Jump to content
  • 0

This is insulting


Question

Alamy Licensed my RF Image yesterday for all of 0.15$ my net was 0.05$
Five cents? That is lower the the lowest Shutterstock fees 
I would like to be able to set a minimum license fee on my images please 

 

Capture1_8.jpg

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 1

I feel your pain, but don't give up. I've had royalty free sales in $$$ in the past few months, so it's more likely a distributor issue than the fact it's royalty free. Just know to expect a huge price variation. And pray the $$$ sales don't get refunded. It's a frustrating market. Maybe easier to walk away when you're new to the market. For those of us who've been doing this for over a decade, it's hard to walk away. 

 

 

Edited by Marianne
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
25 minutes ago, Ilanphoto said:

Alamy Licensed my RF Image yesterday for all of 0.15$ my net was 0.05$
Five cents? That is lower the the lowest Shutterstock fees 
I would like to be able to set a minimum license fee on my images please 

 

I understand the frustration. I briefly joined the agency that rhymes with what you hit when playing badminton in 2019 when I knew very little about stock. After about 3 months I had joined Alamy and two months after that chose to leave the microstock agency, wanting to support an agency that remunerated contributors better and get away from micro prices. I respected the view that just a few cents for an image is not valuing photographers and also leads to the dragging down of the whole industry. I can only think that this is what Alamy believes they have to do to compete now. I have not received one of these tiny licences yet, but it will be very depressing if and when it happens, all the more so for images that I put a lot of effort into, both in terms of capture and post-processing. All I can say is thank goodness I love photography, otherwise there would be no point at all. We can only hope that Alamy maintains a decent amount of higher licence fees, but I can't help but have a sense of foreboding about it. I will try to remain hopeful though 😕 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
3 hours ago, Ilanphoto said:

Alamy Licensed my RF Image yesterday for all of 0.15$ my net was 0.05$
Five cents? That is lower the the lowest Shutterstock fees 
I would like to be able to set a minimum license fee on my images please 

 

Capture1_8.jpg

Shocking!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I´m really glad I have no sales at Alamy recently. I guess I´ll never have in the future...
Some possible infingements or unreported sales thou detected but no reply from Alamy...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
5 hours ago, Ilanphoto said:

Alamy Licensed my RF Image yesterday for all of 0.15$ my net was 0.05$
Five cents? That is lower the the lowest Shutterstock fees 
I would like to be able to set a minimum license fee on my images please 

 

Capture1_8.jpg

 

You can't set a minimum price.

 

However you can remove yourself from distribution sales and also Novel Use which is where a lot of these low value sales come from

Edited by David Pimborough
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
22 hours ago, Keith Turrill said:

I have never had a royalty free sale on Alamy and only use RF for images without persons or real property that I don't think would have a high monetary value.

 

 

I've had quite a few RF sales and I don't mind submitting RF with people and property you just mark them as editorial in the optional tab for each image.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 10/04/2021 at 03:14, David Pimborough said:

 

You can't set a minimum price.

 

However you can remove yourself from distribution sales and also Novel Use which is where a lot of these low value sales come from

 

I had a $$$ distributor sale (Germany) show up yesterday. Rare event, but it shows that they aren't always low.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
11 hours ago, John Mitchell said:

 

I had a $$$ distributor sale (Germany) show up yesterday. Rare event, but it shows that they aren't always low.

 

Just as rare as hens teeth and rocking horse poop 🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
13 hours ago, David Pimborough said:

 

Just as rare as hens teeth and rocking horse poop 🤣

 

That's a colourful way of putting it. Have to say that I was pleasantly surprised, especially since German distributor sales are usually low IME.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 20/04/2021 at 12:36, Keith Turrill said:

I have never had a royalty free sale on Alamy and only use RF for images without persons or real property that I don't think would have a high monetary value.

 

I’ve had 6 RF licenses in the last 12 months and one was for $240.

48 in total, but I only began offering RF the past few years, and they are a small percent of my whole. There a a handful of $200 plus sales and quite a few high $$.

Edited by Betty LaRue
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I can go one worse than the OP (Ilanphoto), albeit not with Alamy but with that very large - and ugly - stock library on the other side of the Atlantic.  Although I have officially removed the last of my images some months ago, yesterday they remitted 15 cents US currency, which apparently represents a string of individual sales at $0.01 and even $0.00 (??) each.  Give me Alamy any day!

Edited by Philip Game
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

The stock site model is flawed from the start. We give Alamy our images for free. They sell them at whatever they consider "fair" and take 50% of the money.

Ignore the prices we see on the Alamy pages because most customers get discounts.

Its a business based on magnitude. If (and ive no idea how many images they sell, too lazy to look) they sell 1,000,000 images for $10 and keep half its $5,000,000 for Alamy and $5 each for the photographer who sells one image.

They have no regard for the cost of production and post production.

In addition they license to newspapers who then re sell their copy and its associated images. The Guardian paid $8 for an image from my archive collection. The story was on their website and 5 others. I pointed out these sites to Alamy and they said its not their problem. I wrote to The Guardian, no reply.

So, my $4 was dilutes by 6 publishers. $0.66 (£0.48) per use.

If it were a snap from a phone who cares but it was from the British Grand Prix in 1986, shot on film, stored and cataloged for 35 yeras and required scanning and load of retouching.

I really think ive had enough of this.

 

  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
8 minutes ago, Nigel Roberson said:

The stock site model is flawed from the start. We give Alamy our images for free. They sell them at whatever they consider "fair" and take 50% of the money.

Ignore the prices we see on the Alamy pages because most customers get discounts.

Its a business based on magnitude. If (and ive no idea how many images they sell, too lazy to look) they sell 1,000,000 images for $10 and keep half its $5,000,000 for Alamy and $5 each for the photographer who sells one image.

They have no regard for the cost of production and post production.

In addition they license to newspapers who then re sell their copy and its associated images. The Guardian paid $8 for an image from my archive collection. The story was on their website and 5 others. I pointed out these sites to Alamy and they said its not their problem. I wrote to The Guardian, no reply.

So, my $4 was dilutes by 6 publishers. $0.66 (£0.48) per use.

If it were a snap from a phone who cares but it was from the British Grand Prix in 1986, shot on film, stored and cataloged for 35 yeras and required scanning and load of retouching.

I really think ive had enough of this.

 

 

What is your alternative proposal to the stock model?

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
29 minutes ago, Nigel Roberson said:

The stock site model is flawed from the start. We give Alamy our images for free. They sell them at whatever they consider "fair" and take 50% of the money.

That is what an agency is for. They do all the marketing and selling, I do all the shooting and keywording. We split the money. Where is the flaw?

 

30 minutes ago, Nigel Roberson said:

They have no regard for the cost of production and post production.

Why should they? - its the suppliers problem to get their costs down.

 

The value of photos has dropped like a rock in the last ten years due (in my opinion) the enormous numbers of people ready to accept cents as a fair price for an image. Alamy did not create this situation and they are victims of it as much as we are. They would be more than happy to charge (and get) $1000 fees regularly like they did 15-20 years ago.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
39 minutes ago, Nigel Roberson said:

The stock site model is flawed from the start. We give Alamy our images for free. They sell them at whatever they consider "fair" and take 50% of the money.

This was the same when it was slides that we sent off.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 30/04/2021 at 15:23, Steve F said:

 

What is your alternative proposal to the stock model?

 

 

I'd say give up and walk away from it all 😪

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Posted (edited)

The alternative to submitting to stock agencies has always been licensing images on your own. Problem is that it doesn't work any longer (not for me anyway), so there really isn't a viable alternative for most of us. The good news is that big agencies like Alamy have far greater reach and a bigger client base than any individual photographer could possibly have. Walking away from it all means walking off alone into the sunset these days.

Edited by John Mitchell
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
36 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

Walking away from it all means walking off alone into the sunset these days.

 

A book I read back when said that taking photos was a minor part of being a successful commercial photographer.  The really important parts were sales, client management, and accounting.

 

Friend of mine who'd been a photo major in school and then a wedding and Bar Mitzvah photographer said that the two places where he felt it was was possible to make a living these days were fashion and combat photography.  Fashion strikes me as requiring a huge amount of hustle and specialized knowledge, and combat photography requires special gear plus being too young to understand mortality.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, MizBrown said:

 

A book I read back when said that taking photos was a minor part of being a successful commercial photographer.  The really important parts were sales, client management, and accounting.

 

Friend of mine who'd been a photo major in school and then a wedding and Bar Mitzvah photographer said that the two places where he felt it was was possible to make a living these days were fashion and combat photography.  Fashion strikes me as requiring a huge amount of hustle and specialized knowledge, and combat photography requires special gear plus being too young to understand mortality.

 

I was thinking primarily of so-called "secondary editorial" photography -- i.e. the kind of images most forum members submit to Alamy. It used to be possible to market those on your own. I did OK in the 90's, up until the early 2000's before the big Web-based agencies, RF, microstock, etc.  really took off. I did have some good sales through my PhotoShelter website later than that. However, nada since 2017. I think I understand mortality now, though. 😁

Edited by John Mitchell
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I had one of these in Jan;  0.25 gross, 0.15 deduction - 0.10 net.  For a moment I thought I was on SS instead of Alamy

 

IMHO Alamy is not root of the problem.  It is HARD to compete in market where competitors give images almost for free via large subscription packages, and that drags everyone else down.  Thing with Alamy is that you can still get decent $$ or $$$ sale, which is impossible elsewhere.   I make occasional independent sale through personal Zenfolio site,  but these are few and far in between. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
4 hours ago, Autumn Sky said:

competitors give images almost for free

Or actually free like Unsplash and the like.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
8 hours ago, John Mitchell said:

The alternative to submitting to stock agencies has always been licensing images on your own. Problem is that it doesn't work any longer (not for me anyway), so there really isn't a viable alternative for most of us. The good news is that big agencies like Alamy have far greater reach and a bigger client base than any individual photographer could possibly have. Walking away from it all means walking off alone into the sunset these days.

 

I guess walking away alone in to the sunset would be preferable to running with the herd for pennies and credit.

 

How long before the remaining decent agencies go the way of the Dodo from 60 to 50 to 40% to subscriptions before being gobbled up

by the giant snake oil salesmen in NYC or Seattle?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
7 minutes ago, David Pimborough said:

 

I guess walking away alone in to the sunset would be preferable to running with the herd for pennies and credit.

 

How long before the remaining decent agencies go the way of the Dodo from 60 to 50 to 40% to subscriptions before being gobbled up

by the giant snake oil salesmen in NYC or Seattle?

 

 

Best not to think too much about such things...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
7 hours ago, John Mitchell said:

 

Best not to think too much about such things...

 

 

 

"O, that way madness lies; let me shun that; No more of that” 😁

 

~King Lear

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.