Micro sales

[meanderingemu]

 

 

 

 

 

Here is another idea Alamy:

 

 

Impress #Alamy contributors by compensating them for unique images....  

[Phil Crean]

@ Alamy it is time to say NO to these so called clients who do not value our work.

Let the other agencies give their contributors images away if they want to and watch them absorb the costs of administering a lost cause.

 

Phil

[meanderingemu]

2 hours ago, geogphotos said:

Unfortunately, the reality of the marketplace is that Alamy's competitors ( and I don't just mean the micros) are offering UK newspapers even lower prices. 

 

I am starting to notice one UK daily, the one with the highest circulation, that used to be almost exclusively Alamy is now using an alternative source at least for some of their images. Once shopping habits change it is very hard to reverse the process. 

 

 

 

and this is the reality.  I know many have posted about the potential lack of arm's length relationship between Alamy and their buying shareholders, but if that was the case you would have expected them to source most of their images from here, and i have not seen any evidence of that.  Most times reading some of the published stories where one of my images would have fit the subject I see images were sourced from other distributors.

[meanderingemu]

1 minute ago, Phil Crean said:

@ Alamy it is time to say NO to these so called clients who do not value our work.

Let the other agencies give their contributors images away if they want to and watch them absorb the costs of administering a lost cause.

 

Phil

 

 

in fairness, Alamy could still do these deals, they probably add little variable costs to their operation, and bring cashflow.  My issue is that instead of having them under "Novel Usage", which Contributors have choice to be part or not, Alamy has now "Normalised" these deals, with no option for contributors.  

[SRJUK]

On 12/02/2022 at 08:20, Stu said:

4 sales at $1.69, minus $1.01 leaves $2.36 which equates to £1.74 for 4 licenses. It's an absolute joke.

You haven't taken off your $2.10 'other fees' from Alamy... so how much do you owe them?

[Rebecca Ore]

2 hours ago, meanderingemu said:

 

 

in fairness, Alamy could still do these deals, they probably add little variable costs to their operation, and bring cashflow.  My issue is that instead of having them under "Novel Usage", which Contributors have choice to be part or not, Alamy has now "Normalised" these deals, with no option for contributors.  

 

If you look at All of Alamy, you'll see bulk buys of model released photos by one individual search per type with purchases of more than ten photos per search in many cases, so those are likely to be bulk deals.  Cheaper to have an intern buy bulk "happy woman close up (MR)" than to pay more both for a photo editor doing a more selective sort and then paying more for the best photos.   The pattern is one search, zooms high, and around a quarter to a third of the zooms purchased.

 

I suppose for Alamy, $30 for ten photos works out the same as to $30 for one where the buyer was connected for more time making a decision for a particular ad.

[meanderingemu]

3 minutes ago, Rebecca Ore said:

 

If you look at All of Alamy, you'll see bulk buys of model released photos by one individual search per type with purchases of more than ten photos per search in many cases, so those are likely to be bulk deals.  Cheaper to have an intern buy bulk "happy woman close up (MR)" than to pay more both for a photo editor doing a more selective sort and then paying more for the best photos.   The pattern is one search, zooms high, and around a quarter to a third of the zooms purchased.

 

I suppose for Alamy, $30 for ten photos works out the same as to $30 for one where the buyer was connected for more time making a decision for a particular ad.

 

not sure what that has to do with Normalising what was "Novel Usage", therefore removing the ability of Contributors to opt-out? 

[Rebecca Ore]

5 hours ago, meanderingemu said:

 

not sure what that has to do with Normalising what was "Novel Usage", therefore removing the ability of Contributors to opt-out? 

 

Less and less control for contributors in general. 

[M.Chapman]

6 hours ago, Rebecca Ore said:

If you look at All of Alamy, you'll see bulk buys of model released photos by one individual search per type with purchases of more than ten photos per search in many cases, so those are likely to be bulk deals.  Cheaper to have an intern buy bulk "happy woman close up (MR)" than to pay more both for a photo editor doing a more selective sort and then paying more for the best photos.   The pattern is one search, zooms high, and around a quarter to a third of the zooms purchased.

Well spotted.

 

Mark

[Regis]

My last four licences are all 4 cents ones each...

And when you read different forums, even the micros seems to sell for more...

A bit depressing really.

[Cryptoprocta]

12 hours ago, meanderingemu said:

Here is another idea Alamy:

Impress #Alamy contributors by compensating them for unique images....  

That was one of the questions I asked the CEO at the time of the contract change.

On 25th May 2021, she answered thus:

"...a business decision based on the value of the 'exclusive' collection. Around 17 million of the 260 million images on Alamy are marked as exclusive to us and we do not see any particular commercial or marketing benefit from this collection, and it varies widely in genre and quality. Our aim is to establish which images are truly exclusive and at the same time unlock infringements revenue, we will then assess the value of this collection to customers. We are aware that this removes the commission incentive for contributors to be exclusive to us and that those who were previously exclusive will see the biggest impact from these changes."

Edited February 14, 2022 by Cryptoprocta

[Camera Girl]

On 08/02/2022 at 08:50, Abiyoyo said:

US 0.5$ yesterday

Country: Worldwide
Usage: Personal use, Non-commercial projects such as teaching materials, essays, dissertations, theses and presentations.
Media: Editorial presentation, single design
Start: 07 February 2022
End: 07 February 2027

 

Country: Worldwide Usage: Personal use, Non-commercial projects such as teaching materials, essays, dissertations, theses and presentations. Media: Editorial presentation, single design Start: 14 February 2022 End: 14 February 2027   The only reason I bother with Alamy now is for the DACS royalty payment and because I process the images anyway to submit them to certain companies (not stock libraries) directly for a decent price, and if they are already processed then I may as well upload them here too.  If Alamy were my only reason - well it would no longer be a reason.

$ 0.50

[Celluloid Hero]

I doubt we will ever see any new memberships to the Alamy $100k club again -

 

 

Our latest post about the 100k club is now live. If you haven't seen any in this series before, here are the links:

 

• 100k club part 1
• 100k club part 2
• 100k club part 3
• 100k club part 4

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

Edited April 3, 2018 by Alamy
Updated with latest link

Edited February 15, 2022 by Celluloid Hero

[meanderingemu]

12 hours ago, Cryptoprocta said:

That was one of the questions I asked the CEO at the time of the contract change.

On 25th May 2021, she answered thus:

"...a business decision based on the value of the 'exclusive' collection. Around 17 million of the 260 million images on Alamy are marked as exclusive to us and we do not see any particular commercial or marketing benefit from this collection, and it varies widely in genre and quality. Our aim is to establish which images are truly exclusive and at the same time unlock infringements revenue, we will then assess the value of this collection to customers. We are aware that this removes the commission incentive for contributors to be exclusive to us and that those who were previously exclusive will see the biggest impact from these changes."

 

 

by Unique i didn't specifically target exclusive images.  I just had an Alamywhack, an image that was the only one out of 260+ million images that fit a 2 word search.  And Alamy felt $3 was an appropriate fee to licence it in perpetuity. 

 

This removes the incentive for contributors to upload specialised images, which was always one of Alamy's niche compared to MS. 

[Michael Ventura]

Had a 50 cent sale yesterday for a presentation/personal use (may have been a student)

 

Usage: Personal use, Non-commercial projects such as teaching materials, essays, dissertations, theses and presentations.
Media: Editorial presentation, single design

[Cryptoprocta]

3 hours ago, meanderingemu said:

by Unique i didn't specifically target exclusive images.  I just had an Alamywhack, an image that was the only one out of 260+ million images that fit a 2 word search.  And Alamy felt $3 was an appropriate fee to licence it in perpetuity. 

 

This removes the incentive for contributors to upload specialised images, which was always one of Alamy's niche compared to MS. 

Indeed, and I've also had an Alamywhack sell for a very low price, though as it was a couple of years back, it wasn't quite as low as yours.

Its the example I use to show it's all about the discount the buyer holds, and very little, if anything, to do with the image.

The secret would be to find a niche for which buyers, who don't need many images, would think to look for on Alamy (or a search engine. It would be interesting to know what proportion of sales are via search engines.)

Edited February 15, 2022 by Cryptoprocta

[Celluloid Hero]

1 hour ago, meanderingemu said:

 

 

by Unique i didn't specifically target exclusive images.  I just had an Alamywhack, an image that was the only one out of 260+ million images that fit a 2 word search.  And Alamy felt $3 was an appropriate fee to licence it in perpetuity. 

 

This removes the incentive for contributors to upload specialised images, which was always one of Alamy's niche compared to MS. 

Spot on!

[wilkopix]

3 hours ago, meanderingemu said:

"...a business decision based on the value of the 'exclusive' collection. Around 17 million of the 260 million images on Alamy are marked as exclusive to us and we do not see any particular commercial or marketing benefit from this collection, and it varies widely in genre and quality. Our aim is to establish which images are truly exclusive and at the same time unlock infringements revenue, we will then assess the value of this collection to customers. We are aware that this removes the commission incentive for contributors to be exclusive to us and that those who were previously exclusive will see the biggest impact from these changes."

Yep, and I changed my almost 100% exclusive collection to non exclusive so I could put the images elsewhere to try and make up the loss of commission from Alamy. Not something that I wanted to do but rather had my hand forced by Alamy. I'm a business and I need to make a profit too. Sad really as I would much rather to stay exclusive ..

[imageplotter]

20 hours ago, wilkopix said:

Yep, and I changed my almost 100% exclusive collection to non exclusive so I could put the images elsewhere to try and make up the loss of commission from Alamy. Not something that I wanted to do but rather had my hand forced by Alamy. I'm a business and I need to make a profit too. Sad really as I would much rather to stay exclusive ..

Agree 100% and for the same reasons. Alamy exclusivity can perhaps still be enjoyed as a hobbyist, but no professional photographer, even if stock/news makes up only part of the business, will be able to justify exclusivity under these terms. I'm in the process of changing it all to non-exclusive, Alamy leaves me no choice. Sad times.

[meanderingemu]

 

 

 

Alamy, shouldn't we also discuss that #Unsustainable stock photography is going to be a continuing trending topic amongst #Alamy contributors this year.  Not sure All these engagement tweets are really inspiring when you see the final monetary impact.  

 

 

[sb photos]

4 hours ago, imageplotter said:

Agree 100% and for the same reasons. Alamy exclusivity can perhaps still be enjoyed as a hobbyist, but no professional photographer, even if stock/news makes up only part of the business, will be able to justify exclusivity under these terms. I'm in the process of changing it all to non-exclusive, Alamy leaves me no choice. Sad times.

Same here. I started contributing with Alamy in 2017, have made all of 2017 and 2018 non exclusive, now changing the remainder.

 

Edit: All uploads since last years contract change have been non exclusive. 

Edited February 16, 2022 by sb photos

[Dave Richards]

2 hours ago, sb photos said:

Same here. I started contributing with Alamy in 2017, have made all of 2017 and 2018 non exclusive, now changing the remainder.

 

Edit: All uploads since last years contract change have been non exclusive. 

For similar reasons I would contemplate making my images non-exclusive but only if, or when, I find another suitable stock site. Not going to waste time on it unless I find that alternative.

[Allan Bell]

Changed all mine to non-exclusive a few months ago when it was obvious that it was not going to be advantageous any more.

 

Allan

 

[Betty LaRue]

1 hour ago, Allan Bell said:

Changed all mine to non-exclusive a few months ago when it was obvious that it was not going to be advantageous any more.

 

Allan

 

Allan, leave your port for what little it will bring in, just don’t upload or put any more work in it. You could still participate in the forum. I would miss you.

[Celluloid Hero]

Just came across a remark by Nicole Glass on her excellent YouTube channel, mentioning that as an SS photographer you might receive as little as 25cents for an image. Looks like we are breaking some records here for minimum returns! Alamy now officially microstock?