Upcoming Alamy contributor update video - comments welcome

[Alamy]

Hi All,

 

Next week we'll be recording a video update for you to cover the topics we would usually speak about at a contributor event or conference. The video will feature Emily Shelley (Managing Director), Alan Capel (Operations Director) and James Allsworth (Head of Content).

 

We'll cover some broad topics including: company vision for the coming years, a review of this year and some tips on how to get the best out of contributing.

 

If there are any other specific subjects you'd like us to cover, please use this thread to make suggestions. We can't promise we'll be able to specifically address everything but we will do our best to respond to what we can. 

 

Deadline for suggestions is close of play, Monday the 7th of December.

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

[meanderingemu]

in addressing "how to get the best out of contributing"  it would be interesting if you could address the current ranking assessment system for contributors and images as it seems their is some issues, as seen in this recent thread

 

 

[geogphotos]

1) 40% commission on non-exclusive images. This was a last minute compromise decision. Not fair. 

 

2) Re-think on the DACS situation. Please don't just give us the same answers as before. 

 

Getting the best out of contributors should involve a two way relationship - too often that doesn't seem to be the case and loyalty is all one way.

 

So, some thought about rewarding loyal, successful contributors to keep them contributing and to help keep them afloat. Incentives. 

 

Edit : It was rude of me not say how grateful I am that this event is happening, a reminder of what is best about Alamy. If only that spirit could be galvanised for the benefit of all of us. 

Edited December 4, 2020 by geogphotos

[RyanU]

It would be interesting to hear your prospects on UK newspaper sales given the system will soon become mandatory for all contributors. Do you expect sales to generally improve across the board, given a broader access to content for certain news publishers, and therefore more likelihood of overall usage of Alamy over competitors?
 

Also, will rates for Live News be affected negatively by the reluctance of news publishers to pay substantially due to Covid-related financial issues?

[John Morrison]

I’d be interested to hear about new marketing initiatives. Not just a bigger slice of the cake for contributors… but a bigger cake altogether…

[M.Chapman]

43 minutes ago, meanderingemu said:

in addressing "how to get the best out of contributing"  it would be interesting if you could address the current ranking assessment system for contributors and images as it seems their is some issues, as seen in this recent thread

 

 

+1

[meanderingemu]

21 minutes ago, RyanU said:

It would be interesting to hear your prospects on UK newspaper sales given the system will soon become mandatory for all contributors. Do you expect sales to generally improve across the board, given a broader access to content for certain news publishers, and therefore more likelihood of overall usage of Alamy over competitors?
 

Also, will rates for Live News be affected negatively by the reluctance of news publishers to pay substantially due to Covid-related financial issues?

 

 

also strategy with the US office and input on potential in other markets,

[Avpics]

Is improving the speed and reliability of the 'daily' database update being targeted? Not having images on sale for days on end is frustrating, in particular of topical subjects and Live News that fall into a black hole.

 

Is there pressure from PA to prioritise the sale of their images, or to make changes that would favour them?

[meanderingemu]

22 minutes ago, Avpics said:

Is improving the speed and reliability of the 'daily' database update being targeted? Not having images on sale for days on end is frustrating, in particular of topical subjects and Live News that fall into a black hole.

 

 

 

 

+1.  Another lost day today.

[losdemas]

I understand that Alamy's efforts are best spent, and of course should always be concentrated on, getting licences. I am sure that most of us do appreciate your efforts, especially in these challenging times. But...

1. Why are licences not limited to low resolution, when appropriate? All licences that are sold for screen use only do not need to be made available at high resolution. Surely this is easy to achieve? If a customer later decides to use an image for print, they could easily request this very quickly. HR images readily available online only increases infringement risk.
2. A number of customers seem to be either forgetful or very slow to self-report - or even occasionally appear to deliberately avoid (!) self-reporting. Some of these usages are hidden behind paywalls and discovered only by chance. I think that perhaps Alamy could be more proactive in chasing these customers? Systems must allow licences to be noted and flagged up when unpaid?! As licence rates continue to fall, this really is inexcusable behaviour on the part of customers.
3. When contributors alert Alamy of abuse of licence terms by customers (predominantly PU or presentation licences), there is often what seems an interminable wait of, at times, many, many, months. Alamy respond with a standard reply of 'this has been passed to our xxx team', then little happens for months - or it gets forgotten about completely and we have to chase it up - sometimes multiple times. This should just not be necessary. The abuse has been flagged; the proof recorded & submitted. With available resources, this should be a straightforward matter of contacting the end-user and requiring and ensuring that correct payment is made for the usage, no?

These are all personal bugbears, that have cost me a lot of time and effort.

 

Another suggestion (a bit out there, this time! 😅), which I am fully aware cannot be commented on in a public space, is whether Alamy has considered creating a company which could address some of the above issues - chasing infringements? This would set it up in direct competition with other businesses who do the same, but I am sure that it could not only resolve issues, but be potentially commercially lucrative for everyone. No? Yeah, I thought so! Thought I'd mention it, anyway.🤣

 

Anyhow, I do offer my thanks for all that you do achieve on our behalves. It is appreciated! 😊 Interested to hear your tips; on tenterhooks about the company vision - and hopeful about the future.

 

Edited December 4, 2020 by losdemas
grammar, spelling

[Sally]

3 hours ago, Avpics said:

Is improving the speed and reliability of the 'daily' database update being targeted? Not having images on sale for days on end is frustrating, in particular of topical subjects and Live News that fall into a black hole.

 

Is there pressure from PA to prioritise the sale of their images, or to make changes that would favour them?

This is a big problem IMHO. No idea why it is worse now than usual.

[Betty LaRue]

I feel it’s not fair to the contributor to allow opting out of PU but not Presentation.  Some buyers are abusing PU, you can take a look at some of those licensed images and know they aren’t wanted on a wall or for other personal use. Some buyers are looking for the cheapest option for usage other than PU.

So if a contributor opts out of PU, that cheapskate buyer just goes to Presentation. Not fair to us. I haven’t opted out personally, but feel for those who have but are still getting cheated through Presentation. 
That situation tends to make one think Alamy only wants their share of the money, for whatever usage the cheaters are applying, without considering the contributors’ wishes. Something that should be a partnership between the contributors and Alamy really isn’t, because what control over our images we’d like to have is getting no consideration.
 

Thank you for the opportunity to see what’s coming, Alamy!

Betty

[Colblimp]

1)  Why does Alamy continue to 'negotiate' derogatory licence fees for contributors?  NB: 'We offer our buyers discounts' is NOT an acceptable answer.

2) I want to opt out of Presentation, why won't you let me do that?

3) Why do you consistently sell pics through Presentation, when the buyer clearly isn't going to use the pics for that purpose?

4) What about creating some sort of bonus system for contributors who sell X number of pics/command X amount of $$$ so we feel valued, unlike at this present time...

 

[Mr Standfast]

How will the Alamy Live News/PA relationship pan out?

 

I'm wary of bonus or incentive schemes. Be careful of what you ask for. Schemes where people are grandfathered in at the higher tier are rare, they nearly always start with a reset to zero.

 

 

[Harry Harrison]

If we must supply images cheaply for Presentation Use, or other bargain basement uses come to that, do they have to be high resolution? Could you not have a tiered range of sizes and prices?

 

Speaking of sizes, please take a look at the multitude of discussions from potential contributors regarding the '17MB uncompressed' minimum file size. Many find it hard to understand and confuse it with their jpeg size on disc, which is also in MB of course. Mark Chapman's suggestion of instead adopting 6 Megapixels (MP), so 3000 x 2000 pixels in the 35mm' format, and familiar to all with respect to digital camera specifications, would surely be easier for everyone.

[gvallee]

I'd like an update on how the Australian office is doing and how is the Australian market in general. Thank you.

[losdemas]

OK, to add to my previous post.  Probably the singular most important thing is that both clients and contributors have confidence in the Alamy platform. Please invest a little in ensuring that the forum, the contributors dashboard and - most important of all - the customer facing front-end website remain active and available 24/7/365. If the front end is down, then a customer is likely to have less confidence in the platform as a whole -  regardless of the reason or how wrong this might be.

 

Another point - that has been raised (and dashed) many times before - is to please re-consider your previous decisions to make the whole forum public. At least give us one area of the forum where - although it may not be entirely private - is at least not available to search engines and only to registered users, where we may discuss fees etc. without potential embarrassment or fear of lowering license fees or worsening terms even further.

 

Thank you.

[MizBrown]

1 minute ago, losdemas said:

Another point - that has been raised (and dashed) many times before - is to please re-consider your previous decisions to make the whole forum public. At least give us one area of the forum where - although it may not be entirely private - is at least not available to search engines and only to registered users, where we may discuss fees etc. without potential embarrassment or fear of lowering license fees or worsening terms even further.

 

Thank you.

 

Alamy hired a service in Virginia, US, to run the forums.  They may be the ones pushing to open the forums up.   More information to sell to advertisers.   I really hope that doesn't happen.   I don't know where Alamy keeps its image and business servers but colocation in a couple of different countries might be useful if this hasn't been done already. 

 

 

[geogphotos]

BAPLA has written an open letter to Future Publishing Ltd and NewsUK about the attempts of those companies to impose unfair contract conditions on suppliers.

 

Could you please explain how this issue is affecting Alamy and your reaction to it?

 

Do you consider it is time to make a stand against publishers and protect photographer rights? Just one of the issues mentioned is that these contracts are attempting to take over secondary rights ( DACS).

 

Alamy is a significant supplier to these companies and is in a better position than most in the UK market to take the lead in standing up to unfair contract conditions. 

 

https://bapla.org.uk/bapla-open-letter-to-future-publishing-ltd-and-newsuk-in-reference-to-unfair-contracts/

 

 

[Joseph Clemson]

I did see somewhere that Alamy were thinking about opening up video contributions again. This is something I personally very much like to see and, following the decimation of contributor commission at a major microstock site,  there is some considerable appetite among stock video makers for a new outlet for editorial video - one wthat pays a reasonable rate of commission, that is.

[Bill Brooks]

On 04/12/2020 at 13:24, losdemas said:

 

1. Why are licences not limited to low resolution, when appropriate? All licences that are sold for screen use only do not need to be made available at high resolution.

 

 

On 04/12/2020 at 15:15, Betty LaRue said:

I feel it’s not fair to the contributor to allow opting out of PU but not Presentation.  Some buyers are abusing PU, you can take a look at some of those licensed images and know they aren’t wanted on a wall or for other personal use. Some buyers are looking for the cheapest option for usage other than PU.

 

 

On 04/12/2020 at 15:39, Colblimp said:

2) I want to opt out of Presentation, why won't you let me do that?

3) Why do you consistently sell pics through Presentation, when the buyer clearly isn't going to use the pics for that purpose?

 

On 04/12/2020 at 17:55, Harry Harrison said:

If we must supply images cheaply for Presentation Use, or other bargain basement uses come to that, do they have to be high resolution? Could you not have a tiered range of sizes and prices?

 

I agree with you guys Here is my solution.

 

Restrict image size to no more than 2500 pixels on the long side for presentation, personal, student, artist's reference, and novel use. No high resolution files available for those low priced uses. 

 

This 2500 pixel limit would cover all the client's real needs for those declared uses, and mostly eliminate the money loosing undeclared suspicious uses. It would encourage more photographers to opt in for those uses, making a better selection of images available to all clients.

 

A win for clients, who would have a larger consistent selection of images to choose from. 

 

A win for photographers, who would be able to sign up for a new additional source of income from low resolution presentation, personal, student, artist's reference, and novel use. Photographers would feel they were not being high resolution ripped off. A photo researcher might be able to take note of additional, formally unseen restricted images, when they came back later for a different higher paying resolution use for that image. If photographers want their images to sell, their images have to be seen.

 

A win for Alamy, who could offer a better selection of images to clients, charge higher prices for some formally suspicious uses, and have a more uniform site buying experience for photo researchers who are acting on behalf of multiple clients.

 

Bill Brooks

[Phil]

I would also be interested in Alamy's comments regarding:

 

1)  Why low resolution images are not available for download/licensing where appropriate?

2)  Seemingly obvious abuse of Personal and Presentation licenses (related to above).

3)  Why continued reliance on outdated and abused post-download billing/payment of images?  Why not replace with pay-then-download online system?  Alamy and contributors are losing $$ due to current scheme.

4)  What are new ownership/management plans/goals for marketing, sales, etc. outside the UK (especially where Alamy has non-UK offices)?

[Shergar]

On 04/12/2020 at 04:51, Alamy said:

Hi All,

 

Next week we'll be recording a video update for you to cover the topics we would usually speak about at a contributor event or conference. The video will feature Emily Shelley (Managing Director), Alan Capel (Operations Director) and James Allsworth (Head of Content).

 

We'll cover some broad topics including: company vision for the coming years, a review of this year and some tips on how to get the best out of contributing.

 

If there are any other specific subjects you'd like us to cover, please use this thread to make suggestions. We can't promise we'll be able to specifically address everything but we will do our best to respond to what we can. 

 

Deadline for suggestions is close of play, Monday the 7th of December.

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

Im always a little nervous when Alamy start giving us little improvements. Hopefully it won't end up costing us !!!!!!

 

Cheers and gone

 

Shergar

[Phil]

37 minutes ago, Joseph Clemson said:

I did see somewhere that Alamy were thinking about opening up video contributions again. This is something I personally very much like to see and, following the decimation of contributor commission at a major microstock site,  there is some considerable appetite among stock video makers for a new outlet for editorial video - one wthat pays a reasonable rate of commission, that is.

 

+1  video footage seems like a growth spot.

[meanderingemu]

1 hour ago, losdemas said:

OK, to add to my previous post.  Probably the singular most important thing is that both clients and contributors have confidence in the Alamy platform. Please invest a little in ensuring that the forum, the contributors dashboard and - most important of all - the customer facing front-end website remain active and available 24/7/365. If the front end is down, then a customer is likely to have less confidence in the platform as a whole -  regardless of the reason or how wrong this might be.

 

Another point - that has been raised (and dashed) many times before - is to please re-consider your previous decisions to make the whole forum public. At least give us one area of the forum where - although it may not be entirely private - is at least not available to search engines and only to registered users, where we may discuss fees etc. without potential embarrassment or fear of lowering license fees or worsening terms even further.

 

Thank you.

 

 

in line with this, and i understand issues will arise, what are your project for Information to Contributors.  We have had some major issues over the last few days, Images approved or transferred to Stock on Thursday are still not up for sale as off 10pm Sunday GMT, yet we have had Zero information from Alamy what is happening.  There was a tweet about "Maintenance issues" but since the new tweet states all is normal, the problem is obviously not a maintenance issue.   Many times it has been reported on these forums that we are seeing more and longer delays on images being made available to clients, AFTER approval- but we have had no acknowledgement what the issue is, and what is being made to address it.