Location, location, location

[Robert Brook]

"Having just (modestly) broken a long drought on Alamy I am a little more motivated." Martin PW

 

Mine's been about 10 years.  However, perversely, I've decided to have a proper crack at Alamy now.  In the past I wouldn't because I would expect it to bring in much less compared with other places, but now the illusion has been  dispelled that it can even achieve that, I can see it as being more like a professional version of Flickr. Certainly not an agent. I can upload anything, and surprise myself that something unexpected might sell. It's actually a very good way of testing the market with new ideas.  Most will flop, but that's the point. 

[Martin P Wilson]

...

 

I can see it as being more like a professional version of Flickr. Certainly not an agent. I can upload anything, and surprise myself that something unexpected might sell. It's actually a very good way of testing the market with new ideas.  Most will flop, but that's the point. 

 

That's a good point. I have long argued that Alamy is not an agent in the true sense and got red-flagged for voicing the opinion.

 

As you suggest I, too, will be using Alamy as a test and development channel while I work up other approaches.

[Bill Brooks]

Forget about moving to a stock photo location, unless you are willing to change location every other year. 

 

Instead live an interesting engaged life, and photo record that life for stock, without incurring extra cost.

[Ed Rooney]

"Spun the dials and it told me Ed should move to San Diego. Easy!" -- David K

 

Funny you should mention that, David. In the '80s I was offered a two-year contract with San Diego based Southwest Airlines. I turned it down because of a few deal-breaker details. I was living in Oxfordshire at the time, doing a weekly spot for BBC Radio Oxford and had a relationship going. 

 

I also agree with what Bill Brooks said above; if there is a center to the stock scene, it keeps shifting and will keep shifting. 

 

Last night, when I posted this, I was thinking that my point was being missed entirely. I was not asking for single subject ideas or even a new direction. I was expressing surprise and dismay that New York City may not be that interesting to the world at large anymore. When we used to name the major cities of the world, New York was always on the short list. I have a lot fewer images of Rome than I have of NYC, but the overall comparative percentage of sales of Rome is better. 

 

  

 

Understand, I don't do news or most events, and I won't be doing any iPhone snaps except for my own visual records. I was a serious PJ at the start of my career. I covered three wars and about 6 serious riots. Basta! No more, thanks. Most of the "news" people cover on Alamy is not really news. 

 

Let me comment on the three snaps above: 1. They would not let me shoot inside the bakery. (I was not attacked by mice.) 2. This is the up-to-the-minute state of the new World Trade Center, almost done. It's will be done sometime this year, and since it's a 12 minute walk from my front door I will shoot it several times in a variety of light. 3. Our citibike bike-share program began last year. I covered it on the opening day, as I'm sure a lot of others did here in NYC.

 

I have had no sales on any of these subjects.

 

Regarding the bike share, NYC was several steps behind other major cities like London, Paris and Washington, DC. So as a story it was old and boring. 

 

My OP was wondering why New York City, not me, does not do better. 

[Robert Brook]

"Most of the "news" people cover on Alamy is not really news".  Semantics.  Alamy isn't Reuters (or VII), if that's what you mean.  But pictures of current events sold to news desks is still 'news'.

 

Regarding the World Trade Centre.  I've had no sales of the old one as it was collapsing (second tower).  The reason?  New York is stuffed with photographers including some of the most talented in the world - there were a lot of much better ones taken.

 

"My OP was wondering why New York City, not me, does not do better".  It does brilliantly, but due to saturation coverage, and for the reasons Geoff has given, there isn't much scope for sales on mass photography sites such as Alamy.  Enter " new 'world trade center' " and you already get more than 1000 results.

[Betty LaRue]

I feel a bit like you, Ed, living in Oklahoma where?  At least, New York City is known everywhere.  My problem is that I have a lack of energy.  I get a good idea of a shoot, then I think of all involved and how I will feel (beat up) at the end of the day, and push it away for "another day" that never comes.

As we age and get aches, pains and tiredness issues, that is often the case.

 

I do think that stock photographers could do well to forget "the place" they are in and begin focusing on people.  People being #1, the place being only the 2nd element.  There is and probably always be a need for shots of people. Families doing things together, couples walking holding hands, sneaking a hug or a kiss, enjoying or buying a hot dog at a stand, that kind of thing.  Of course, in an ideal world, those would be released but absolutely not necessary.

 

This nation is aging what with the baby boomers getting up there.  There is a demand for older people doing things. Focus in on that old couple window shopping together!  See, I have some decent ideas, just not the impetus to get out there and do it.  Maybe when I get (finally) my new X-T1, I will be more energized to do some of this type of shooting. I won't be carrying around a camera that absolutely kills my neck and back. I've done a tiny bit of this with the RX100, but I'm looking forward to the X-T1.

 So yes, street shooting can provide these kind of images.  But instead of the odd shot of a person's face done artistically in black and white (I see so much of in street shooting)

go for the people doing things.  Together preferably, but the single can work, too. Not long distance work, but tighter shots that show expressions.

 

You've got a small enough rig, Ed to get by with this, I would think.  And if you see tourists that appear loose and friendly, sometimes it works to ask nicely if you can photograph them. 

I did this once at our Bricktown canal area.  There is a spray park with water shooting up everywhere, and a young couple had a small child, under 2, delighted and playing in the water.  I asked Dad if I could photograph him, and was given permission.  My understanding of "stock" wasn't as good, then, or I would have photographed the parents interacting with the child!  Of course, being female does help with children, not so many female pedophiles running around. If I were a man, I doubt I would ask, but family groups would work well. 

The worst (usually) that can happen is someone will say no.  A people image will sell before a food shot every time. Or am I all wet, guys?

 

Betty

[Robert Brook]

"That's a good point. I have long argued that Alamy is not an agent in the true sense and got red-flagged for voicing the opinion."  Martin PW

 

If anyone thinks Alamy is an agent, they have never had an agent.

 

If a contributor's work is not known, assessed, understood, and the contributor is not advised, informed, encouraged and sometimes work is criticised or critiqued, by a senior creative person within the company (or collection if it's C or G), then the basic functions of an agent are not being executed.  On top of that the contributor's work should be individually promoted.

 

I would advise anyone who isn't a genius at self-promotion, to get one. Even if you have to hammer on doors.

 

Unless it's just a hobby.

 

RB

[Martin P Wilson]

...

 

I do think that stock photographers could do well to forget "the place" they are in and begin focusing on people.  People being #1, the place being only the 2nd element. 

 

...

 

Betty

 

I agree Betty, I was at a historic motorsport event/exhibition and got into a conversation with a very experienced retired journalist. He was really challenging me on why anyone should use my pics and my business strategy. He made the point even at an event like that it was not about the cars but the people. Rather an eye opener but he is right; I am still grappling with properly getting the people aspect into my photography and writing.

[Allan Bell]

ED said:

"I was expressing surprise and dismay that New York City may not be that interesting to the world at large anymore."

 

You have just answered your own post Ed. Get out there and make it interesting.  

 

Allan

[Martin P Wilson]

Robert, I agree,

 

I think that the "individually promoted" aspect is key, think theatrical or literary agents. For the most part I don't really think C or G are agents either.

[Robert Brook]

Robert, I agree,

 

I think that the "individually promoted" aspect is key, think theatrical or literary agents. For the most part I don't really think C or G are agents either.

 

And I agree, Martin. But they represent some photographers. 

 

For example:

 

http://www.reportagebygettyimages.com/

[John Mitchell]

"Spun the dials and it told me Ed should move to San Diego. Easy!" -- David K

 

Funny you should mention that, David. In the '80s I was offered a two-year contract with San Diego based Southwest Airlines. I turned it down because of a few deal-breaker details. I was living in Oxfordshire at the time, doing a weekly spot for BBC Radio Oxford and had a relationship going. 

 

I also agree with what Bill Brooks said above; if there is a center to the stock scene, it keeps shifting and will keep shifting. 

 

Last night, when I posted this, I was thinking that my point was being missed entirely. I was not asking for single subject ideas or even a new direction. I was expressing surprise and dismay that New York City may not be that interesting to the world at large anymore. When we used to name the major cities of the world, New York was always on the short list. I have a lot fewer images of Rome than I have of NYC, but the overall comparative percentage of sales of Rome is better. 

 

  

 

Understand, I don't do news or most events, and I won't be doing any iPhone snaps except for my own visual records. I was a serious PJ at the start of my career. I covered three wars and about 6 serious riots. Basta! No more, thanks. Most of the "news" people cover on Alamy is not really news. 

 

Let me comment on the three snaps above: 1. They would not let me shoot inside the bakery. (I was not attacked by mice.) 2. This is the up-to-the-minute state of the new World Trade Center, almost done. It's will be done sometime this year, and since it's a 12 minute walk from my front door I will shoot it several times in a variety of light. 3. Our citibike bike-share program began last year. I covered it on the opening day, as I'm sure a lot of others did here in NYC.

 

I have had no sales on any of these subjects.

 

Regarding the bike share, NYC was several steps behind other major cities like London, Paris and Washington, DC. So as a story it was old and boring. 

 

My OP was wondering why New York City, not me, does not do better. 

Ed, you might have a point about NYC not being as interesting to the world as it used to be. Some cities are definitely "fresher" than others. Younger West Coast cities such as Vancouver, Seattle, and Portland come to mind.

[Robert Brook]

"I do think that stock photographers could do well to forget "the place" they are in and begin focusing on people.  People being #1, the place being only the 2nd element.  There is and probably always be a need for shots of people. Families doing things together, couples walking holding hands, sneaking a hug or a kiss, enjoying or buying a hot dog at a stand, that kind of thing.  Of course, in an ideal world, those would be released but absolutely not necessary.

 

This nation is aging what with the baby boomers getting up there.  There is a demand for older people doing things. Focus in on that old couple window shopping together!  See, I have some decent ideas, just not the impetus to get out there and do it.  Maybe when I get (finally) my new X-T1, I will be more energized to do some of this type of shooting. I won't be carrying around a camera that absolutely kills my neck and back. I've done a tiny bit of this with the RX100, but I'm looking forward to the X-T1." Betty LaRue

 

Well, someone's on the ball round here ...

 

Betty - make sure to get releases, make sure the pictures have an authentic or natural feel, and they should sell like hot cakes in the right places.  What you describe is what all the commercial agencies are currently after.

[Ed Rooney]

Betty, Rodgers and Hammerstein made Oklahoma very famous a long time ago. 

 

Understand that I have a long, full-time career in photography behind me that began in 1960 and lasted over 30 years. American Express, PanAm and American Airlines were clients. Towards the end of that period, I had my stock with Tony Stone Images, maybe the best stock agency ever.

 

I'm retired.

 

And I'm trying to learn, not how to start a new career or find the energy and financing for a new direction; I'm trying to learn how to be retired. I would like to supplement my retirement income with some stock earnings. That's my goal. I see a lot of people in here who share this position. 

 

I've heard Geoff's theory on "found" and "made" pictures many time, but since our images don't overlap much at all, the theory does not interest me. I have no plan to take an advanced class in Photoshop, setup even a small studio, or hire models. And I'm not talking about what I do or don't shoot. I do the best I can, as I hope we all do. 

 

Only John Mitchell in his last post seems to think I may be on to something. But hey, gang . . . I'm not planning to move anywhere. 

[losdemas]

I feel a bit like you, Ed, living in Oklahoma where?  At least, New York City is known everywhere.  My problem is that I have a lack of energy.  I get a good idea of a shoot, then I think of all involved and how I will feel (beat up) at the end of the day, and push it away for "another day" that never comes.

As we age and get aches, pains and tiredness issues, that is often the case.

 

I do think that stock photographers could do well to forget "the place" they are in and begin focusing on people.  People being #1, the place being only the 2nd element.  There is and probably always be a need for shots of people. Families doing things together, couples walking holding hands, sneaking a hug or a kiss, enjoying or buying a hot dog at a stand, that kind of thing.  Of course, in an ideal world, those would be released but absolutely not necessary.

 

This nation is aging what with the baby boomers getting up there.  There is a demand for older people doing things. Focus in on that old couple window shopping together!  See, I have some decent ideas, just not the impetus to get out there and do it.  Maybe when I get (finally) my new X-T1, I will be more energized to do some of this type of shooting. I won't be carrying around a camera that absolutely kills my neck and back. I've done a tiny bit of this with the RX100, but I'm looking forward to the X-T1.

 So yes, street shooting can provide these kind of images.  But instead of the odd shot of a person's face done artistically in black and white (I see so much of in street shooting)

go for the people doing things.  Together preferably, but the single can work, too. Not long distance work, but tighter shots that show expressions.

 

You've got a small enough rig, Ed to get by with this, I would think.  And if you see tourists that appear loose and friendly, sometimes it works to ask nicely if you can photograph them. 

I did this once at our Bricktown canal area.  There is a spray park with water shooting up everywhere, and a young couple had a small child, under 2, delighted and playing in the water.  I asked Dad if I could photograph him, and was given permission.  My understanding of "stock" wasn't as good, then, or I would have photographed the parents interacting with the child!  Of course, being female does help with children, not so many female pedophiles running around. If I were a man, I doubt I would ask, but family groups would work well. 

The worst (usually) that can happen is someone will say no.  A people image will sell before a food shot every time. Or am I all wet, guys?

 

Betty

 

+1

 

Agree 100% with all you say. Betty (not wet at all !).  Every time I look at what has sold and continues to sell well in stock, it almost invariably involves people.  There are (and will continue to be) exceptions, of course, in all kinds of subject areas, for all kinds of reasons, but many of the best-selling togs (inc. those who report here) have people in a large %age of their images.

 

Like you, I'm hugely guilty of being well aware of what I should be doing, but not getting around to it: I know I'll get little sympathy from contributors here when I moan about few or no sales!  In my defence, I have to say that ~25% of my sales have been of mundane things (street/shop signs, etc.), which is why I continue to take them!  I even took a trip across town to take a photo of a specific sign outside a specific shop because what it displays is highly relevant in today's market, and I believe that it's the only one in my town.  How sad is that?  Well, not that that sad - 2 months later it sold (my second ever sale).  The  problem is that if you concentrate on looking up at signs above stores, you sometimes miss what's right in front of you - and that involves people.  I imagine that these images are also better placed to receive higher license values, too.

 

Ed, in your position, I would do what others have advised: take what you please, upload what you choose, and enjoy what's around you.  Personally, I think that NYC has as much attraction for the world as ever, as indeed does Tweety-twee, Waxforshire!  Perhaps it's just that demand in stock is changing and buyers are looking for something different...?  Right, off to take another shop sign... :D

[Ed Rooney]

 

Do you all think these people are old enough and busy enough to be valid stock?

[Robert Brook]

 

Do you all think these people are old enough and busy enough to be valid stock?

 

They are difficult to assess at thumbnail size, but aside from the first one, you appear to be shooting the location, not the people - that is there, is nothing separating the figures from their surroundings, and the images look too busy. Some would benefit by having been shot from much lower down, just off the ground, others by getting much closer.

 

Forget having been a PJ or a travel photographer.  I have been a photographer all my life - aside from a few years teaching in London - done all kinds of things, and regard most of what I have done in the past to be irrelelevant to what I do know.  I'm not sure I know how to retire.  

 

RB

[fotoDogue]

Try making work like this in Oxfordshire.... the best commercial stock is old advertising - old adage. Original image from http://adsoftheworld.com/media/print/viaje_mais_magazine_usa

 

 

 

This looks even more photoshopped than a Vogue photo of Kim and Kanye

 

http://oystermag.com/kim-kanyes-vogue-photoshop-fail

[John Mitchell]

 

Do you all think these people are old enough and busy enough to be valid stock?

 

Don't know about valid "stock" (not fond of the term really), but they all look like valid New Yorkers, which is more important IMO.

 

I would say that at least 75% of my Alamy sellers don't have any people in them at all. I don't think that there are any absolute "shoulds." All kinds of images can sell.

[Ed Rooney]

 

 

Do you all think these people are old enough and busy enough to be valid stock?

 

They are difficult to assess at thumbnail size, but aside from the first one, you appear to be shooting the location, not the people - that is there, is nothing separating the figures from their surroundings, and the images look too busy. Some would benefit by having been shot from much lower down, just off the ground, others by getting much closer.

 

Forget having been a PJ or a travel photographer.  I have been a photographer all my life - aside from a few years teaching in London - done all kinds of things, and regard most of what I have done in the past to be irrelelevant to what I do know.  I'm not sure I know how to retire.  

 

RB

 

 

LOL Oh, look what we have here. It has always been the custom in the Alamy forum not to offer a critique of another forum member's work unless that member asks you to do so. I do not recall asking you to do so. The subject of this post is not hard to understand. In fact it is listed in the title three times: location. 

 

But quid pro quo: most of your images seem to have to do with piles of garbage. Apt. What was it you taught in London? Not photography, surely? You have trouble assessing a thumbnail? It's funny that most of my buyers make the decision to buy from thumbnails. Yet you are giving me instructions on how to shoot. I wouldn't take your advice on how to sharpen a pencil. And you have the gaul to suggest that I "forget about being a PJ or a travel photographer"? My life was interesting and productive. Most sane and sensitive people value their memories. 

 

I suggest that you not address me again in this forum. 

[Robert Brook]

 

 

 

Do you all think these people are old enough and busy enough to be valid stock?

 

They are difficult to assess at thumbnail size, but aside from the first one, you appear to be shooting the location, not the people - that is there, is nothing separating the figures from their surroundings, and the images look too busy. Some would benefit by having been shot from much lower down, just off the ground, others by getting much closer.

 

Forget having been a PJ or a travel photographer.  I have been a photographer all my life - aside from a few years teaching in London - done all kinds of things, and regard most of what I have done in the past to be irrelelevant to what I do know.  I'm not sure I know how to retire.  

 

RB

 

 

LOL Oh, look what we have here. It has always been the custom in the Alamy forum not to offer a critique of another forum member's work unless that member asks you to do so. I do not recall asking you to do so. The subject of this post is not hard to understand. In fact it is listed in the title three times: location. 

 

But quid pro quo: most of your images seem to have to do with piles of garbage. Apt. What was it you taught in London? Not photography, surely? You have trouble assessing a thumbnail? It's funny that most of my buyers make the decision to buy from thumbnails. Yet you are giving me instructions on how to shoot. I wouldn't take your advice on how to sharpen a pencil. And you have the gaul to suggest that I "forget about being a PJ or a travel photographer"? My life was interesting and productive. Most sane and sensitive people value their memories. 

 

I suggest that you not address me again in this forum. 

 

 

Sorry Ed - overstepped the mark a bit there. 

 

Most of what I put on Alamy is old and second rate, true.  The funny thing is, poor as it is I have been sitting on page one of BHZ for a few years now.  Greatly puzzled by that.  And why some similar pictures elsewhere have, individually, clocked up thousands of pounds over time.

 

If you want to offer a proper critique, go ahead. 

 

"Most sane and sensitive people value their memories".  Of course they do.  And I have a great respect for people like you, who have done the kind of things you have done.

 

But photography doesn't stand still.  It's not memory I need to relinquish, it's any attachment to my old work, to old ideas, to tired positions. Photography doesn't stand still.  For example: It took me far too long to fully embrace digital photography, thinking there was something special about film.  But when I did, I realised I couldn't carry on with the same mindset I had using film.

 

Again sorry - and one thing we can agree on - having to spend time staring at my Alamy work can be nothing but disagreeable.  Fot me, because most of it represents a position that I have relinquished.

 

All the best

 

Robert

[Ed Rooney]

Fair enough. Apology accepted.

 

I don't want to do anymore critiques nor have anyone critique me. The few times I jumped in on a newbie begging for comments, I wish I had not. 

 

More a metaphor that factual, I don't believe in creative writing classes.

 

What was it that guy said who used to put on plays about an hour north of me in Woodstock? Oh, "All's well that ends well." Enjoy your Sunday.

[Robert Brook]

"Enjoy your Sunday"

 

And you too, Ed

 

_________________________________________________

 

Added later:

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors,
As I foretold you, were all spirits, and
Are melted into air, into thin air;
And, like the baseless fabric of this vision,
The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces,
The solemn temples, the great globe itself,
Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve;
And, like this insubstantial pageant faded,
Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff
As dreams are made on, and our little life
Is rounded with a sleep. (The Tempest, IV.i.148–158)

[Linda]

They closed the bakery down today because of a rodent infestation. No kidding.   

Saw a NYC News story the other day about rats crawling all over the inside of the display cases at Dunkin Donuts. SOmeone did an iPhone video turned it over to the news and Board of Health.

Was that the same one?

L

[Linda]

 

Try making work like this in Oxfordshire.... the best commercial stock is old advertising - old adage. Original image from http://adsoftheworld.com/media/print/viaje_mais_magazine_usa

 

 

 

This looks even more photoshopped than a Vogue photo of Kim and Kanye

 

http://oystermag.com/kim-kanyes-vogue-photoshop-fail

 

I really love that cab shot.Is that a composite image? As for Kim and Kanye....they are so overcooked aren't they?  

L