New picture sales not yet reported in sales

[Ace]

Dear All,

 

I have had several sales recently in newspapers. Mainly the Mail online.

Roughly how long is it before they appear in your sales ?

I understand that they take a little while to come through but am curious as to how long.

From experience I also know the prices are quite low.

 

Thanks in advance,

Adrian

[JohnB]

Usually up to three months

[Paulstw]

Sold an image to The Express in July, appeared this month. Sold an image to The Daily Record in June and it's still not appeared. Can vary greatly as a picture in February to The Daily Mail popped up in April. No real order to it. Just comes through when ever they clear their invoices. 

[Mirco Vacca]

I am also still waiting for a sale in the telegraph from august.

[dov makabaw]

Can vary a lot although 3 to 6 months seems to be the norm. If I find one of my images in a paper I advise MS by email. Have had a few unreported sales in the past.

 

dov

[Steven Gillis]

Chasing up unreported Mail online usages from June!

 

Regards

[David F]

In theory up to three months for reporting but longer still to get paid. That said I have an image via Alamy live news that was used by the Times on the 22nd March 2013 this year and I am still waiting for it to appear in my sales never mind get paid. Alamy confirm the download but say I have to wait until the paper confirm usage.

I have had others from various sources where I have had to do the work for Alamy and identify and prove the image was used before anything was done. This could turn into a rant so I will stop there with that one.

That said this is nothing compared to a magazine front cover I am still waiting to get paid for from 2010. Again we have been waiting for them to "get back to us" for some considerable time.

When the system works however it works well.

David

[Ace]

Many thanks all.

Thought it might be 3 months but was not sure.

I have taken screen shots for my record to maybe chase up later. But as we can't have ' eyes on ' the worlds press am hoping that Alamy have this system under control !

Thanks again.

[losdemas]

It's an uphill struggle!

 

I had a sale (my first), to a subscription-only magazine.  I was lucky in that one of the contributors here presumably subscribes and reported the sale on the monthly 'Have you found...' thread, otherwise I might never have known about it.  I reported the sale to Alamy when I found out (approx 3 months after the usage, 4 months after when it was likely downloaded) and was asked to "get back to us with the proof of usage showing your image being used along with the date of usage and publication name".

 

Of course, I couldn't show it being used, but luckily, the information I was able to provide was sufficient, and 6 days later the image was invoiced - and on the same day zoomed for the first time!  Coincidence?  I could very easily get paranoid, you know!

 

While waiting for Alamy to talk with the client, I found a cheap copy of the mag. in question on E-Bay and bought it, just in case.  But we really shouldn't have to jump through these hoops.

 

All the more reason for high praise (and lots of green arrows!) to the kind folk who regularly scour the Internet and hard-copy literature for usages of our images, and report back on the 'Have you found...' threads.

[Steven Gillis]

 

All the more reason for high praise (and lots of green arrows!) to the kind folk who regularly scour the Internet and hard-copy literature for usages of our images, and report back on the 'Have you found...' threads.

I'll second that.

 

Regards

[ManWay]

But why should we be checking our image uses? Alamy take their percentage and this is their job. 

 

In this day and age it is quite possible for image users to report a use almost immediately -  one advantage of computerised systems. Since we have a very limited time in which to pay our utility bills the same should apply with image use - one rule for all.

 

If Alamy 'misses' an image use then they should forgo their percentage if  the usage has been tracked down by the image creator IMO.

 

regards

 

Richard

[Ainara]

I found one of my images in a Swedish newspaper last May. A month ago, a send an email to Alamy asking why this sale is not appear in my summary of items sold yet. They answer me that:

 

"Distributors take longer to report usage than direct sales as there are more people involved in the process (us, them and their customer). The use of your image will appear on your Summary of items sold page before the end of next month."

 

I'm still waiting, hope to see this sale in few days...

[Ace]

What i don't understand is that surely if a photograph is `bought/used` from Alamy there must be an electronic route to track the sale.

 

Then the end user would owe and therefore be invoiced by Alamy.

 

It should then be simply a question of what credit terms the end user has agreed with Alamy and when the end user pays Alamy then Alamy can pay the photographer.

 

But am i wrong in thinking that this happens ?

[Joe Gaul]

I have never understood the reluctance of Alamy to chase up unreported sales as it must be in their interests. Firstly because they are losing their percentage; secondly we use agencies so that we don't have to get involved in promotion and collection activities, and if we do we may as well go down the Symbiostock route; and if end users start to believe that the images are free then it is a downward spiral. Perhaps we would not have suffered a percentage drop if these fees had been identified and collected.

[ManWay]

What i don't understand is that surely if a photograph is `bought/used` from Alamy there must be an electronic route to track the sale.

 

Then the end user would owe and therefore be invoiced by Alamy.

 

It should then be simply a question of what credit terms the end user has agreed with Alamy and when the end user pays Alamy then Alamy can pay the photographer.

 

But am i wrong in thinking that this happens ?

Yes Ace, I think that this is what should happen ( and would happen if Alamy was keen to protect our interests). 

 

Trouble is Alamy is so keen to get images licenced for anything that it lets some 'big' buyers 'pick off the tree' for a set fee - usually sweet FA - just lok at newspaper scheme. This is obviously not properly monitored.

 

Remember, there are 40 million images on Alamy. If Alamy's cut is just $1 per sale they will make money. It is you and I and 27000 others who put in the hard graft in getting the images/buying the kit/travelling to location etc.

 

Unfortunately this is the way of the world. I expect several posters now to say "If you don't like the heat , get out of the kitchen" . That's fine but I don't have a day job to give up! 

 

I have been a professional photographer for 28 years - it was hard at first but never harder to make a living than now.

 

Good Luck All

 

Richard