Jump to content

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, John Mitchell said:

 

I think Kumar/Doc might have said that he is (deservedly, if so). I've never made even half of 25K in one year. It would be interesting to know how many do qualify.

I hit  > $25,000 between 2014 and 2018 inclusive. Not since then, and with the reduction in overall fees paid am now on a likely downward slope. I would think the number of individual photographers reaching this amount with exclusive to Alamy images must be very few

 

Kumar

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

Wim, this is first thought that came to my mind as well.   Primary reason might be simple cost-cutting, and it's designed in such way to minimize # of contributors that might end pissed off & closing ports.  Big cats (>25K,  studios, I don't know who they are, they don't come to the Forum, are essential to the business) - so don't touch them.  Then majority of "average" contributors (i.e most of us on the forum) will stay the same, and even blog says something along these lines.  Largest impact is to "average", but exclusive contributors <25K as they take cut from 50% to 40%.   Those that sell <250 gross/year are deemed casual / sporadic i.e not really important.

 

It's a tricky subject.  I've been in stock ~4 yrs and have yet to see any agency raise contributor compensation (except for one I can't name, but nobody sells there anything anyways)

 

One bad thing this is doing is (de)motivation of new contributors.  Yes, they will start as "Gold" but everyone knows how hard it is to make Alamy sale, specially when your port is small.  So most of these guys, that might have super content, are likely to be dropped off after 12 months to 20% and lose interest.

 

 

Unfortunately this is me.

I was on MS as I thought Alamy was slightly above my pay grade but dropped MS when I got accepted by Alamy.

 

I only have a small young port but it seems quite efficient. 

This year I have licensed 1-2 images per month on a port of up to 400 and my average CTR is 1.2.

The problem for me is that at 1-2 licenses per month and ever decreasing fees, I am unlikely to hit 'gold' and therefore my commission is likely will drop from 40/50% to 20%!

Seems like a pretty big stick to try and encourage me to expand my portfolio.

 

If I was Alamy I would try to encourage more efficient, tight ports. After all it would be less storage, less QC, better customer experience when searching for images etc

 

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 😉)

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Olivier Parent said:

 

I tend to think that some of us realize Alamy seems to be kinda following the microstock path.

 

 

I agree, Oliver. I've never submitted anything to microstock agencies. You are still a working pro; I was but I'm retired. I'm just saying it might be a better idea to negotiating some before rushing out the door. Contributors are angry; I get it. I'm angry.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I take it that everyone has already emailed Emily Shelley directly, as she suggests in the blog? Has anyone had a response, or at least an acknowledgement? I've had no replies to the two emails I've sent so far.

Alex

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Alex Ramsay said:

I take it that everyone has already emailed Emily Shelley directly, as she suggests in the blog? Has anyone had a response, or at least an acknowledgement? I've had no replies to the two emails I've sent so far.

Alex

She is probably too busy forwarding e-mails about possible liability issues back to the contributors

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Alex FYI on page 31:

 

"Thanks for all the feedback so far everyone.
 
We will of course be publishing a formal response here very soon, certainly by the end of the week. 
 
With so many responses we have to do things in this way rather than post here addressing each point. Thanks for your pateince on this, we are reading every post.
 
There will be no more responses from us here until then where we will update page one of the thread and also the latest post here too.
 
Best regards
 
Alamy" 

Edited by Ed Rooney
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
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 by AndrewP
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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

"22.2; By opting in to marketing and/or 3rd party emails during Registration you agree that we can send you marketing and/or 3rd 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 3rd party emails at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link within these emails or by changing your email preferences in your account settings."

  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

 

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

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 by meanderingemu
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
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 by NYCat
  • 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.