reality business-like for both them and those of us that it is more than a feather in the hat for to license images. Not trying to sound pompous or pushing down on anyone, but well I'm sure most know what I mean, there is an awful lot of sub-standard stuff clogging up the system, the systems that now needs upgraded... Said with the best of intentions, without trying to hurt anyone's feelings.

I would absolutely prefer what you suggest.  I know I have duplicates and lesser quality images but I am loathe to get rid of stuff uploading just in case a customer chooses my "less good" over someone elses "less good"

The thing I would say is to a point if QC is tightened beyond pure technicality it would be necessary to reduce or remove "punishment" for failures - so if you are going to reject an image because there are too many similar or because it is good but not brilliant (ie there is not a technical measure that can be pointed to, it is a case of perception of colour atmosphere etc) there cannot be a 30 or even 10 days upload suspension.  Sure keep suspensions for noise, softness, etc because they can be measured and pointed to - just not the extra ratings.

[John Mitchell]

5 hours ago, BobD said:

The bottom line is the reality.

In 2011 my average gross sale was $90. This year and last year it is down to $28.

In 2011 I earned practically double that I did last year, so I saw no benefit from the last cut that was supposed to help fund the US office for all our benefit. I saw no benefit, just a cut in income. 

This year I have increased my port by Nearly 60%, my sales and income have grown 15%.

 

However Alamy try to dress it up, it will be the tipping point for me in as much as it will no longer be worth the time and effort and stamina to keep the treadmill rotating.

I have stopped uploading until we get a clear statement from James as to how they intend to proceed.

After a knee jerk initial reaction in uploading a few images to a tier 1 microstock agency, I have put this on hold also until we get a clear idea to what is going to happen.

 

 

As an aside I have noticed a few regular forum members who have made negligible if any contribution to this thread, it will do nobody any good by sitting on the fence. 

 

My average gross sale has dropped over the years, but not nearly as much as yours, so I guess everyone's experiences are different. To be fair, benefits from increasing your collection probably won't start kicking in for another year or so. I find that most new images need to "marinate" for quite awhile before they start to license. Submitting to microstock still seems more like an act of desperation to me than a viable alternative, especially now that micro sites are bursting at the seams with similar images. I've decided to hold off uploading any new images to Alamy until James gets back to us with an official followup to his video. I needed to take a break anyway. I've been burning way too many calories lately.

[Martin P Wilson]

Need to find higher margin and lower volume markets for more distinct work.

I am seeing the same prices as when I started out in 1970, my local paper used to pay £5 for small, single column image (B&W of course) and the same again when they used it again. We now see that price for national newspaper use. Local papers, mainly don't pay for photography (some ex-employee I know are used as stringers, for now).

 

I think I am going to reduce my involvement in these forums almost to nothing (there are people I will miss, but many are now elsewhere); for me discussing what Alamy might or might not, could or could not, do is just whistling in the end. I am going to use the time more productively finding a new direction for my photography, in new markets. If I can't I will become an amateur and concentrate on my doctoral research which hopefully will help other photojournalists in due course. I am taking control of my life, and my mental health!

[Guest]

Well, I'm out. The 40% commission and increasingly low prices meant it wasn't worth keeping my images for sale on Alamy. I also resent the cut Alamy have taken from my DACS payments. I just didn't see the contract change on that one so, all in all, I'll concentrate on other income from my photography.

[Starsphinx]

 

4 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

 

My average gross sale has dropped over the years, but not nearly as much as yours, so I guess everyone's experiences are different. To be fair, benefits from increasing your collection probably won't start kicking in for another year or so. I find that most new images need to "marinate" for quite awhile before they start to license. Submitting to microstock still seems more like an act of desperation to me than a viable alternative, especially now that micro sites are bursting at the seams with similar images. I've decided to hold off uploading any new images to Alamy until James gets back to us with an official followup to his video. I needed to take a break anyway. I've been burning way too many calories lately.

I have to challenge the bursting at the seams bit for both here and other agencies including MS.  Take what strikes me as being a fairly common thing - a teacup ride - or tea cup ride if you prefer.  A common fairground ride seen at both high-end permanent parks, Disney has one, and highly mobile operators possibly leasing them singly for events.  They are bright.  They are colourful.  They usually involve happy children.  They are human interest.   I would expect there to be huge numbers of photos of them, like in the thousands - after all there are thousands of dragonfly pictures which are far more difficult to take.  There are 261 photos on here - and a big microstock agency (ss)  274 photos.  Both places have images badly captioned that are not of tea cup rides at all.  You cannot tell me the market is bursting at the scenes when something as common, as easy to photograph as a teacup ride has a tiny fraction of the images something like a dragonfly has.  I will give you dragonflies bursting at the seams - but not everything.

 

[andremichel]

3 minutes ago, Dayve said:

Well, I'm out. The 40% commission and increasingly low prices meant it wasn't worth keeping my images for sale on Alamy. I also resent the cut Alamy have taken from my DACS payments. I just didn't see the contract change on that one so, all in all, I'll concentrate on other income from my photography.

You have some beautiful work, it would be a shame for Alamy to lose it. 

[riccarbi]

Maybe because my professional profile is similar to his, but I deem MilesbeforeIsleep comment the best one, by far.
I also add my point of view, as a non-professional photographer who is running a totally different business (I run an architectural practice, and I also publish a web magazine of art and design). How much selling photos through Alamy is, and will be, a good business?
In 2018, I got (to date) about $ 0,66 net per image in my port. Being quite optimistic and hoping the commercial life o a photo on Alamy is about 10 years, that means that, in 2018, I was hoping to get $ 6.6 net per image, overall.
Now, how much time is required to develop, check, upload and keyword a single photo? In my case about 20 minutes on average ( I don't take into account the time I spent to shoot that photo since I did it for different reasons than selling it on Alamy). So, I will supposedly get slightly less than $20 per hour of work. Not very exciting, but not that bad, after all. 
Now, I have to evaluate if, after the commission change, this situation will still be economically convenient for me. A 20% reduction means my revenue per hour will drop to $16, hmmm.
Furthermore, my revenue per image dropped from $ 10 in 2017  to $ 6.6 in 2018. Therefore, the average price-per-photo trend is declining and, extrapolating it, in 2019 I will possibly get less than $4.5 per image in my port and less than $13 per hour of work, and possibly much less in the following years. That's no good.
What I should do? Arguably, to stop upload new photos, and leaving those already in my port where they currently are. Furthermore, I could investigate monetization strategies different from Alamy, such as selling most of my photos directly through my websites or advertising them straight to the thousands of potential buyers I have in my mailing list.

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, andremichel said:

You have some beautiful work, it would be a shame for Alamy to lose it. 

That's so nice of you to say! Many thanks. I really don't make much money though so this was a wake up call for me to re-think what I do with my work. Alamy have done some odd things regarding low pricing and long licencing. I just feel it's time to vote with my feet on their latest commission change.

 

P.S. you also have some stunning work and I hope it pays for you :-)

[John Mitchell]

9 minutes ago, Starsphinx said:

 

I have to challenge the bursting at the seams bit for both here and other agencies including MS.  Take what strikes me as being a fairly common thing - a teacup ride - or tea cup ride if you prefer.  A common fairground ride seen at both high-end permanent parks, Disney has one, and highly mobile operators possibly leasing them singly for events.  They are bright.  They are colourful.  They usually involve happy children.  They are human interest.   I would expect there to be huge numbers of photos of them, like in the thousands - after all there are thousands of dragonfly pictures which are far more difficult to take.  There are 261 photos on here - and a big microstock agency (ss)  274 photos.  Both places have images badly captioned that are not of tea cup rides at all.  You cannot tell me the market is bursting at the scenes when something as common, as easy to photograph as a teacup ride has a tiny fraction of the images something like a dragonfly has.  I will give you dragonflies bursting at the seams - but not everything.

 

 

I admit to knowing next to nothing about microstock. No doubt, as is the case with Alamy, there are many gaps to be filled on microstock sites. It seems like a lot of work for pennies a pop (usually), though. I agree with you about the inadequate captions on microstock sites. They must generate a lot of dead wood. Same situation here, of course, as you say.

 

Expect a deluge of new teacup ride pics now... 

 

 

[Starsphinx]

1 minute ago, John Mitchell said:

 

I admit to knowing next to nothing about microstock. No doubt, as is the case with Alamy, there are many gaps to be filled on microstock sites. It seems like a lot of work for pennies a pop (usually), though. I agree with you about the inadequate captions on microstock sites. They must generate a lot of dead wood. Same situation here, of course, as you say.

 

Expect a deluge of new teacup ride pics now... 

 

 

Oh I know - my 2 are already  up there lol

I mean the teacup ride is just an example - I keep stumbling over things there seem to be very few of,  often things which are not particularly hard to shoot.  Meanwhile, things that can present a definite challenge are massively over-represented.  I think some of it is erroneous assumptions about the difficulty in getting a shot being equal to how rare it is.  So getting a good shot of a dragonfly can be challenging - although the opportunity is often common - so person spends time and effort before getting a shot that makes them go wow, and thinks that would look great in a book so they upload it - but everyone has had the same idea.  On the other hand, they walk through a fair and the teacup ride is so easy and obvious, they assume everyone has already done it.    

I just take pictures - if something catches my eye I take a photograph - I don't worry if I am the first or millionth to do so - and I will continue chasing dragonflies because they are incredible and I love doing.

[John Mitchell]

4 minutes ago, Starsphinx said:

Oh I know - my 2 are already  up there lol

I mean the teacup ride is just an example - I keep stumbling over things there seem to be very few of,  often things which are not particularly hard to shoot.  Meanwhile, things that can present a definite challenge are massively over-represented.  I think some of it is erroneous assumptions about the difficulty in getting a shot being equal to how rare it is.  So getting a good shot of a dragonfly can be challenging - although the opportunity is often common - so person spends time and effort before getting a shot that makes them go wow, and thinks that would look great in a book so they upload it - but everyone has had the same idea.  On the other hand, they walk through a fair and the teacup ride is so easy and obvious, they assume everyone has already done it.    

I just take pictures - if something catches my eye I take a photograph - I don't worry if I am the first or millionth to do so - and I will continue chasing dragonflies because they are incredible and I love doing.

 

For sure, it's not all about money. That would be tragic.

[MilesbeforeIsleep]

2 hours ago, Martin P Wilson said:

 

I would suggest there are a lot of storm clouds on these two commision threads !

He must be prescient!

[BobD]

57 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

Expect a deluge of new teacup ride pics now... 

 

 

For once I'm ahead of the curve