Jump to content

Recommended Posts

How is G. now going to compete with the likes of SS, where untold millions of RF images are available for pennies?

I'm sticking with RM (mostly) on Alamy until the clock runs out. Let the feeding frenzy begin...

 

closeup-of-mallard-ducks-competing-for-f

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be brave of Alamy to try promoting RM but they could give it try  as there is no competition to speak of except specialist agencies.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

💀

 

They used to be the place to aim for, now I'm sorry that I even have a handful of images there (from another agency). I was given the opportunity to upload more, but I didn't because I didn't want to earn pennies - less than even the lowest microstock subscription rates. 

 

My portfolio is becoming more heavily RF, even though I certainly prefer RM, simply because it gives me more opportunities to spread similar images to other sites, although I have also set  aside some RM photos as "Alamy only," but I worry that I'm leaving money on the table not just uploading them to several sites at once. It is really a dilemma.

 

I'm glad that I opted for more accessible photography rather than spending a fortune hiring models and stylists and trying to produce big budget images - I worked with food and prop stylists as a photo assistant and even without models the cost of some of these productions was only worthwhile because places like the now-defunct Jupiter Images got high prices for them, and we had a dedicated editor who we worked with - from shoot ideas to brainstorming. When Getty took them over the game changed. They assigned a Connecticut photographer an editor in Ireland who never responded to requests. I can only imagine what some of the commercial work on Getty must have cost to produce. 

 A lot easier to earn a ROI on a D700 than on a $30,000 digital back, studio equipment, etc. 

 

Ironically, most of the micros now have a more expensive Premium brand, but Getty can't seem to figure out where they end and iStock starts, licensing top files at micro prices. Even their bargain basement brand iStock used to let you designate a certain number of files at higher prices once you hit certain targets. Those higher priced files of mine always sold much more often than the rest (because people want those "premium" files), but Getty seems to keep dropping their prices. 

 

Maybe Alamy can spend some of the money they've saved with the new commission structure and find a way to market our RM images. I'll put on my rose colored glass and make a wish.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing certain about the digital stock business is change. 

 

I only shoot common-access editorial images exclusively for Alamy. All of them are RM. I'll keep them that way until there's a good reason not to. 

 

Edo

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Ed Rooney said:

The only thing certain about the digital stock business is change. 

 

I only shoot common-access editorial images exclusively for Alamy. All of them are RM. I'll keep them that way until there's a good reason not to. 

 

Edo

 

 

Seeing the positive out of this Getty decision - there is going to be a lot of secondary editorial, travel, type content that will no longer be available on Getty.  Especially ones with unreleased recognisable property/people that can't be converted to RF. And for a lot of photographers Getty are not even offering the chance to convert any of their images to RF - they are just going to be hidden for Premium Access only by the end of Jan 2020 and then eventually removed en masse ( by end of November 2020). 

 

This sudden change of direction after Getty piling up secondary editorial content in Creative over the last few years ( from both individuals and partner agencies) is bound to create huge gaps in content. Some of this sort of material is in Getty editorial but nothing like the coverage that Alamy has. 

 

Hopefully, this will benefit Alamy and its contributors.

 

 

Edited by geogphotos
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just see this as natural progression to a simpler licensing model. I think RM has been a complication for both customers and agencies for a while and Getty have made a bold move. A move I don't agree with to be honest but as I no longer am with them I am not enraged at this point. It will no doubt have an effect on the marketplace as Bill has mentioned.

 

These days I get confused what is RM and what is RF, I understand the difference perfectly but agencies are using some more liberal interpretations such as (these examples are from my Alamy sales for this last couple of months)  a) RF but with a one time usage stipulation added b) RM in perpetuity for Single company - multiple educational editorial use.

 

I think the danger to other agencies is will the "one model" (RF) appeal more to new image users and their accountants enough to affect the rest of the market in the mid/long term. 

 

More "interesting times" to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When things get tough, some seem to be running round like headless chickens in search of profit. This is how I feel about Getty right now. Maybe, in the short term, they will attract a lot of new clients by selling such an incredible amount of premium stuff for pennies, but soon their premium stuff will be available elsewhere because there will be no point selling exclusively through their agency. I do not see how this race to the bottom could be beneficial to photographers.

Edited by Olivier Parent
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Olivier Parent said:

When things get tough, some seem to be running round like headless chickens in search of profit. This is how I feel about Getty right now. Maybe, in the short term, they will attract a lot of new clients by selling such an incredible amount of premium stuff for pennies, but soon their premium stuff will be available elsewhere because there will be no point selling exclusively through their agency. I do not see how this race to the bottom could be beneficial to photographers.

 

 

Olivier,

 

If Getty are losing photographers such as yourself then they really are being stupid and short-sighted. I love your French Polynesia images in particular. 

 

Getty's loss and Alamy's gain. 

 

This move has to be driven by Getty's debt mountain - a way to cut staff costs and photographer commission.

 

Surely, there has to be a limit to how far this can go? 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brian Yarvin said:

Okay Ian, where did you source this?

 

 

Right hand side of my Alamy dashboard where they list all the tweets and blogs and what have you.

 

And on the forum

 

I0000wC85VVIpwUw.jpg

Edited by geogphotos
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiding in plain sight!! 

 

You've got to love those tweets and blogs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Brian Yarvin said:

Hiding in plain sight!! 

 

You've got to love those tweets and blogs.

 

 

i wonder if Alamy buys the image RM or RF....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was speaking to an art buyer at a major London ad agency today about this as somebody with images here and getty to get her take on it. 

 

Initially she thought it was great. When I explained that not only will all the rm images be deleted and cant be resubmited. That the photographers share has been halved and the fact that sometimes you can end up with a few cents in your pocket for a shot some of the economic realities started to shine through.

 

The good photographers will and are leaving and the contents will become amateur driven. Less concept driven images less models used overall less.

 

Maybe alamy should pick up the baton and start some form of premium range curated and priced accordingly. There is a market for the level of work but you have to be able to make money out of it as a photographer.

 

D

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave, I'd reject this idea if it were for any agency except Alamy. They at least have a sales force in place that understands what we're talking about. Alamy could do it, but it would require some serious motivation on their part.

 

As for your scenario of pros being replaced by amateurs, that happened long ago.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are completely right in that. I would say that that is not necessary a bad thing. But an amateur may well be happy to see there work used almost just for the satisfaction the money is a secondary motivation its nice to have to help pay for trips to shoot more or to buy new kit.

 

For scenics, landscapes, city scapes etc where you only need a camera a few filters and a tripod then lets face it its a fairly even playing field. When it comes to models, props, lighting, studios, stylists, hair and make up, permits etc you need a pro. And they need to have a pretty good idea that they will recoup there investment and some to make it worth while.

 

Some of the still life work I have produced has taken a day to create one shot to then be offered 20% of not much is not tenable. If I can use it as a portfolio piece that get me more commissioned work then that is a benefit. I really feel there is now a growing gap for high quality work that is sold at a realistic price to make it viable.

 

D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had three decent (mid $$ and high $$) RM sales of exclusive images to the same magazine pop up today. It appears that there are still plenty of editorial clients who understand and perhaps even prefer RM licensing for various reasons, so I agree with Alamy -- RM ain't dead by any means.

Edited by John Mitchell
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 

 

Olivier,

 

If Getty are losing photographers such as yourself then they really are being stupid and short-sighted. I love your French Polynesia images in particular. 

 

Getty's loss and Alamy's gain. 

 

This move has to be driven by Getty's debt mountain - a way to cut staff costs and photographer commission.

 

Surely, there has to be a limit to how far this can go? 

 

Thank you very much Ian!

Actually, I do not submit to Getty.

I tend to think their microstock platform is all that will last and this is not something I wish to be part of…

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/11/2019 at 06:23, Olivier Parent said:

 

Thank you very much Ian!

Actually, I do not submit to Getty.

I tend to think their microstock platform is all that will last and this is not something I wish to be part of…

 

 

You don't think that Getty will last? I agree that this latest move doesn't inspire confidence. They seem to be always shuffling the debt mountain into the future.

 

It is an interesting prospect to imagine the stock industry without Getty - overall I think the consequences would lead to renewal and new energy.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ian, even though I was there, it's hard for me to recall how vivid and energetic the stock photo industry was before all this consolidation. It was a time when there were always more vendors and always more buyers. I can't help but wish for a re-emergence of boutique agencies, even though I can't imagine what sorts of images they'd host or who they might offer those images to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whenever there is change there is opportunity and I believe this has handed Alamy a terrific opportunity to exploit, there will always be a buyer for RM and RF, it just needs managing the expectations of the various buyers.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Brian Yarvin said:

Ian, even though I was there, it's hard for me to recall how vivid and energetic the stock photo industry was before all this consolidation. It was a time when there were always more vendors and always more buyers. I can't help but wish for a re-emergence of boutique agencies, even though I can't imagine what sorts of images they'd host or who they might offer those images to. 

 

 

In general terms it becomes unhealthy when any industry is over-concentrated in just a few hands.

 

Stock isn't far from being a duopoly these days. The giants have so much power that they can control the market and stifle any initiatives emerging from would-be competitors. 

 

In my opinion the stock photography industry has become stagnant and needs a complete shake-up. 

Edited by geogphotos
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ian, I came in here to share the same thing - saw it on twitter. Glad to see they are pushing RM - it certainly will set them apart more now. Let's hope we will see more RM sales. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Marianne said:

Ian, I came in here to share the same thing - saw it on twitter. Glad to see they are pushing RM - it certainly will set them apart more now. Let's hope we will see more RM sales. 

 

 

 

 

Yes, it is a positive statement to attract more photographers.

 

Let's hope that similar adverts are being produced to attract more buyers.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 

 

You don't think that Getty will last? I agree that this latest move doesn't inspire confidence. They seem to be always shuffling the debt mountain into the future.

 

It is an interesting prospect to imagine the stock industry without Getty - overall I think the consequences would lead to renewal and new energy.

 

 

The BBC would have to look elsewhere for images for sure maybe go back to Alamy and other agencies.

Share this post


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.