Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 02/06/2021 at 17:25, Alamy said:

Hi Everyone,

 

To frame expectations we just wanted to update you that we're aiming to get the ammendments confirmed for early next week. 

 

The 45 day notice period will start again from that point. The existing Alamy contract will remain in force until the end of that new notice period.

 

We'll be in touch with further information then and will update this thread accordingly.

 

Best regards,

 

Alamy

 

Email today from contributor services says “The contract change is still coming into force on the 1st July”.  🤔

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Thyrsis said:

 

Email today from contributor services says “The contract change is still coming into force on the 1st July”.  🤔

I’ve had no such email from contributor services, has anyone else?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, sb photos said:

I’ve had no such email from contributor services, has anyone else?

It was in response to one I sent them...I’ve queried it but not yet had a reply.

Edited by Thyrsis
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Thyrsis said:

It was in response to one I sent them...I’ve queried it but not yet had a reply.


It makes you wonder who is running Alamy. Depending upon your reply this could yet further reinforce commonly held views that you cannot trust Alamy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Thyrsis said:

 

Email today from contributor services says “The contract change is still coming into force on the 1st July”.  🤔

 

And yet their update of the 2nd June (see page one of this thread) clearly states.....

 

"To frame expectations we just wanted to update you that we're aiming to get the ammendments (sic) confirmed for early next week. 

The 45 day notice period will start again from that point. The existing Alamy contract will remain in force until the end of that new notice period."

 

Go figure, as they say....

Edited by Vincent Lowe
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Vincent Lowe said:

 

And yet their update of the 2nd June (see page one of this thread) clearly states.....

 

"To frame expectations we just wanted to update you that we're aiming to get the ammendments (sic) confirmed for early next week. 

The 45 day notice period will start again from that point. The existing Alamy contract will remain in force until the end of that new notice period."

 

Go figure, as they say....

 

 

maybe by existing the mean the first rewrite, they seem to have been big on word specific stuff that goes against contributors. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Foreign Export said:

 i cant see that commitment on page 1, if you are referring to this statement from Alamy:

 

"we will always ask the user first whether or not they hold an existing licence before we pursue." - that means they will ask the user of the image and NOT the contributor


You are right, I misread that. Apologies to all.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, meanderingemu said:

 

 

maybe by existing the mean the first rewrite, they seem to have been big on word specific stuff that goes against contributors. 

Good thought

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Foreign Export said:

So I now have a new plan which I will implement so I can positively benefit from Alamy enforced changes:

 

We all need to regularly review what we shoot and how we market our work, and now when circumstances dictate. Some of your ideas are similar to mine. Have been looking at registering a domain, then considering wether to build a website or use PhotoShelter or similar to sell direct, both digital and prints from my archives and new shoots. Then wether to license images RM, or RF for simplifying licences. Long ago I had sold via exhibitions, framing prints myself to keep overheads down, but that was time consuming. I used to photograph properties and measure up, but that pays peanuts now. I've already started diversifying what I shoot, I just need get the images captioned, tagged and uploaded. Also, some of what I shoot or can shoot would do far better elsewhere, and be exclusive or not similar to any uploaded to Alamy. An online portfolio is a must, even something simple to start with.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/06/2021 at 13:30, Cliff Hide said:

 

I have received a helpful reply from Emily Shelley to my letter regarding  the proposed clause 5.1 (the one causing me the most concern).  As promised I've posted it below (emphasis is mine) . 

 

This reply may have crossed with the official announcement, but I wanted to let you know that we have taken feedback on board about the clause you mention and will be redrafting it back to its original form. The legal view here was that this cleared up wording rather than materially altered the meaning but that's not how it has been interpreted and we would of course not pass on liability to contributors for something that was our fault. I'm sorry for the concern this has caused.

 

 

How does she think we can trust anything that comes out of her mouth after she’s lied through her back teeth before? As for sorry - don’t make me laugh. 

  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 6
  • Downvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sb photos said:

 

We all need to regularly review what we shoot and how we market our work, and now when circumstances dictate. Some of your ideas are similar to mine. Have been looking at registering a domain, then considering wether to build a website or use PhotoShelter or similar to sell direct, both digital and prints from my archives and new shoots. Then wether to license images RM, or RF for simplifying licences. Long ago I had sold via exhibitions, framing prints myself to keep overheads down, but that was time consuming. I used to photograph properties and measure up, but that pays peanuts now. I've already started diversifying what I shoot, I just need get the images captioned, tagged and uploaded. Also, some of what I shoot or can shoot would do far better elsewhere, and be exclusive or not similar to any uploaded to Alamy. An online portfolio is a must, even something simple to start with.

 

sounds like a plan- hope it works out for you

Link to post
Share on other sites

How about keeping the commission at 50% and raising the 20% band to minimum of 500 $.  That would please all of the active contributors who probably have the best images. The ranking should also favour those  who have the best sales record.. This would possibly produce the  same financial result for the agency in terms of revenue.

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Travelshots said:

How about keeping the commission at 50% and raising the 20% band to minimum of 500 $.  That would please all of the active contributors who probably have the best images. The ranking should also favour those  who have the best sales record.. This would possibly produce the  same financial result for the agency in terms of revenue.

 

There is little incentive for alamy to 'please the active contributors', and no evidence whatsoever that they 'probably have the best images' either, sadly. A tiny number of contributors are active on this forum. By comparison, the large agencies have far greater numbers of images available on alamy. (Just as an example, WENN Rights, 5 million + images, and I'm sure Zuma etc. have higher numbers still). Even a contributor with a large individual collection of 70-100k images is peanuts against that. Many of the large accounts who are not agencies never venture on this forum and may or may not have seen the contract changes.

 

As for ranking best sales highest - that does exactly what it often does now: it'll bring up may tired, older images in the mix on the first page, which are there simply because they've sold before, and it will again favour large scale contributors such as agencies who sell high volumes. Of course previous sales will always be a factor in the algorithm, I'm not saying that is entirely wrong, but if ranking is based solely on that, it'll never refresh the collection as it is visible to those who search (and will most likely not venture beyond page 1-2 of their search). 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think all new starters should be given two years to build up sales to the $250 gross. I mean lets face it, If that's not achievable then either they're bad at choosing subject matter, bad at keywording, or just plain bad at photography.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/05/2021 at 16:51, MizBrown said:

 

I've never been that good at maths.   How so?

Difference between absolute value (50-40=10) and proportional (10/50  = 0.2 ie 20%)  You’re not wrong to say its a 10 point drop because it is, just needs context.

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

I think all new starters should be given two years to build up sales to the $250 gross. I mean lets face it, If that's not achievable then either they're bad at choosing subject matter, bad at keywording, or just plain bad at photography.

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's nonsense.  Perhaps they've got another job that pays better than stock photography.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, ACC said:

 You’re not wrong to say its a 10 point drop because it is, just needs context.

The percentage point trick - you see it everywhere. When Alamy cut the commission again in six months it will be another 10 percentage points, from 40 to 30 which will in fact be 25%.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, spacecadet said:

Because by calling 60-40 the "core rate" they can pretend that the promise of 50-50 was never made.

Yes, this is excellent wording. The core rate has always been there and all the other promises and false assurances from the past are figments of our collective imagination.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people only put their best work on Alamy and I would like to see the ratio between number of images and zooms and sales used as the marker. Not total sales. it took me three years to sell $250 and they seem to value me now, judging by how high my images appear in results.

 

Paulette

  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, NYCat said:

Some people only put their best work on Alamy and I would like to see the ratio between number of images and zooms and sales used as the marker. Not total sales. it took me three years to sell $250 and they seem to value me now, judging by how high my images appear in results.

 

Paulette

 

 

I'd say that they show exactly how much they value us ( or not) by the way that they treat us. 

Edited by geogphotos
  • Upvote 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ian, I realize how much trouble you and others went to in order to mark some images as exclusive and I agree that what Alamy has done to you stinks. 

 

Paulette

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, imageplotter said:

By comparison, the large agencies have far greater numbers of images available on alamy. (Just as an example, WENN Rights, 5 million + images, and I'm sure Zuma etc. have higher numbers still). Even a contributor with a large individual collection of 70-100k images is peanuts against that.

 

600 agencies if I'm remembering correctly, and around 60,000 individual photographers.  Someone pointed out early in this that Alamy probably has different contracts with some of the agencies.   And only the agencies can set minimum prices if I'm remembering the contract correctly.

 

I wonder how many of Alamy's individual contributors make $25,000 gross a year -- and, that's less than median wage in most industrialized countries before the 50% deduction.

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.