Contract Change 2021 - Official thread

[Harry Harrison]

17 hours ago, Jansos said:

That would be nice, wouldn't it? When I get my data in 24 hours I'll have a look and see if there is any obvious key field to use that links with original file. I very much doubt it though.

I see you've got a large port, for this to work ideally you need to be sure that you don't have duplicate filenames, this can easily happen if you're using different cameras from the same manufacturer. If you're using Lightroom then Sally's recommendation of Alamy Lightroom Bridge is the way to go but duplicate filenames still need to be matched manually. See page 12 of the manual here:

 

https://www.lightroom-plugins.com/downloads/Alamy Uploader Manual.pdf

 

I'm just aware of this because I do have duplicate filenames in my much smaller Alamy port though at least I know which ones they are. You can use Excel or similar to check for this in your downloaded data.

 

[woofit]

I am infrequent contributor to this forum, but for my 2 cents worth, this is just Alamy/PA getting rid of a lot of the smaller Contributors and going with generic stock images from the the larger Studios, thereby reducing their costs of administration/Computer storage. They are hoping everyone on Silver will drop off the edge of the Planet, and those on Gold will hang around to the next commission cut just to preserve some individual content.

As for the small print in the Contract which has been widely discussed in the forum that is reprehensible in my view.

I moved over to the dark side when they chopped the rates from 50%, and I am glad I did as I now earn more through the other 2 Agencies than Alamy, so my humble advice is that you all follow suit, and as soon as possible.

[Mr Standfast]

My thoughts on the proposed contract changes.

1.    The $25,000 Gold threshold. My experience of setting thresholds is that I collected the data and collated it in the form of a cumulative frequency graph, I then selected the percentile for inclusion or exclusion based on the business need. A degree of best fit was the usual intention, but some arbitrariness was hard to exclude. The late and respected Keith Morris was used as a poster boy for Alamy. One of, if not the highest single producer, his production was around $33,000 a year, with falling returns this would be awfully close to $25,000 in today’s terms. If you feel the need to persist with this threshold, I suggest you set it at a level where a respectable number of contributors will attain it. I surmise, albeit without data, that your perceived business objective can be met with a much lower threshold. I urge you to consider a lower threshold.

2.    Contract changes where more liability is passed onto the contributor. Some of these items seem to be additional boilerplate being applied by a lawyer under the justification of adding clarity. I am unconvinced the implications to the small and viable contributor have been understood by ALAMY. If there is a valid business reason for ALAMY taking this position, has not been explained. If this risk is real then under the principle that contributors and ALAMY have a dependent relationship would it not be amicable for ALAMY and its parent company to facilitate cheap indemnity insurance for contributors?

3.    The $250 Silver threshold. I approach this point with apprehension. To my mind the contributors affected by this change fall into two groups. The first is a cohort who regularly show up on the forum asking why their non-commercial, underexposed pictures with word salad keywords do not “get good sells”. The second cohort are long standing contributors with modest portfolios. They are steady yet modest earners. Some of these contributors have worked hard on the forum filling in a customer support function for ALAMY. A function that ALAMY has chosen not to fund yet this cohorts’ efforts in critiquing amateur photography and hopeless captions has had an effect which ALAMY and certainly this contributor has benefited from. It is unfair to treat both cohorts in the same manner. I urge ALAMY to not apply the silver band to existing contributors. If there is a business need for this band then apply it to new contributors and not the people that have had their good will exploited.

Well, that’s my view. If any fellow contributors disagree, may I ask that you add a few words to the conversation rather than a red arrow.

[AlexH]

12 minutes ago, woofit said:

I am infrequent contributor to this forum, but for my 2 cents worth, this is just Alamy/PA getting rid of a lot of the smaller Contributors and going with generic stock images from the the larger Studios, thereby reducing their costs of administration/Computer storage.

 

Recent social media activity by Alamy does seem to plugging content from Cavan...which would lend weight to your theory.

[Richard Baker]

6 minutes ago, Mr Standfast said:

My thoughts on the proposed contract changes.

1.    The $25,000 Gold threshold. My experience of setting thresholds is that I collected the data and collated it in the form of a cumulative frequency graph, I then selected the percentile for inclusion or exclusion based on the business need. A degree of best fit was the usual intention, but some arbitrariness was hard to exclude. The late and respected Keith Morris was used as a poster boy for Alamy. One of, if not the highest single producer, his production was around $33,000 a year, with falling returns this would be awfully close to $25,000 in today’s terms. If you feel the need to persist with this threshold, I suggest you set it at a level where a respectable number of contributors will attain it. I surmise, albeit without data, that your perceived business objective can be met with a much lower threshold. I urge you to consider a lower threshold.

2.    Contract changes where more liability is passed onto the contributor. Some of these items seem to be additional boilerplate being applied by a lawyer under the justification of adding clarity. I am unconvinced the implications to the small and viable contributor have been understood by ALAMY. If there is a valid business reason for ALAMY taking this position, has not been explained. If this risk is real then under the principle that contributors and ALAMY have a dependent relationship would it not be amicable for ALAMY and its parent company to facilitate cheap indemnity insurance for contributors?

3.    The $250 Silver threshold. I approach this point with apprehension. To my mind the contributors affected by this change fall into two groups. The first is a cohort who regularly show up on the forum asking why their non-commercial, underexposed pictures with word salad keywords do not “get good sells”. The second cohort are long standing contributors with modest portfolios. They are steady yet modest earners. Some of these contributors have worked hard on the forum filling in a customer support function for ALAMY. A function that ALAMY has chosen not to fund yet this cohorts’ efforts in critiquing amateur photography and hopeless captions has had an effect which ALAMY and certainly this contributor has benefited from. It is unfair to treat both cohorts in the same manner. I urge ALAMY to not apply the silver band to existing contributors. If there is a business need for this band then apply it to new contributors and not the people that have had their good will exploited.

Well, that’s my view. If any fellow contributors disagree, may I ask that you add a few words to the conversation rather than a red arrow.

   

I wholeheartedly agree. There appears (to me) to have been more thought put into your post than in the actual contract changes. Alamy, please take note of this. 

[BobD]

On 19/05/2021 at 06:02, DawnOne said:

I just quit Alamy and will be removing my work. They just asked me to sell 2 photographs to a corporate client for $15. apiece, which amount to $7.50 each after Alamy removes their 50% commission, and less once it drops to 40%. While I hesitated before, as I’ve invested thousands of hours on the 4,621 photos I submitted, it was frankly a waste of my time. 

You should remove your images first, wait 6 months for them to be taken down fully and then close your account. that way if any sell in the meantime you will still get what's due, otherwise any that sell Alamy will keep all the commission.

[Tony ALS]

On 18/05/2021 at 11:58, Tony ALS said:

I have been following this thread since the announcement and have the utmost respect for the long term contributors to Alamy which from what I understand had attracted a base of professional skilled photographers in it's early days who are deserving of far more than the contract offered before this change, let alone what has been cobbled together now.

Whether some of the newer contributors like myself deserve the same respect is part of the problem as I know that I neither have the skill, time or energy to compete with the best on here and my rediscovery of photography during this mess we have all had to suffer over the last year or more may be a common theme with some who suddenly found they had time to find something else to do with so many restrictions on activities.

I would describe myself as an enthusiast who enjoys photography and an outlet for what I create which might bring in some cash was something I had never considered before this health crises.

I abandoned SS and switched to Alamy for reasons most of you will be aware of and now face a similar conundrum here. The $0.10 minimum at SS now doesn't look as bad as it did last year given the paltry amounts now being paid sometimes as reported on here!

I have 150 images which I now can't get enthusiastic about keywording and although the weather is improving my inclination was to leave the camera at home this morning when I normally take it with me for my early morning walk.

If the way I have reacted to this is common combined with countries easing restrictions and everyone getting back to their offices then the number of images uploaded will slow from the smaller contributors like myself.

Alamy has managed to dent all motivation to continue here and when the longer term contributors are affected by such ridiculous parameters it makes you consider your options.

PA have driven greed to the fore as happens again and again with companies that lose all sense of connection with the people who helped create the entity they become.

Sad.

I added my comments, quoted here, a couple of days ago and having followed subsequent comments the most disturbing aspect of the new contract appears to be the change in liability and potential for legal problems.

Being paid a decent share is important of course, but the longer term (i.e. forever!) potential for a claim against a contributor is far more worrying for those of us without the clout to fight back against claims which could be from anywhere in the world. The likelihood might be small but I certainly don't want to risk everything for the sake of an obscure clause in this contract.

I don't intend jumping ship until answers are forthcoming which supposedly will be by tomorrow and I cannot understand those who have jumped already and thrown away the work they have put in here without at least waiting for a response to the many concerns.

It might be the last chance today to make Alamy aware of the disquiet they have created so rather than this thread going quiet, which I'm sure it won't, I would hope that more join in to make their concerns heard.

I have started to upload new images elsewhere and I will leave here if the contractual issues are not addressed. 

I don't have much faith that there will be anything new in the response other than some clarification of the contract.

[AndrewP]

29 minutes ago, Mr Standfast said:

Keith Morris was used as a poster boy for Alamy. One of, if not the highest single producer, his production was around $33,000 a year, with falling returns this would be awfully close to $25,000 in today’s terms.

If KM wouldn't reach the +$25k threshold then it will be a very small group of photographers that make the grade. The $25k cut off will not have been decided upon without very close scrutiny to the data to see who's above and who's below.

Edited May 20, 2021 by AndrewP

[Mr Standfast]

1 hour ago, Allan Bell said:

I sat in front of the computer early this morning to start processing some 100 + images for Alamy then started to read this thread again. Totally lost the will and energy to fire up the processing software as well as the will to live.

 

Will go out for a walk to clear my head and hopefully don't see a bus coming towards me.🤪

 

Allan

 

I prescribe chocolate followed by bashing the garage into shape. Nil carborundum.

[Cryptoprocta]

12 minutes ago, AndrewP said:

If KM wouldn't reach the +$25k threshold then it will be a very small group of photographers that make the grade. The $25k cut off will not have been decided upon without very close scrutiny to the data to see who's above and who's below.

Not necessarily.

It could have been chosen knowing that only a tiny handful of contributors reach that, yet they can still advertise that contributers can "earn up to 50%".

 

It's that balance of malice and incomptence again.

[geogphotos]

It's the BETRAYAL that hurts most.

[mickfly]

All these unfamiliar names posting on the forum with many of them having up to 18 years supplying Alamy.

I imagine the meeting where someone sitting around the PA desks asks "What about the long term, solid contributers who have never let us down and are part of the almost 1000 negative comments on the contract post?"

 

I imagine the answer will be.

 

"Screw them!"

[Cryptoprocta]

How desperate is this, and how indicative of how they see us as cash cows:

"22.2; By opting in to marketing and/or 3^rd party emails during Registration you agree that we can send you marketing and/or 3^rd party emails. These emails are promotional in nature and will include, but are not limited to, photography related offers, competitions, industry information and affiliate programs. You can unsubscribe from marketing and/or 3^rd party emails at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link within these emails or by changing your email preferences in your account settings."

[Allan Bell]

1 hour ago, Sally R said:

 

Take care Allan! Look out for buses! Your Alamy friends do not want you run over!

 

There is such a great bunch of people here and it is a real community of photographers who have supported one another, provided advice and contributed to a real sense of camaraderie. I do hope it can continue as such, but if all goes pear-shaped there might be a nice way to continue an ex-Alamy group of some sort to discuss photography-related stuff.

 

I have not jumped ship yet. I am waiting to see how Alamy responds to our concerns. I have just readied myself with the knowledge of what to do to terminate the contract should the response not be favourable and, like many here, Im looking at other options.

 

Sally there is a way and I put it in an earlier post which PA/Alamy has deleted. The group was formed by another dissatisfied contributor to Alamy.

Contact me on be00.a00an45(at)gmail.000     I,m sure you can work out what goes in where the 0's are.

 

[meanderingemu]

Good morning.

 

i'm exhausted.  Following Allan's example and going for a long walk.  Will avoid buses....

 

 

(if anyone needs to contact me, i use my moniker as me ema1l address the google place)

Edited May 20, 2021 by meanderingemu

[imageplotter]

11 minutes ago, Cryptoprocta said:

Not necessarily.

It could have been chosen knowing that only a tiny handful of contributors reach that, yet they can still advertise that contributors can "earn up to 50%".

 

It's that balance of malice and incompetence again.

 

Sadly, I really don't think they're too concerned about individual contributors. A fair number of agencies contribute and file vast numbers of images each month. My impression is the threshold serves to keep them sweet and attract further. Last week, the Alamy blog announced that they had secured exclusive distribution of The Independent image archive with 70k images. Not a huge collection, but a unique and presumably potentially very profitable one.

 

Agree with geophotos - it feels like a huge betrayal. 

[Alan Gallery]

4 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

It's the BETRAYAL that hurts most.

 Sorry, which BETRAYAL is that?

 

This is the dirty, underhanded, slimesucking side of Disaster Capitalism.  I will bet the first excuse will be about how hard it was to keep the business going during Covid while they will have help from the government and moved more jobs off shore and we photographers got nothing.  But to these people any disaster is an opportunity to reset the economic landscape (literally in some cases) to grab power resources and advantage. 

 

 

[BobD]

17 minutes ago, imageplotter said:

 

Sadly, I really don't think they're too concerned about individual contributors. A fair number of agencies contribute and file vast numbers of images each month. My impression is the threshold serves to keep them sweet and attract further. Last week, the Alamy blog announced that they had secured exclusive distribution of The Independent image archive with 70k images. Not a huge collection, but a unique and presumably potentially very profitable one.

 

Agree with geophotos - it feels like a huge betrayal. 

 

I don't believe that the threshold was set to keep agencies happy. I think that agencies and large libraries would almost certainly have individual contracts.

In my opinion the threshold was set purely to exclude the vast majority on individual contributors.

 

This change in commission only slightly effects me as 2/3 of my images are non exclusive, I will change the rest on 1st July. What worries me more is the contract changes discussed in the last few pages in regard to liability. Unless there is some clarification I may have to take the risk free option and close my account.

[NYCat]

2 hours ago, Martin L said:

 

Rather than gross income as a level grade, wouldn't a percentage of number of sales against portfolio size be a better judge of how a portfolio should be rewarded?

Or even bring in CTR which according to the myths already has some impact on the whether our images get seen and potentially sold.

 

However like most others it is the potential liability that is the main issue for me and needs urgent clarification asap otherwise I too am outta here (or alternatively set up as a professional indemnity insurance salesman 😉)

 

 

This makes a lot of sense to me. I think they must already consider how many sales we make with a small portfolio. I am very small and yet appear high in searches. I am taking a wait and see stance before making any decisions. If the liability issues are not fixed I would have to delete everything except images taken in wild places. I find some of the sales prices these days alarming although I still make some very good amounts. Hoping for some improvement in this new contract! I was never tempted by microstock because it was never something I expected to make money doing and I hate to think of pennies a sale.

 

Paulette

Edited May 20, 2021 by NYCat

[Colin Woods]

39 minutes ago, Alan Gallery said:

This is the dirty, underhanded, slimesucking side of Disaster Capitalism. 

Yep! Read The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein.

[geogphotos]

To my mind this is a new CEO imposing herself by:

 

1) Achieving something the previous CEO failed to do - showing her determination to get things done and be decisive

 

2) Achieve an immediate, dramatic improvement in short term profits with minimum effort - impressive results shown in the bottom line, nobody on the Board of PA will care less how it was achieved

 

All excellent for the next career move.

 

We have to act in the same way and do what is best for ourselves whatever that might be.

Edited May 20, 2021 by geogphotos

[Martin P Wilson]

2 hours ago, David Pimborough said:

 

To be honest Allan I felt the same way.

 

Everything was going OK up until the end of 2019 then literally earnings every where fell off a cliff, the the agency shennanigans of cutting rates started.

 

Alamy's was the final straw I actually wept when I saw what they were doing

 

This last year has been crap beyond belief with collapsed incomes, living under lockdown and in my case a death in the family during lockdown and then these corporate types think they can come along without a care in the world and announce this?

 

Just don't let the buggers get you down 😉

 

 

 

 

Me too but but I am treating it as a challenge and using it as an incentive to do positive things. Not for discussion here but feel free to find me and talk through other channels. Going back to my management consultancy  roots and doing some business planning and market analysis etc.

 

I am not going to do anything in a rush or in anger, I will do what is right for me. Eeven if that means leaving my old stuff on Alamy at reduced commission, even if only for the time being.

 

Thoughtfully,

 

Martin

[wilkopix]

1 hour ago, BobD said:

I don't believe that the threshold was set to keep agencies happy. I think that agencies and large libraries would almost certainly have individual contracts.

In my opinion the threshold was set purely to exclude the vast majority on individual contributors.

It certainly isn't for the agencies as they won't be exclusive anyway. I'm guessing that agencies with large collections will have negotiated their own deals and contracts with Alamy.

I think you are right that the new contract and percentage split is to exclude the small to mid individual contributors. If it wasn't intentional it will certainly have that effect.

[hotbrightsky]

57 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

nobody on the Board of PA will care less how it was achieved

 

So perhaps we should all contact some PA shareholders?

https://pamediagroup.com/about-us/

 

Some Alamy contributors might recognise a few customers! 

 

Must be grounds for an anti-competitive investigation surely?

[RyanU]

7 minutes ago, hotbrightsky said:

 

So perhaps we should all contact some PA shareholders?

https://pamediagroup.com/about-us/

 

Some Alamy contributors might recognise a few customers! 

 

Must be grounds for an anti-competitive investigation surely?

Guardian, Sun and Telegraph... Aka, papers that get major discounts for online stock use...