Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

 

Good point. There is a certain photo website that allows contributors to set their own "fair" prices, and most of the prices are ridiculously low. Photographers are sometimes the last ones to treat themselves fairly. There's a reason why some microstock agency owners are able to buy mansions in the Hamptons.

It could show either the Alamy price or the contributor's minimum price, whichever is the greater. There again I might have missed out on a 43 cent (gross) sale last week had my minimum been applied!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ed Rooney said:

I believe I've said many times in this forum that I no longer do stock photography for the money. I haven't seen any real money from stock since Tony Stone retired to the South of France. 

 

But I don't like being abused and this new bunch who are now calling themselves Alamy are abusing us all. 

 

Ed, I too do not do stock for money.  It is simply a way to justify the money I have spent on equipment, and hopefully to earn enough to cover the cost of said equipment.  

And since I do a lot of graphics work, I have PS and Illustrator etc. anyway, so might as well use them beyond graphics.  But like Betty, I may spend more time creating art from my images than than scanning for dust spots at 100%.  Might find that more rewarding.  And more fun.

 

I certainly won't remove my images and I will probably add more, but certainly expand to other venues.  The stock image market hasn't really been a viable source of income for the past few years.  I certainly can't see any fresh faced college grads heading into it in the near future. I would assume right now 90% of stock contributors are like me and simply do stock for fun because they love photography and have to do something with all those images.

 

Jill

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is now time to remove the money worm from my photographic apple.

 

Flickr here I come. No money but more fun, less personal risk, nice forum.


FREEDOM FREEDOM FREEDOM
 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am really upset at Alamy's insinuation that photographers who want to approve any infringement actions are cheating the exclusive system. Alamy's own definition of exclusive clearly states that I am allowed to sell prints and license images through my own website and still be considered exclusive to Alamy. So why am I out of line in wanting Alamy to check with me first before potentially harassing my customers?

 

I've been spending some time with my sales reports today and have come to realize that the occasional $1,000 sale really masks the poor fees I'm getting most of the time.  I did give notice to close my account after the 2018 changes, but a personal email from their photography director convinced me to stay. Alamy is now the smallest part of my business, but the biggest source of heartache.
 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Alamy and its contributors are in an abusive relationship. When you're in an abusive relationship, you should leave. I realise that's easier said than done for those who are making from Alamy  a significant part of their total income, but you should definitely look to diversify, i.e. start focusing on elsewhere.

Edited by KTC
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Mitchell said:

 

Or the Onepercentium Level.

 

Actually my guess is that less than 1% of Alamy contributors make $25K annually. Whatever the number, they certainly are an "exclusive" group.

What sucks about this, and Im sure Alamy knows the age groups of its contributors. A lot of older photographers use Alamy to supplement their pensions or are working towards that goal. After what was the worst year for many of these older people and , just when we thought we could see a light at the end of a very long dark tunnel Alamy hit us all with this BS. 

What about these older contributors Alamy? what about their dream? where's their incentive to carry on? What about their student deal????? 

 

Cheers and gone 

 

Shergar 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'll sign up as a mature student at my local college and claim the 100% commission offered to students by Alamy.

This last winter I made most of my Alamy images exclusive and closed my main photo website with it's very slick shop front and now just have a small website.


I've now removed the exclusive tick from all my Alamy images, opted out of distribution and will be reinstating my own website properly in the near future.


My main efforts will be better spent elsewhere.
 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Gina Kelly said:

can you please tell us how many contributors actually qualify for that platinum level (selling 25k per year)?

I've had $25K+ in 5 of the past 18 years but the last one was 10 years ago. My lifetime total number of sales is 8850 but with about 400 sales a year in recent years I'm only going to be half way to Platinum status.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

What a greedy, deceitful and short sighted decision. I've been a contributor for nearly 2 decades. By pure coincidence by sales today went over $250 today so I'm 'lucky' I'll stay in the Gold [sic] tier (Alamy really must be sniggering at this in-joke). Of course like the vast majority of us I've got no hope of getting anywhere near the Platinum tier that would retain the current commission rate, so my obvious choice is to remove the exclusive flag from all my images and sell them through Alamy's competitors as well - what a great way to lose loyalty.
In addition, my wife has recently started to contribute and has been encouraged by a few sales. She's not likely to make the $250 threshold so is likely to give up, as many new contributors now will. Good news for the top contributors, less competition, bad news for the diversity of stock and Alamy's growth.
So my plan is to remove the default exclusive flag for future submissions (done), remove the exclusive flag from all my images from 1st July and suggest that my wife deletes her account and combines her photos with mine on Alamy and elsewhere.

Edited by Flash68
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mickfly said:

This last winter I made most of my Alamy images exclusive and closed my main photo website with it's very slick shop front and now just have a small website.


I've now removed the exclusive tick from all my Alamy images, opted out of distribution and will be reinstating my own website properly in the near future.


My main efforts will be better spent elsewhere.
 

Yeah I did a similar thing earlier this year, my images were exclusive, but I also set them all to RF/editorial and opted into distribution, based on Alamy's advice on how to get more sales.

Didn't make any difference and now because of this I've now reversed it, setting all to non-exclusive, set back to RM editorial only (no personal use and no advertising), and opted out of distribution. And now I'm trailing another option, so Alamy will  be a secondary concern for me.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Jill Morgan said:

 

Ed, I too do not do stock for money.  It is simply a way to justify the money I have spent on equipment, and hopefully to earn enough to cover the cost of said equipment.  

And since I do a lot of graphics work, I have PS and Illustrator etc. anyway, so might as well use them beyond graphics.  But like Betty, I may spend more time creating art from my images than than scanning for dust spots at 100%.  Might find that more rewarding.  And more fun.

 

I certainly won't remove my images and I will probably add more, but certainly expand to other venues.  The stock image market hasn't really been a viable source of income for the past few years.  I certainly can't see any fresh faced college grads heading into it in the near future. I would assume right now 90% of stock contributors are like me and simply do stock for fun because they love photography and have to do something with all those images.

 

Jill

 

I actually do pursue stock photography mainly for the money (such as it is). The regular monthly payments aren't large. However, they have remained fairly consistent over the years, and they help pay a few bills. There is of course a fun factor, but I hope Alamy doesn't assume that enjoyment is all most contributors are interested in.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not a fan of tiered payment systems.  If a client licenses three photographs from three photographers for X dollars each, why should the payments to the photographer depend on how much they have sold before?   And in this case, it’s not even how many previous sales (like some other agencies), but how many $$ your images have sold for per year.

 

So those with a small portfolio who have fewer sales will get paid less per sale.  Earning less per sale than someone in the next tier which means they’ll have less income which keeps them at that low tier.  How is that fair or motivating to the photographer?

 

With my past sales history, I fit into the middle category.  Most of my images are exclusive, but I don’t see the point of that now.    The top tier isn’t even fathomable (I also initially thought the 25K was a typo).   So no motivation to even try for it.   Perhaps it’s just big agencies who fit into that top income category, but then they probably wouldn’t have many exclusive images anyways.

And how does this make alamy a better picture library?

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Shergar said:

What sucks about this, and Im sure Alamy knows the age groups of its contributors. A lot of older photographers use Alamy to supplement their pensions or are working towards that goal. After what was the worst year for many of these older people and , just when we thought we could see a light at the end of a very long dark tunnel Alamy hit us all with this BS. 

What about these older contributors Alamy? what about their dream? where's their incentive to carry on? What about their student deal????? 

 

Cheers and gone 

 

Shergar 

 

I definitely fit that older demographic. My monthly Alamy payments are an important supplement to my pension and other income. I do take pictures simply for my own interest and enjoyment, but that's not the main reason I'm here.

Edited by John Mitchell
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How many photographers will be motivated to go through their images and remove the "exclusive" check mark when uploading to other sites? .. so if Alamy felt it was not accurately checked in the past, I doubt that it will improve.

 

I have no illusion that Alamy would care one way or another what I do with my photos .. so I'll stick around as long as I stay above Silver.

 

If anyone would care to share where "elsewhere" is, feel free to send me a message :)

 

/Rose-Marie

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My hypothesis is that Alamy no longer needs me, I am exclusive, but miniature.  Their priority is to keep the other big agencies as partners.  Or I'm wrong?

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

From Wikipedia:

Greed (or avarice) is an uncontrolled longing for increase in the acquisition or use of material gain (be it food, money, land, or animate/inanimate possessions); or social value, such as status, or power. Greed has been identified as undesirable throughout known human history because it creates behavior-conflict between personal and social goals.

  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This has been hinted at several times in the thread, but apolgies if I've missed it being spelled out.

Alamy has set three pricing targets. It isn't even clear whether these targets are gross or net, and it's never safe to 'assume' or 'guess' when agencies go bad.

But whichever, they set the prices, and apparently retain the right to give away our images.

"there is not and will not be during the term of this Contract, be any limitation or restriction on Alamy’s ability to license the Content" (BAD GRAMMAR - just sayin')

Thereby they are in full control of what we earn.

Edited by Cryptoprocta
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, AM Chang said:

My hypothesis is that Alamy no longer needs me, I am exclusive, but miniature.  Their priority is to keep the other big agencies as partners.  Or I'm wrong?

 I agree with you. They checked their main sources for uploads and set the limit accordingly. Of course, Alamy is a business, so they will have to do what is best for them.

 

What makes Alamy so special are all the photographers all over the world covering every little corner, in my opinion ... but I don't think Alamy sees it that way ... :(

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Alamy locked this topic
  • Alamy unlocked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • 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.