Jump to content

Thinking of going exclusive - am I crackers?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, geogphotos said:

I'd suggest concentrating on increasing your numbers before worrying about exclusivity etc

 

Keyword off-Alamy ( Lightroom or whatever you use) so that you have the images ready to send elsewhere should you decide to.

 

See how things go, what is getting zoomed/bought/looked at and what isn't?

 

Personally I'd keep them under one type of licence rather than complicate things. Since you say that definitely want to avoid micros you should go RM ( IMHO).

 

Thanks. have started using LR for keywording now and am in the habit of no longer forgetting to do it before exporting, so that's taken care of...!

 

I have almost everything listed RM, think it's only something like 8 images RF and they're all free of property and have me as the model so obviously released without question if it gets to that. It was more of an experiment than anything else but going forward my plan is to stay more or less wholly RM. 

 

Two of the three sales I had so far were of the same image of a motorway taken not 2 miles up the road from me, and not even used in this country. Go figure!

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

 

Thanks. have started using LR for keywording now and am in the habit of no longer forgetting to do it before exporting, so that's taken care of...!

 

I have almost everything listed RM, think it's only something like 8 images RF and they're all free of property and have me as the model so obviously released without question if it gets to that. It was more of an experiment than anything else but going forward my plan is to stay more or less wholly RM. 

 

Two of the three sales I had so far were of the same image of a motorway taken not 2 miles up the road from me, and not even used in this country. Go figure!

 

I am guessing but quite likely an image like that would be rejected from the micros as not being sufficiently saleable. That is a big lesson itself I'd say. If there are types of pictures that are not on micros then that has to be a good lead to follow.

 

The other big difference I see when looking at micros is the often very loose, careless approach to captions even if they have the images eg) do they mention the name of the motorway, the exact location, direction, anything specific such as the name of a haulage company or has all that been omitted/cloned out to make it look generic?

 

So although we can't get away from the huge negative impact that micros have on all of us we can at least attempt to differentiate our own images and distance ourselves from the same sort of content. To me that is one of the main advantages of RM because no RM image can be on a micro site.

 

Edited by geogphotos
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Cal said:

0 images on Alamy's MS offering.

Alamy doesn't have a "microstock offering"- what do you mean?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

Alamy doesn't have a "microstock offering"- what do you mean?


Maybe he meant S******O 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm exclusive with Alamy and prefer a smelly blue cheese on my cracker! 😄

 

As others have mentioned, metadata is your friend!

 

Best practice is to have all the metadata (captions, keywords/tags, location, copyright notice, photographer contact info), on the original image file, be that RAW, TIFF or JPG. Then any derivative copy's of the images that you submit have all the metadata included. Notice I include in my metadata information that Alamy strips from the images, not to worry as I annotate my images for the long term not just for what Alamy requires.

 

A good book that helped me transition to digital is The DAM Book

 

Hope this helps,

 

David L. Moore

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine are exclusive. But then, I’m more interested in a rather peaceful life, not flogging my work. If you are energetic, by all means...
From what some others have said, a certain amount of buyers search a lot of agencies. I never want to offer something here that can be gotten for pennies elsewhere.

For the most part, my sale prices are decent here. Not what they used to be when I got $300 textbook sales, but the market is what it is. Back then, most licenses were for print, not web.

Someday, physical in-your-hands books will be in museums, not libraries.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Cal said:

What do people mean here when they say editorial images sell well? Is this referring to checking the "sell for editorial only" checkbox or referring to the subject type?

 

People would be referring here to the subject type - specifically images with people that lack model releases and images with property that lack property releases. So images of Black Lives Matter protests, general street scene with property and people, basically anything unreleased.

 

My general understanding is that if the license type is RM, ticking the editorial box is mostly not essential, but the photographer can choose to at their own discretion. The important thing is to indicate that you don't have model and/or property releases. However, Alamy states that images including artwork must be marked editorial and photographed in a wider context.

 

So I think what people are saying here is that a lot of the kinds of images that sell here are unreleased images, and often of the type that appear in newspapers, news websites, magazines etc. There is a greater focus on those kinds of images over the kinds of commercial images that appear a lot in microstock, such as model-released photos of a family eating dinner, business people around a table, that kind of thing. You can still get editorial images on more commercially-oriented stock sites and vice versa, but not to the same degree. The fact that there are contributors on Alamy who are photojournalists or work for magazines makes sense, as Alamy is more oriented to the kinds of subject matter that are editorial in nature.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sally R said:

 

People would be referring here to the subject type - specifically images with people that lack model releases and images with property that lack property releases. So images of Black Lives Matter protests, general street scene with property and people, basically anything unreleased.

 

My general understanding is that if the license type is RM, ticking the editorial box is mostly not essential, but the photographer can choose to at their own discretion. The important thing is to indicate that you don't have model and/or property releases. However, Alamy states that images including artwork must be marked editorial and photographed in a wider context.

 

So I think what people are saying here is that a lot of the kinds of images that sell here are unreleased images, and often of the type that appear in newspapers, news websites, magazines etc. There is a greater focus on those kinds of images over the kinds of commercial images that appear a lot in microstock, such as model-released photos of a family eating dinner, business people around a table, that kind of thing. You can still get editorial images on more commercially-oriented stock sites and vice versa, but not to the same degree. The fact that there are contributors on Alamy who are photojournalists or work for magazines makes sense, as Alamy is more oriented to the kinds of subject matter that are editorial in nature.

NO Sally,

 

According to what you have written both you and Alamy have corrupted the term "Editorial" or you have taken something written by Alamy out of context.

 

Editorial According to Merriam-Webster: Traditionally, the word editorial operates firmly within the realm of the written word. As a noun, it most often refers to a newspaper or magazine article (or an online equivalent) that gives the opinions of that publication's editors or publishers. 

 

In my opinion; Editorial Photography is a different way of seeing and making images and magazine photography, newspaper photography and wire service photography and very different subsets of Editorial.  Over the years I have also done a lot of "Corporate Photography" and "Advertising Photography"  Those are very different than "Editorial Photography."  I have tried to do "Stock Photography", but was never happy doing it.

 

To put it in context for Cal:  Editorial, at least in the way I used it, was meant to mean that I make an image (s) with the idea that it or they will be licensed by a publication or editorial web site (see definition above in bold).  I have made "Editorial" images that I had signed model releases from the subjects appearing in the images, but do not do that very often.  One more important factor for "Editorial Images" is that they be unaltered graphically (see Alamy's own guidelines) and have complete and accurate caption information.

 

I would also add that an "Editorial Image" also illustrates a story or event.  

 

Chuck

Edited by Chuck Nacke
addition
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the current state of stock photo prices, I tend to focus on assignments, but when it comes to stock photography I am exclusive with Alamy.

I submitted images to a French niche agency in the past, but never the same images that were available on Alamy, and I eventually closed my account there recently.

I have always considered microstock as sawing the branch you are sitting on so I never even thought of becoming a contributor to these.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Chuck Nacke said:

NO Sally,

 

According to what you have written both you and Alamy have corrupted the term "Editorial" or you have taken something written by Alamy out of context.

 

Editorial According to Merriam-Webster: Traditionally, the word editorial operates firmly within the realm of the written word. As a noun, it most often refers to a newspaper or magazine article (or an online equivalent) that gives the opinions of that publication's editors or publishers. 

 

In my opinion; Editorial Photography is a different way of seeing and making images and magazine photography, newspaper photography and wire service photography and very different subsets of Editorial.  Over the years I have also done a lot of "Corporate Photography" and "Advertising Photography"  Those are very different than "Editorial Photography."  I have tried to do "Stock Photography", but was never happy doing it.

 

To put it in context for Cal:  Editorial, at least in the way I used it, was meant to mean that I make an image (s) with the idea that it or they will be licensed by a publication or editorial web site (see definition above in bold).  I have made "Editorial" images that I had signed model releases from the subjects appearing in the images, but do not do that very often.  One more important factor for "Editorial Images" is that they be unaltered graphically (see Alamy's own guidelines) and have complete and accurate caption information.

 

I would also add that an "Editorial Image" also illustrates a story or event.  

 

Chuck

 

Ok Chuck, I think I understand what you are saying. I was trying to answer that question for Cal as I could see it hadn't been answered yet.

 

My understanding of editorial was on the basis of images that cannot be used by the purchaser commercially. I do get that editorial images are used to illustrate a story or event, and are used in a range of media publications. I guess what I was also including in editorial were images that cannot be used commercially because of the lack of a release. For example, if I photograph a branded can of soup but I don't have a release, then it can only be used by the purchaser editorially. However, the can of soup on it's own is not telling a story (and is less interesting). Someone writing an article may still use the image though if it helps to illustrate what the article is about (maybe something on the canned food industry, cooking fresh meals rather than eating canned food for a health magazine etc).

 

So if I get you correctly, you are talking about the craft and profession of doing editorial photography, and that involves storytelling via capturing a moment in time. And as you point out, it is possible to take an editorial photo even where you may have a release. It is a qualitative thing, rather than being defined by the presence/absence of a release.

 

So I guess a better answer for Cal than what I gave above would be to say that editorial images that illustrate stories and events that are used with the written word in various forms of media sell better on Alamy.

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

there is an excellent tweet from Alamy that I have just seen on the dashboard which I agree with:

 

 

Cracking photo as well.

 

Thanks for the tips re. editorial.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's impossible to advise. Everyone's port is different so everyone's experience is different. All my pics on Alamy are RM and exclusive (though some are only de facto exclusive as they are pictures of artworks). I also have a port on one of the micros, about 10% smaller than my Alamy port, but every month except one I have earned more there and my overall earnings there are considerably more than my earnings via Alamy. I will say that I don't do Live News on Alamy, and that probably makes a big difference.

Both agencies are falling in sales and especially in rpd, and what will happen round the corner is anyone's guess. If your aim is a better rpd, Alamy is a better bet for the moment, if your aim is to maximise your income, Alamy may not be your best bet unless you move into Live News.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I admit to being crackers, but I think that being exclusive is especially beneficial for editorial photos -- i.e. ones created with magazines, books, editorial websites, etc. in mind. Not sure about "commercial" and "lifestyle" images, though, since I don't know much about those markets. I like to think that keeping most of my Alamy images exclusive has resulted in consistent monthly sales numbers and revenue, but I don't have any way of verifying this.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just over half my images here are exclusive, the others are with a small specialist agency that is very picky about what it takes but returns far more per image and in total than Alamy. I think it depends what you shoot, if you have a specialist area it may be worth looking through the BAPLA lists to find a library you fit with. I will have no truck with the "Penny Dreadfuls" and almost all my images are RM.

 

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

"Penny Dreadfuls"

 

🤣🤣🤣

 

Neither do I.

 

Allan

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Cryptoprocta said:

return per download. The average you net from each individual sale.

Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/06/2020 at 11:35, Sally R said:

 

Ok Chuck, I think I understand what you are saying. I was trying to answer that question for Cal as I could see it hadn't been answered yet.

 

My understanding of editorial was on the basis of images that cannot be used by the purchaser commercially. I do get that editorial images are used to illustrate a story or event, and are used in a range of media publications. I guess what I was also including in editorial were images that cannot be used commercially because of the lack of a release. For example, if I photograph a branded can of soup but I don't have a release, then it can only be used by the purchaser editorially. However, the can of soup on it's own is not telling a story (and is less interesting). Someone writing an article may still use the image though if it helps to illustrate what the article is about (maybe something on the canned food industry, cooking fresh meals rather than eating canned food for a health magazine etc).

 

So if I get you correctly, you are talking about the craft and profession of doing editorial photography, and that involves storytelling via capturing a moment in time. And as you point out, it is possible to take an editorial photo even where you may have a release. It is a qualitative thing, rather than being defined by the presence/absence of a release.

 

So I guess a better answer for Cal than what I gave above would be to say that editorial images that illustrate stories and events that are used with the written word in various forms of media sell better on Alamy.

 

 

You’re right Sally and your first post was correct too. I understood what you were getting at 👍

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Colblimp said:

You’re right Sally and your first post was correct too. I understood what you were getting at 👍

Thanks Colblimp, Cheers Sally 😊

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/06/2020 at 23:58, Cal said:

there is an excellent tweet from Alamy that I have just seen on the dashboard which I agree with:

 

 

Cracking photo as well.

 

I agree with it too Cal. It's good advice. I love the photo too. Animals often seem to find cameras interesting. My favourite photographer is an Estonian named Sven Zacek. He has done a wonderful job focussing on what he knows and has access to in Estonia, especially wildlife and landscapes. He has an image of a Great Grey Owl on one of his Nikon cameras, which I thought of seeing the penguins curious about the camera https://www.zacekfoto.ee/en/image/nikon-fan/

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.