Jump to content

Never been easier and cheaper to download a photo from Alamy


Recommended Posts

So click Alamy website,

search photo,

choose photo,

click buy as presentation photo,

Purchase at £11.99

 

So its no wonder that all my sales these days are this price ?

 

Are there any checks to see here the photo gets used ?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

and that is a big problem.

if i want to not allow personal use or presentation use, can I simply 'tick' myself out or do you have to do each photo individually ?

anybody know please ?

thanks in advance 

Adrian 

Edited by Ace
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have opted out of Personal Use.  Sales are about the same as last year but revenue is better.

 

I would also opt out of Presentation Use if I could but that doesn't appear to be an option.

 

A full size image is unlikely to be needed for presentation use and yet for under £12 my Hi Res image is out there without a watermark.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, John Walker said:

I have opted out of Personal Use.  Sales are about the same as last year but revenue is better.

 

I would also opt out of Presentation Use if I could but that doesn't appear to be an option.

 

A full size image is unlikely to be needed for presentation use and yet for under £12 my Hi Res image is out there without a watermark.

not good then 🤨

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ace said:

and that is a big problem.

if i want to not allow personal use or presentation use, can I simply 'tick' myself out or do you have to do each photo individually ?

anybody know please ?

thanks in advance 

Adrian 

 

Yes, it is.

 

You can select up to 500 images at a time in AIM, then, in the Optional section, put a tick in the 'Don't sell for personal use including single copy, non-retail wall art prints' box, or you can ask CR to apply this restriction to all of your images.  You cannot restrict usage for presentation, which is a problem, as those determined to abuse licenses will just choose that license instead - for the same price as PU.  Regardless, I opted out of PU some little while ago owing to the obvious abuse of the system.

 

1 hour ago, John Walker said:

I have opted out of Personal Use.  Sales are about the same as last year but revenue is better.

 

I would also opt out of Presentation Use if I could but that doesn't appear to be an option.

 

A full size image is unlikely to be needed for presentation use and yet for under £12 my Hi Res image is out there without a watermark.

 

Agreed.  This really should be rectified; I don't see any excuse for it.  If Alamy insist on licensing RM images as virtual RF, then they should at the very least be restricting the file size to something appropriate for the usage.  There have already been people here discussing whether to limit the file sizes they upload to Alamy and only licensing higher resolution files directly.  It seems to me that, long-term, Alamy are shooting themselves in the collective foot here.

 

1 hour ago, Ace said:

not good then 🤨

 

Understatement.

 

1 hour ago, KevinS said:

Adding a box to the restrictions area of AIM would solve this problem. Or Alamy could raise the price for this usage, then we wouldn't need to be able to restrict it. :)

 

 

Sadly, I don't see either of these options happening.

 

Edited by losdemas
Grammatical errors
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ace said:

So click Alamy website,

search photo,

choose photo,

click buy as presentation photo,

Purchase at £11.99

 

So its no wonder that all my sales these days are this price ?

 

Are there any checks to see here the photo gets used ?

 

 

You're lucky that you are getting full price for PU purchases.  My last two have been discounted by half.  Why??  One was obviously not going to be used for that purpose & perhaps was a mislabeling but the other could well have been for PU.  I don't get it.

 

Rick

Link to post
Share on other sites

I opted out of PU a couple of years ago, strangely by constantly clicking the PU box.  One day I looked and all my images were opted out, without an email to Alamy.  I do get the occasional Pres use, but they're few and far between.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With approaching 200 million files on line why would they bother about a few being mis sold. They appear to be obsessed with turnover and not interested in wether the individual photographer is being ripped off. Similar situation with large clients and the large discounts they off for quantity-great for their turnover and great for the buyer but what exactly does the photographer get out of it- perhaps a cup of coffee soon to become a glass of water!

 

regen

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Rick Lewis said:

 

You're lucky that you are getting full price for PU purchases.  My last two have been discounted by half.  Why??  One was obviously not going to be used for that purpose & perhaps was a mislabeling but the other could well have been for PU.  I don't get it.

 

Rick

 

i`m getting those also ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I said this a long while back - the problem is people just take the default price.. especially if the default price is the cheapest. Yes it probably increases license count sold and maybe may would not if it were not that cheap to license, but at what cost? Having a default cost that was higher (ie, personal use needs to be selected) .. or a wizard type approach may bring more accurate license purchases but probably less of them.... (I am playing devils advocate with myself here)

 

.. I would prefer personal use not to be the default....but for the lowest price to be displayed ..

 

IE.. you CAN get it for this price (even though I am not happy with that price personally) BUT you will have to select it, actively making it a choice to purposely infringe (other than just a default purchase.)

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Julie Edwards said:

I said this a long while back - the problem is people just take the default price.. especially if the default price is the cheapest. Yes it probably increases license count sold and maybe may would not if it were not that cheap to license, but at what cost? Having a default cost that was higher (ie, personal use needs to be selected) .. or a wizard type approach may bring more accurate license purchases but probably less of them.... (I am playing devils advocate with myself here)

 

.. I would prefer personal use not to be the default....but for the lowest price to be displayed ..

 

IE.. you CAN get it for this price (even though I am not happy with that price personally) BUT you will have to select it, actively making it a choice to purposely infringe (other than just a default purchase.)

 

 

 

+100

The highest price should be the default option, not the lowest.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends how people think. "I'm using this image myself therefore it's personal use". "I'm using this image for a commercial project I'm working on therefore it's commercial usage".

There's also been plenty of research done on the way people choose based on the selections available.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Julie Edwards said:

I said this a long while back - the problem is people just take the default price.. especially if the default price is the cheapest. Yes it probably increases license count sold and maybe may would not if it were not that cheap to license, but at what cost? Having a default cost that was higher (ie, personal use needs to be selected) .. or a wizard type approach may bring more accurate license purchases but probably less of them.... (I am playing devils advocate with myself here)

 

.. I would prefer personal use not to be the default....but for the lowest price to be displayed ..

 

IE.. you CAN get it for this price (even though I am not happy with that price personally) BUT you will have to select it, actively making it a choice to purposely infringe (other than just a default purchase.)

 

 

I would say that a wizard would be the way to go - I know lots of people do not actually have the foggiest idea of what the actual legalities of use through licences are - what personal use or presentation or whatever does and does not cover.

Something like

  • Do you want to be the only person with this image (instantly wipe out all images sold before and set price for exclusive licence)
  • Is this image just for you (for instance to put on your wall),  or will it be shared with others
  • what will it be used for  - website, presentation, a book or magazine, advertising

Add in other options according to the answers to above with guidance on pricing and what choosing the option means.  I think most people are more honest when confronted with having to answer questions rather than a list of prices - it is easier to say heys that cheapest price if I look at it this way its personal use than it is to answer the image is just for me to put on a wall when you are intending using it for something else.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A default option sends the message "This is the most common selection, and therefore the one that is probably the most applicable to you." Alamy have defended the huge number of refunds on the grounds that many people think they are buying the item rather than an image: "personal use" helps to reinforce that belief. If a use which would obviously be applicable only to an image were the default, it would help to stop genuine mistakes, and make claims for refunds on that basis much less plausible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, DJ Myford said:

A default option sends the message "This is the most common selection, and therefore the one that is probably the most applicable to you." Alamy have defended the huge number of refunds on the grounds that many people think they are buying the item rather than an image: "personal use" helps to reinforce that belief. If a use which would obviously be applicable only to an image were the default, it would help to stop genuine mistakes, and make claims for refunds on that basis much less plausible.

 If i make a mistake then i generally end up paying for it. How can Alamy possibly defend the argument that the customer thought they were buying the object depicted and give a refund when they cannot get the high res unwatermarked file back or conclusively prove its not being used. It just shows how little value Alamy put on the work of the photographers submitting. 

 

Regen

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is quite alarming. Is there a way I can I select to turn off PU for my whole port in one click as I seem to be defaulted on royalty free ? Sales are terrible enough as it is so taking out PU would probably make things worse.

 

Edited by Marb
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Marb said:

This is quite alarming. Is there a way I can I select to turn off PU for my whole port in one click as I seem to be defaulted on royalty free ? Sales are terrible enough as it is so taking out PU would probably make things worse.

 

You can set your default for uploads to exclude PU use by clicking on the cog wheel (settings) icon on top right of your AIM. If you want all previously uploaded images to be excluded, best to email Alamy and ask them to change it.

Edited by Sally
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Sally said:

You can set your default for uploads to exclude PU use by clicking on the cog wheel (settings) icon on top right of your AIM. If you want all previously uploaded images to be excluded, best to email Alamy and ask them to change it.

Ok, thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Marb said:

This is quite alarming. Is there a way I can I select to turn off PU for my whole port in one click as I seem to be defaulted on royalty free ? Sales are terrible enough as it is so taking out PU would probably make things worse.

 

You can't put any restrictions on RF images other than selecting editorial only. So you can only opt out of PU for RM images.

 

Pearl

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not invest in any form in businesses that are chasing market share  or turnover; as a management consultant I saw it as an ego trip on the way to penury! CReates busy fools and a false impression of success (no doubt supports big bonusses for senior executives at the expense of the shareholder, and other investers like contributors.) Contributorsa have much more 'skin in the game' than James West,  his colleagues and the shareholders. We should remember that!

 

Just think how much i t would cost to produce and prepare 150+million images from scratch. It would be many times more than the value of Alamy's balance sheet.

 

Edited by Martin P Wilson
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Craig Eisenberg said:

I also have been noticing a lot of "personal use" licenses for $9.99. What's going on? This seems fishy.

 

If you opt out of personal use (as I have) it becomes 'presentation' - don't know but strongly suspect (probably ad hoc) users click the first, cheapest option whatever they are really doing.

 

There seems to be no validation of the purpose or even who the customer is if they use Paypal (just an email) rather than a credit card (at least then it should require name and address).

Edited by Martin P Wilson
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.