Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just had this email from Alamy, wondering if everyone gets them:

 

Hi Mark,

We’re in the process of looking over the Alamy collection to help ensure accuracy of the “Exclusive to Alamy” declaration currently applied to certain images.

Your account currently has 2086 images marked as Exclusive to Alamy.

As a general reminder, “Exclusive” images cannot be available through any other third-party licensing, sales or distribution channels (where not supplied through Alamy). You can sell your images on a personal print site (without a stock licencing option) and still mark these as exclusive to Alamy. Selling prints and stock licences on your own website is also fine.

If your collection contains images of artworks these can never be marked as Exclusive to Alamy, unless you're the artist.

If you’re already sure that everything is in order then there is no need for further action. If you’re unsure though, please review your collection and update the “Exclusive to Alamy” annotation of your images where necessary to prevent any future issues.

Thanks,

Alamy

 

I thought it was quite odd in that it says that currently I've got "2086 images marked as Exclusive to Alamy" when actually, as of this morning I've got 2607, i.e. all of them. It's from contributors@alamy-updates.com so presumably you're not meant to reply to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I had the same email.

 

I think it's just a gentle reminder to make sure the images you've marked as exclusive really are exclusive!

 

John.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stokie said:

I think it's just a gentle reminder to make sure the images you've marked as exclusive really are exclusive!

Thanks, did they get your numbers right, it kind of feels that they've brushed up an old email without updating the numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me too and it claims that only 8924 of my 20odd thousand are exclusive, but I'm sure they all are...
Puzzlin...????

Phil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Phil Crean said:

Puzzlin...????

I'll say, they're a bit far off with yours! I downloaded the csv just to be sure.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If your collection contains images of artworks these can never be marked as Exclusive to Alamy, unless you're the artist."

 

So I'm confused if I take a photo of a sculpture or statue or some other kind of monument that can not be marked as Exclusive?

 

Like wise if I take a photo of a building covered in graffiti that can not be marked as Exclusive?

 

I'd appreciate any clarification ta :)

 

also they said I have 1764 images but its really 1910 🤔

Edited by David Pimborough
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mark. 

 

I've just received my personalised version of the email and suspect all contributors will get theirs unless they've 'unsubscribed' from such updates. So, no, I'm sure they are not expecting any replies.

 

Having recently discussed the perennial issue of street art images and re-annotated such photos as 'Editorial Only', I was interested to note the following in the email: 

"If your collection contains images of artworks these can never be marked as Exclusive to Alamy, unless you're the artist."

 

It's probably been mentioned before and I missed it, so I've just amended my artwork (predominantly street art) images accordingly. However, I do wonder what further restrictions on street art images will be placed upon us in the future. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, David Pimborough said:

"If your collection contains images of artworks these can never be marked as Exclusive to Alamy, unless you're the artist."

 

So I'm confused if I take a photo of a sculpture or statue or some other kind of monument that can not be marked as Exclusive?

 

Like wise if I take a photo of a building covered in graffiti that can not be marked as Exclusive?

 

I'd appreciate any clarification ta :)

 

 

21 minutes ago, Number Six said:

Hi Mark. 

 

I've just received my personalised version of the email and suspect all contributors will get theirs unless they've 'unsubscribed' from such updates. So, no, I'm sure they are not expecting any replies.

 

Having recently discussed the perennial issue of street art images and re-annotated such photos as 'Editorial Only', I was interested to note the following in the email: 

"If your collection contains images of artworks these can never be marked as Exclusive to Alamy, unless you're the artist."

 

It's probably been mentioned before and I missed it, so I've just amended my artwork (predominantly street art) images accordingly. However, I do wonder what further restrictions on street art images will be placed upon us in the future. 

 

There was some discussion about this at the time.A photograph of a work of art in context isn't a copy of the work of art. It makes no sense to say that this can't be exclusive.

2ACCXGK.jpg

 

Edited by spacecadet
  • Like 4
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Harry Harrison said:

Just had this email from Alamy, wondering if everyone gets them:

 

Hi Mark,

We’re in the process of looking over the Alamy collection to help ensure accuracy of the “Exclusive to Alamy” declaration currently applied to certain images.

Your account currently has 2086 images marked as Exclusive to Alamy.

As a general reminder, “Exclusive” images cannot be available through any other third-party licensing, sales or distribution channels (where not supplied through Alamy). You can sell your images on a personal print site (without a stock licencing option) and still mark these as exclusive to Alamy. Selling prints and stock licences on your own website is also fine.

If your collection contains images of artworks these can never be marked as Exclusive to Alamy, unless you're the artist.

If you’re already sure that everything is in order then there is no need for further action. If you’re unsure though, please review your collection and update the “Exclusive to Alamy” annotation of your images where necessary to prevent any future issues.

Thanks,

Alamy

 

I thought it was quite odd in that it says that currently I've got "2086 images marked as Exclusive to Alamy" when actually, as of this morning I've got 2607, i.e. all of them. It's from contributors@alamy-updates.com so presumably you're not meant to reply to it.

 

Just a quick one on this from us - sorry for the confusion regarding the number. There has been a lag on the number pulled from the database for the email and what today's total may be. All other info is correct, the exact number may not match though in all cases.

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Alamy said:

 

Just a quick one on this from us - sorry for the confusion regarding the number. There has been a lag on the number pulled from the database for the email and what today's total may be. All other info is correct, the exact number may not match though in all cases.

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

 

Can you comment on Spacecadets' post immediately above about artworks in a wider context. Most of the public art images I shoot are also in a wider context, usually incorporating people viewing the artwork. Do these have to be sold as non-exclusive?

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I spent months going through mine to indicate which were exclusive and which were not. During all that time I was losing 10 percentage points on all sales because all images were marked as non-exclusive ( getting 40% instead of 50%). I can't remember now, were all images categorised as non-exclusive until stated to be otherwise?

 

I did ask but there was no refund on those which were actually exclusive all the time.

 

My point with all this work, what is the benefit to the contributor since the client is not informed whether an image is exclusive or not? So no potential sales advantage.

 

Of course we all want to do the right thing and stick to the rules but equally we are being asked to spend time and effort doing this just for the end result of losing commission on non-exclusive images.

Edited by geogphotos
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Alamy said:

Just a quick one on this from us - sorry for the confusion regarding the number.

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also if we discuss exclusive definition, i have been struggling with

Quote

 images that are from the same shoot, but shot from a different angle or the model is posing differently, is considered a different image and can be marked as exclusive if that particular shot is not available elsewhere.

 

how does the model posing rules apply to event stuff.  would you consider the two following as "posing differently".  this is not a different crop, and the second the look of the pedestrian is totally different (i had missed it, so first will be deleted in 6 month) .  Would these be considered different?

 

 

 

2A9710H.jpg

2A9C12R.jpg

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Joseph Clemson said:

 

Can you comment on Spacecadets' post immediately above about artworks in a wider context. Most of the public art images I shoot are also in a wider context, usually incorporating people viewing the artwork. Do these have to be sold as non-exclusive?

 

We can refer you to the contributor help pages for that, but for ease here's the info you need from that very page:

 

What classifies an image as Exclusive to Alamy?

You will receive 50% of each direct sale for images that are Exclusive to Alamy and 40% for images that are not Exclusive to Alamy. Below we have answered some frequently asked questions surrounding what classifies an image as exclusive.

Images of artwork

Images of artwork in context can be marked as exclusive. The general rule of thumb is that the artwork can’t take up any more than 1/3 of the image frame.

Different versions of the same image

Similar versions of the same image that are available on other licencing platforms can’t be marked as exclusive (i.e. B&W, different crop, or slight adjustments). However, images that are from the same shoot, but shot from a different angle or the model is posing differently, is considered a different image and can be marked as exclusive if that particular shot is not available elsewhere.

Facebook and Instagram

You can upload exclusive images to Facebook and Instagram.

Selling direct

Images can be sold through your own website or directly to customers and still be marked as Exclusive on Alamy.

POD sites

Images that are available via POD sites can be marked as exclusive as long as they’re not offered for additional licencing through the POD site.

We consider additional products as mugs and towels the same as prints.

Cheers

Alamy

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, meanderingemu said:

also if we discuss exclusive definition, i have been struggling with

 

how does the model posing rules apply to event stuff.  would you consider the two following as "posing differently".  this is not a different crop, and the second the look of the pedestrian is totally different (i had missed it, so first will be deleted in 6 month) .  Would these be considered different?

 

 

 

2A9710H.jpg

2A9C12R.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

These are different images. 

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Alamy said:

 

These are different images. 

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

 

thanks.  this is really helpful.  I think i was trying to be overly cautious. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

 

 

 

There was some discussion about this at the time.A photograph of a work of art in context isn't a copy of the work of art. It makes no sense to say that this can't be exclusive.

2ACCXGK.jpg

 

 

This is my understanding. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

 

My point with all this work, what is the benefit to the contributor since the client is not informed whether an image is exclusive or not? So no potential sales advantage.

 

 

The benefit is that you earn a higher commission for images exclusive to us. If you mark images as exclusive when they are not, then this could be treated as a breach of contract leading to possible consequences including removal of images from the site. 

 

Our sales staff can view images marked as exclusive and we do have options of sharing exclusive images to customers if that's what they require. 

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Alamy said:

 

 

Images of artwork

Images of artwork in context can be marked as exclusive. The general rule of thumb is that the artwork can’t take up any more than 1/3 of the image frame.

 

 

 

are handmade protest banners and placards qualified as work of art?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Alamy said:

 

The benefit is that you earn a higher commission for images exclusive to us. If you mark images as exclusive when they are not, then this could be treated as a breach of contract leading to possible consequences including removal of images from the site. 

 

Our sales staff can view images marked as exclusive and we do have options of sharing exclusive images to customers if that's what they require. 

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

 

 

Since the commission was 50% for all sales it isn't actual true to say that exclusive images earn a higher commission.  What has happened is that non-exclusive images get a lower commission. 

 

I understand totally about the contractual obligations but remind you that it was Alamy that made the change and that it has not been at all easy to respond for those who had/have image elsewhere ( because over the years they were actually encouraged by Alamy not to have all their eggs in one basket). 

 

I had to go through an Excel spreadsheet of over 60,000 images identifying the approx 20,000 that are not exclusive. It took ages!!

Edited by geogphotos
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, meanderingemu said:

 

 

are handmade protest banners and placards qualified as work of art?

 

Impossible to say with 100% certainty.

 

The question you have to ask yourself is "does my image contain artwork that takes up more than 1/3 of the total frame, by which someone else could claim copyright to?"

 

If you're not sure, don't take the risk. 

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Alamy said:

 

Impossible to say with 100% certainty.

 

The question you have to ask yourself is "does my image contain artwork that takes up more than 1/3 of the total frame, by which someone else could claim copyright to?"

 

If you're not sure, don't take the risk. 

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

 

 

 

 

thanks.  my issue if more what is the contractual definition of "artwork" to be honest?  

 

so to clarify, cannot be "exclusive"

 

2A3DRW2.jpg

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harry Harrison said:

I thought it was quite odd in that it says that currently I've got "2086 images marked as Exclusive to Alamy" when actually, as of this morning I've got 2607, i.e. all of them. It's from contributors@alamy-updates.com so presumably you're not meant to reply to it.

 

Same here, I currently have 2483 images, and as far as I'm aware they are all exclusive. Alamy totalled them as 2126.

 

I noticed one of last months sales was only a 40%, looked into to it and all from that shoot weren't marked exclusive. That was then correct. I then spent some time checking, all was well. I did find some early images with no super tags, still have to go back over those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, meanderingemu said:

thanks.  my issue if more what is the contractual definition of "artwork" to be honest?  

 

so to clarify, cannot be "exclusive"

 

2A3DRW2.jpg

 

Yes I'd like to understand this too. Is not the photographic image of someones work of art on public display unique in that it was captured by a particular photographer, camera and moment in time? If this unique image is listed with only Alamy and nowhere else is it not exclusive to Alamy? And how does one measure 1/3 of the frame as a "general" rule and what significance does that ratio have to exclusivity? Please enlighten us.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, meanderingemu said:

 

 

thanks.  my issue if more what is the contractual definition of "artwork" to be honest?  

 

so to clarify, cannot be "exclusive"

 

2A3DRW2.jpg

 

My understanding is that a 3-D sculpture like that can be photographed from a zillion different angles, each of them potentially unique, so you can mark the image exclusive. It should be designated as "editorial use only", though.

Edited by John Mitchell
  • Upvote 6

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.