Images Sold in April 2019 (one per day)

[AlanC 16]

3rd April - Highland Dancers at a Scottish Highland Games event.  PU.

 

[Stan Pritchard 90]

Dun Caan and Churchton Bay. Island of Raasay, from The Braes. Isle of Skye, Inner Hebrides, Scotland, United Kingdom, Europe. 

- Image ID: BC0GD7

 

Country: Worldwide
Usage: Editorial
Media: Editorial website
Industry sector: Education
Image Size: Any size
Start: 04 April 2019
End: 04 April 2024
Public Service Website Use, single placement, includes archive rights in perpetuity.

[spacecadet 2,595]

Country: Worldwide ; Usage: iQ sale: Corporate client.

Brochure Any size. Any placement. 

Internal and external marketing communications. Excludes advertising.

One time use only. ;  Industry Sector: Media, design & publishing ;  Start: 05-April-2019 ; End: 05-April-2020

 

Low mid $$. A third of the price of a couple of years ago

Still, only 400 yards from my front door. I should collect a few more like this- it's my only shopfront. Taken because I liked the light.

Edited April 5 by spacecadet

[Sally 1,242]

Makes up for two refunds which put me into negative payment. I was asked to lift my restriction on sales to Russia for this one. 

Editorial $$

[Michael Ventura 3,965]

P.U. for low $$

 

[Avpics 780]

A welcome mid $$ IQ sale

 

 

[Bill Brooks 1,101]

RF $$$ at 50%, exclusive to Alamy, commission

Here is a Alamy very editorial shot of:

Tracks or galleries damage left under the tree bark by Emerald Ash Borer (Agrilus planipennis) that will kill the tree. - Image ID: E9W2EN

 

The tree is in a National Park close to my home. The Park did the debarking, as this is a point of interest on a guided hike. I used a telephoto to throw the background out of focus and then used photoshop to increased the microcontrast thereby making the tracks more obvious. Submitted a close up pic of the tracks only, as well

 

[Autumn Sky 152]

Flat Rock at Torrey Pines State Beach, north of La Jolla Shores California.
Calendar; Print run of 3,000; Duration: 1 year; United States

Mid $$

 

 

 

On low tide it is possible to walk around in surf.  Very good place for sunsets too and one of personal all-time favorite places on this planet. 

Edited April 6 by Autumn Sky

[Autumn Sky 152]

Ama Dablam in Nepal Himalaya Mountains on standard trekking route to Everest Base Camp above Namche Bazaar

 

Country: Worldwide
Media: Non-commercial, one time, personal/home use

(Very) low $$

[John Mitchell 3,197]

A repeat-seller on Alamy that I foolishly sent to another agency where it sits gathering dust and losing revenue for me. A cautionary tale...

 

 Magazine use, $$$ but 40% commission (Ouch!).

 

 

 

[Steve Valentia 162]

18 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

A repeat-seller on Alamy that I foolishly sent to another agency where it sits gathering dust and losing revenue for me. A cautionary tale...

 

 Magazine use, $$$ but 40% commission (Ouch!).

 

1. I don't get how it can be losing revenue if it's just sitting there gathering dust?

 

2. I think you mean 60% commission.

Edited April 6 by Steve Valentia

[Michael Ventura 3,965]

18 minutes ago, Steve Valentia said:

 

1. I don't get how it can be losing revenue if it's just sitting there gathering dust?

 

2. I think you mean 60% commission.

 

I think what John is saying is that this image is a repeat seller on Alamy is also on another agency, not selling and costing him 20% since it is a non-exclusive image on Alamy.

 

%40 commission would be correct.

[Steve Valentia 162]

5 minutes ago, Michael Ventura said:

 

I think what John is saying is that this image is a repeat seller on Alamy is also on another agency, not selling and costing him 20% since it is a non-exclusive image on Alamy.

 

%40 commission would be correct.

 

1. Sorry, I don't get that. If it's non-exclusive and not selling elsewhere it's not losing money. It's just not making extra money.

2. No, 60% commission is correct. Commission is what is paid by the client (you) to the agent (Alamy). Alamy take 60% unless images are exclusive, then they take 50%.

Edited April 6 by Steve Valentia

[Bill Brooks 1,101]

38 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

A repeat-seller on Alamy that I foolishly sent to another agency where it sits gathering dust and losing revenue for me. A cautionary tale...

 

 Magazine use, $$$ but 40% commission (Ouch!).

 

 

 

 

John why not remove the image from the other agency? Once it is taken down from the other agency, then make it exclusive to Alamy.

 

Nice shot John. Colourful costume, viewer can see what she is doing, interesting ingredients plainly displayed, well processed. I am sure it will continue to sell on Alamy, but next time at 50% commission, if it is exclusive.
 

[John Mitchell 3,197]

8 minutes ago, Steve Valentia said:

 

1. Sorry, I don't get that. If it's non-exclusive and not selling elsewhere it's not losing money. It's just not making extra money.

2. No, 60% commission is correct. Commission is what is paid by the client (you) to the agent (Alamy). Alamy take 60% unless images are exclusive, then they take 50%.

 

I meant that I received only 40% because the image is non-exclusive. It is in effect now losing me revenue because it hasn't been licensing elsewhere -- i.e. I would have received 50% if it were exclusive to Alamy.

[John Mitchell 3,197]

1 minute ago, Bill Brooks said:

 

John why not remove the image from the other agency? Once it is taken down from the other agency, then make it exclusive to Alamy.

 

Nice shot John. Colourful costume, viewer can see what she is doing, interesting ingredients plainly displayed, well processed. I am sure it will continue to sell on Alamy, but next time at 50% commission, if it is exclusive.
 

 

Thanks, Bill. My plan is to try to reel in some of these images (I've got others doing the same thing) and make them exclusive at some point. However, it isn't easy, especially when agencies have far-reaching distributor networks.  I wish I had had a crystal ball when I sent them off into the unknown.

[Steve Valentia 162]

3 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

 

I meant that I received only 40% because the image is non-exclusive. It is in effect now losing me revenue because it hasn't been licensing elsewhere -- i.e. I would have received 50% if it were exclusive to Alamy.

 

It's not losing you anything. It's just not making an extra 10% - not 20%, as you say. But, you have the chance it will make more money and that might be worth the wait.

[John Mitchell 3,197]

1 minute ago, Steve Valentia said:

 

It's not losing you anything. It's just not making an extra 10% - not 20%, as you say. But, you have the chance it will make more money and that might be worth the wait.

 

True enough. I'm going to wait another six months or so to see if things pick up with this particular agency. However, past experience tells me that I made a bad choice contributing to them. Thankfully, I only sent them a few 100 images, not a few 1000. No doubt a lot of other Alamy contributors are now in a similar leaky boat.

[Autumn Sky 152]

1 hour ago, Bill Brooks said:

 

John why not remove the image from the other agency? Once it is taken down from the other agency, then make it exclusive to Alamy.

 

Nice shot John. Colourful costume, viewer can see what she is doing, interesting ingredients plainly displayed, well processed. I am sure it will continue to sell on Alamy, but next time at 50% commission, if it is exclusive.
 

 

Agreed.  In addition,  when nice images like this get downloaded on micros for 10 or 20 cents it makes you feel soiled. 

 

It is really larger question of correct strategy.   Some people presumably upload lesser quality images, sized, to micros and leave high-end full resolution for places like Alamy.  On the surface this approach makes sense.  But there are also opinions out there that most customers don't shop around so there is no real benefit.  In addition, Alamy sales don't come easy;  so if your image sits here exclusively collecting dust for years, it could have fetched $100 or more if it was available on 3 or 4 top micros.  

[Keith Douglas 470]

 

Boats moored in Morecambe Bay at low tide in the evening sunlight. Low $$

Usage: Magazine, editorial website use, one time use only

 

[One of the last two shrimping boats (right, LR66) operating out of Morecambe.]

 

 

 

Edited April 6 by Keith Douglas

[Webby 131]

3 sales today, 2 of low $$, this one of the Passion Facade, La Sagrada Familia, Barcelona for mid $$. Really chuffed as there are thousands of  pictures of the Sagrada.

[cksisson 49]

My first for the month. Another presentation for low $$, but it's a sale. 

 

Organ rib vault at Callanwolde in Atlanta, Georgia. 

 

Having been around for several months now, I can say the "one sale per one thousand images uploaded" is holding true for me. I'll have 3,000 uploaded soon.

 

Still filtering in old work as I continue to shoot and upload new.  

[spacecadet 2,595]

On 06/04/2019 at 18:47, Steve Valentia said:

 

It's not losing you anything. It's just not making an extra 10% - not 20%, as you say. But, you have the chance it will make more money and that might be worth the wait.

A cut from 50% to 40% is a reduction of 20%.

[Steve Valentia 162]

2 hours ago, spacecadet said:

A cut from 50% to 40% is a reduction of 20%.

 

To be honest, I think we'd all be better off concentrating on photography than maths.

 

Yes, the difference between 50% and 40% is 20% (actually, it's 22.22% recurring) If you start at 50%. But, we're not starting at 50%, we are starting at 100%.

 

So, if you got 50% of 100% and now you get 40% of 100%, you have lost 10%.

Edited April 9 by Steve Valentia

[spacecadet 2,595]

2 hours ago, Steve Valentia said:

 

To be honest, I think we'd all be better off concentrating on photography than maths.

 

Yes, the difference between 50% and 40% is 20% (actually, it's 22.22% recurring) If you start at 50%. But, we're not starting at 50%, we are starting at 100%.

 

So, if you got 50% of 100% and now you get 40% of 100%, you have lost 10%.

I give up. I think my arithmetic is correct.

Edited April 9 by spacecadet