RM or RF

[Eduardo]

Hi all

where do you prefer upload the pics RF or RM, I think there are more sales in RF but prices are better for us in RM, what do you think?

Many thanks

[Allan Bell]

All my images are RM.

 

Allan

[John Mitchell]

I'm still a fan of RM. It is the best way to maintain the value of your collection IMO. RM also at least gives you the illusion of having some control over your work. However, the line between RM and RF is becoming increasingly blurred.

[PatrioticAlien]

I use to be in favor of RF, but lately i have been thinking more about it and have been realising that RM is just kind of works out better for ones self. 

[Ed Endicott]

I use RM in order to keep better control of my images.

 

With relation to licensing and money - it doesn't matter anymore.  Alamy is going to price either one to whatever the buyer wants and whatever Alamy can get for it.  They will also tailor the rights to the buyer.

[John Mitchell]

I use RM in order to keep better control of my images.

 

With relation to licensing and money - it doesn't matter anymore.  Alamy is going to price either one to whatever the buyer wants and whatever Alamy can get for it.  They will also tailor the rights to the buyer.

So true, it's the buyers who have all the control these days. Nonetheless, I feel that sticking with RM at least sends the message that I still want to have some say in the matter even if I am really just kidding myself.

[dov makabaw]

I used to think that RF was preferable and acheived higher prices.

 

This has not proved to be the case for me but I continue to attribute RF if and when appropriate. I use a different pseudo for each.

 

dov

[Colin Utz]

Most of my images require model and/or property releases, which I don´t have. But, that´s also the reason, why I´m here.

[Ed Endicott]

 

I use RM in order to keep better control of my images.

 

With relation to licensing and money - it doesn't matter anymore.  Alamy is going to price either one to whatever the buyer wants and whatever Alamy can get for it.  They will also tailor the rights to the buyer.

So true, it's the buyers who have all the control these days. Nonetheless, I feel that sticking with RM at least sends the message that I still want to have some say in the matter even if I am really just kidding myself.

+1

[Ed Rooney]

Almost all my collection is RM, with just a handful of RF. 

[Stokie]

Only 4% of my collection is RF.

 

John.

[CandyAppleRed Images]

When I started, I tended put anything that didn't need releases as RF. I reckon the proportion of my RF sales to the number of images is about the same - roughly 18% of my portfolio/sales.

 

Some have been for quite decent amounts, but one in particular was sold to a web design company as part of a web template, and they have used it on at least 6 websites so far for the princely sum of $6. Even if they use it on 100 more, I get nothing.

 

Since that happened, I have very rarely set any image as RF.

[Pearl]

Back in the day RF attracted higher prices but, in spite of that, I have mainly stuck with RM for the same reasons quoted by others.  Nowadays RF seems to attract weeny prices as I suppose they are just competing directly with microstock. 

 

Pearl

[sandhun]

What is your thought process when determining whether to license an image as RF or RM?

 

Here are some assumptions I have about RF and RM. Please let me know if I've misunderstood anything here.

 

A RF image is likely to sell more frequently but will fetch a lower price on each sale

Unique shots are better placed as RM (if this is the case, can anyone clarify why?)

[Jill Morgan]

Shots that are common (such as my shots from Africa) I have as RF. Everything else is RM.

[Panthera tigris]

"A RF image is likely to sell more frequently but will fetch a lower price on each sale"

 

For me thats not the case anymore, it used to be but this last couple of years I make more per image sale on RF. 

 

I use RF if I think the image I have taken is of a quite common subject, or for lesser images in a group of similar images. I don't think there are hard and fast rules on RM/RF anymore, its just a judgement call. 

[Sheila Smart]

Apologies if members have heard this before but...if I had licensed an image as RF to a paper manufacturer which appeared on tissue boxes here in Australia for five years, I would have been $8,000 worse off!  My rule of thumb for those who don't know which to choose is this:  If you feel that the image has the possibility of being renewed time and time again on a project, then choose RM.  If you feel its going to be a one off, then probably RF.  That said, I only license RM.    

 

Sheila

[Hawgshooter]

I have a couple of images that have been licensed regulary for the past couple of years by the same buyer. It's added up to a good chunk of change for an otherwise "pedestrian" stock photo. Had it been an RF image I wouldn't have been as well off.

 

Marc

[Guest GPK]

.

[Bryan]

My best return on an image came from a RF shot, two licences in fact, I still see it on calendars, but that was from way back when I first started with Alamy. I mostly classify as RM these days, partly because I don't have releases, but also, as has been pointed out, because certain types of image can get multiple usages and it makes more sense that way.

[eppic]

I've been lately toying with the idea of selling future images here as exclusive RM as I'm fed up with submitting to microstock sites with low sales and horrible commissions. Alamy lately has been doing well for me with my RF portfolio, so either way I am considering just uploading all future images only to Alamy.  Would it then be beneficial to go with an exclusive RM license?  Most of my images aren't all that unique and are mostly nature/ travel with a smattering of isolated/ white background shots.