Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Philippe, Alamy sent us an email about DACS that included the number of licenses that qualified. Did the amount they sent you seem about right according to your records? Some people have reported a big difference between what they thought they had and what Alamy said.

 

Paulette

Edited by NYCat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also noticed my DACS' payment in my Alamy Account Balance: $ 146.64  :o 

So DACS' payment to Alamy should have been  $ 293.28. Isn't that a bit low with 30,000+ images (all RM) and several sales per day? I'm asking because it seems VERY low compared to what others received with far lesser stock.

 

A little comparison:

 

Me (Important note: those are $ which Alamy was paid by DACS)

  •  $ 293.28 with 30,000 images (that's about £ 230)

Others (Important note: those are £ AND form submitted directly to DACS):

  • £62 for about 12 uses
  • £345 with 8,000 images (that's about $ 539)
  • £271 with 10,000 images (that's more than I have with 1/3 amount of stock)
  • £259 with 6,700 images

........?  :huh:  :huh:   :huh:

 

Cheers,

Philippe

 

Humm yeah, seems a little on the light side. I think that £259 was mine at the end ($404).

 

edit. Ask Alamy to provide a copy of the application?!? I can't think  of any reason why they wouldn't provide it, I'm sure they'd be happy to help/explain.

Edited by Duncan_Andison

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Phillipe

One explanation could be % of sales to UK Books and Magazines I suppose. Are your sales mainly in that market or not?

Also.... did alamy submit for all your sales from year 1 with alamy or just 2013 because Dacs pay out for all your sales from all years. That may be a question to ask of Alamy.

Mine are from accumulative sales from 2008. Also others you have quoted may have got accumulative sales from many many years back. Don't forget that they may have claims for photos licenced via other agencies. How long have you been making sales with alamy?

Kevin

Hi Kevin,

 

I'm with Alamy since 25 Aug 2009. An explanation - as you suggested - could be that indeed those who contacted DACS directly, also claimed images licenced via other agengies.

Anyway, I just contacted MS about this.

 

Edit to add: from another British agency I received last year £185 (my 50% share of £370 or about $ 470) with ................ only 4500 images on-line.

Seems a bit weird:

  • Alamy with                    30,000 images on-line   >> DACS payment $293
  • other UK agency with     4,500 images on-line   >> DACS payment $470

:wacko::blink:

 

Cheers,

Philippe

 

 

Yes, this is true. I claimed for direct sales as well as others from other agencies and not just sales from Alamy.... It sounds like a logical explanation and I'm sure MS will be able to clarify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also noticed my DACS' payment in my Alamy Account Balance: $ 146.64  :o 

So DACS' payment to Alamy should have been  $ 293.28. 

 

Alamys email to contributors about payments indicated that the amount paid to photographers (who use Alamy to get DACS payments) would be 50/50 after Alamy have recovered costs, therefore, the amount paid to photographers would be less than 50% of the original total received for DACS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 the amount paid to photographers (who use Alamy to get DACS payments) would be 50/50 after Alamy have recovered costs, 

I thought an agent's costs came out of his commission, not the photographer's.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too wonder about their math. They said they were claiming on my behalf for around 300 uses. Never claimed DACS before. $267 USD in my account. So I get less than a $1 per use?? Kinda thought it would be a bit higher. Why would clients even bother paying in the first place? Just pay the DACS and screw us all.

Wow, that seems low - as does Philippe's payback.  I would certainly be interested in the admin costs Alamy charged - it must have been substantial.

I claimed directly for 34 eligible licenses (although I had 94 in total that I couldn't confirm due to the lack of RF info), and got $179 CAD.

Maybe next year Alamy will give us more info with which to claim for RF sales to avoid their high admin costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<p>I traced back my 2013 RM sales and counted only the following licenses:</p>

<ul class="bbc">

<li><strong>Region</strong>: UK / worldwide / English language</li>

<li><strong>Usage</strong>: book / magazine</li>

</ul>

<p>Result: 155 eligible licenses<i> (could be slightly less due to some refunds)</i></p>

<p> </p>

<p>According to my calculations of $/image (<em>based on how many <span style="color:rgb(57,56,57);"><span style="font-family:Arial;">eligible licenses I counted and</span></span> what Alamy received from DACS</em>) I can only conclude that it's a fraction of what some of you received directly from DACS (<em>based on the information some of you revealed</em>).<br />

<br />

So, or my (<em>or Alamy's</em>) counting of <span style="color:rgb(57,56,57);"><span style="font-family:Arial;">eligible licenses</span></span> is incorrect. Or there's a high administration cost involved.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Another little comparison: Alamy received $1.9/image for my claim (so I got $0.95/image) compared to $4.5/image and even $6.5/image which others received. </p>

<p><br />

<br />

Cheers,<br />

Philippe</p>

It might be the combination of those possibilities. It has to be in a UK publication; I don't believe a worldwide publication by a US publisher counts. From my small number of qualifying licenses it would appear that Alamy only counted licenses in which the "region" is UK (in the last column of the spreadsheet) and I claimed accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't look like I'm going to win a prize for the most eloquent quote :) 

Not sure what went wrong there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't look like I'm going to win a prize for the most eloquent quote :)

Not sure what went wrong there.

 

Look at the content: you are quoting a post which has since been edited, (the section in between the last but one paragraph tags - <p>...</p>).  Perhaps you were writing your post while Philippe was editing his?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Looking up the August thread about DACS, am I correct that I could have claimed not only the 2013 sales but all those from when I started with Alamy (2009)?

 

This is from the DACS website...

"You can claim for any artwork or photograph that has appeared in a UK book or magazine up until the end of the previous year, so long as you own the copyright. There is no backward limit to when the work needs to have been published – you can claim for artwork published three years ago, thirty years ago or more. It also doesn’t matter if it is one work appearing in one book, or thousands of works appearing in thousands of books. You are still entitled to a share of the royalties."

 

 

That would be A LOT more than the 155 licenses I counted just for 2013 :huh:

I have the feeling I'm missing out on a lot of money.

 

Cheers,

Philippe

Yes, all allowed sales since you started...

It's only RF sales that cause an issue. If you are all RM then not claiming for yourself is a spectacular own goal. There's no way I would allow one of my agencies to claim above their commission rate, Just asking for this kind of thread to appear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Looking up the August thread about DACS, am I correct that I could have claimed not only the 2013 sales but all those from when I started with Alamy (2009)?

 

This is from the DACS website...

"You can claim for any artwork or photograph that has appeared in a UK book or magazine up until the end of the previous year, so long as you own the copyright. There is no backward limit to when the work needs to have been published – you can claim for artwork published three years ago, thirty years ago or more. It also doesn’t matter if it is one work appearing in one book, or thousands of works appearing in thousands of books. You are still entitled to a share of the royalties."

 

 

That would be A LOT more than the 155 licenses I counted just for 2013 :huh:

I have the feeling I'm missing out on a lot of money.

 

Cheers,

Philippe

Yes, all allowed sales since you started...

It's only RF sales that cause an issue. If you are all RM then not claiming for yourself is a spectacular own goal. There's no way I would allow one of my agencies to claim above their commission rate, Just asking for this kind of thread to appear.

 

 

Thanks, Geoff.

 

Oh boy! Seems my weak moment of laziness has costed me a lot of money. Don't dare to trace back all those eligible licenses and calculate what I could have earned.

Can't wait to hear what Alamy has to say to this.

 

Edit to add: I just took the time to count my eligible licenses from 2010 till the end of 2013: 329 (took care of refunds) multiplied by an average of $ 4.00/image that would make .......$1,316.

I received 146.64 from Alamy  :wacko:

 

Cheers,

Philippe

 

 

Not sure where your average comes from but as far as averages are concerned they do not mean a lot with DACS as payments are made on bands not exact numbers so for example 301 magazine sales gets you the same share as 1200 magazine sales.  

However looking at some averages which may have a limited meaning DACS paid out just under £5 million for 23,000 claims which gives an average claim of about  £217.

You had 329 pictures to claim for which puts you round about the middle of the claims bands.  No idea if that means you would get the exactly the average or not but I think it suggests that your figure of $1316 is quite a bit higher than you could reasonably expect.  I have not checked the exact conversion but I think this figure is higher than I got for a far higher usage number.

Yes you would have got more by claiming yourself but no-where near the sort of figure you are looking at.

 

Chris Burrows

Edited by Chris Burrows

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whats DACS lol am i missing out on something

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You almost certaily are if you have made UK book or magazine sales. Do a search.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks Alamy for collecting and depositing my DACS money in my account on Dec 19. I would rather be taking pictures than fill out another government form.

 

I am also having a good December saleswise. Thanks for the best commission split of any major stock photo library in the industry.

 

Alamy's offer on DACS was a great deal for me because I get money, and I have to do nothing.

 

In business or life you have to leave a benefit on the table for your partners. Otherwise you have neither a business, a life, or a partner.

 

It is called sharing.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phillipe.

 

If you had max mag and book sales in max no of books and mags and had claimed direct from DACs then your payout this year would have been around £700. Two years ago it would have been around £900.  As Dacs continue to collect more revenue year on year and continue to reduce their own expenses this may well be the direct effect of all these agencies jumping on the band wagon and receiving a considerable amount from the DACs pot.

 

Alamy did state that they would payout 50% minus their expenses (which they have not chosen to declare) None of my other agencies take more than 50% so I consider the Alamy deal to be poor value but unfortunately the DACS rules being what they are preclude me from making a claim on my Alamy sales as I already make max claims in my own right  so I accept 159 dollars from alamy rather than nothing!

 

With regard to amount per sale due to the DACS banding favouring the lower bands this figure drops considerably as you move through the bands.

 

Regen

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason I am apparently "moaning" is that my amount is rather low (judging the private mails I received, others seem to think so as well) compared to the data I mentioned in my previous posts. Especially compared to the amount I received last year via another UK agency where I have only 4,500 images online.

 

Phillipe,

 

Hopefully by now you'll realise from losdemas' post that this has nothing to do with the number of images you hold in the library. Nor is it explicitly linked to the number of images sold. The categories and bands are critical in determining your payout, and as Regen states the amount per band fluctuates each year depending on the amount of the total pot, expenses of DACS, and most importantly the number of claimants. With each qualifying claimant receiving a minimum of £25 you can easily see that a huge influx of claimants with only 1-2 sales is going to significantly reduce the pot for those in the higher bands.

 

You say that this is business, rather than benefit, but it is business you have not taken the time to understand, and have handed off the responsibility for to a 3rd party. Just as you can't complain if one of your stock images is licenced for $6.14 you can't complain about what you are given by DACS (and then reduced by commission from Alamy).

 

The payback amount comprises of fees gained based on secondary reproduction of already licenced works through photocopying in libraries and other means but calculated at a very high level. It is entirely possible that none of your images were reproduced as part of the payback pot. You have to treat it as a Christmas time bonus - Payback could cease at any point - irrespective of any number of sales you make or have made in the past.

Edited by Mike@Meonshore
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 With each qualifying claimant receiving a minimum of £25 you can easily see that a huge influx of claimants with only 1-2 sales is going to significantly reduce the pot for those in the higher bands.

 

Though you do need a minimum of 3 ISBN'd  books and/or ISSN'd mags to qualify for anything at all.....

 

km

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might help folk by linking again to the useful post by Jools from last year on DACS payback thresholds?

It certainly does, thanks, I'd missed that.

Looks like I went up a band this year, but the next one is much further away so if I stay in it presumably I'll find out what the variation is from year to year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, I'm still waiting and beginning to get concerned that I didn't click 'send' or something. Anybody else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, I'm still waiting and beginning to get concerned that I didn't click 'send' or something. Anybody else?

 

I had this happen a few years back, I went from Cheque to BACS but they had recorded my account details incorrectly and it got paid in a the sweep up tranche in late Jan/Feb, after I checked in with them and corrected it.

 

Might be worth popping an email in, although as we are very close to Christmas it might be worth trying again from 5th Jan.

 

If you successfully claimed then you will get paid. If you didn't hit submit then you'll have to wait until next year now as the money will already have been allocated. You should have an email confirmation from them if your claim was received.

Edited by Mike@Meonshore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Right, I'm still waiting and beginning to get concerned that I didn't click 'send' or something. Anybody else?

 

I had this happen a few years back, I went from Cheque to BACS but they had recorded my account details incorrectly and it got paid in a the sweep up tranche in late Jan/Feb, after I checked in with them and corrected it.

 

Might be worth popping an email in, although as we are very close to Christmas it might be worth trying again from 5th Jan.

 

If you successfully claimed then you will get paid. If you didn't hit submit then you'll have to wait until next year now as the money will already have been allocated. You should have an email confirmation from them if your claim was received.

 

 

I had that once, I'd changed banks, and they had the wrong details and payment got returned. Give them a ring and check they have the right account details

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, I'm still waiting and beginning to get concerned that I didn't click 'send' or something. Anybody else?

I'm still waiting (in the U.S., applied myself, not through Alamy). I did receive a form e-mail from DACs a week or so back saying to expect payment by Christmas, so I must have clicked 'send,' but there's not a lot of time left...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My payment came a while ago but today I got a letter in the mail stating how much I got etc. but there is also a form called "Certificate of deduction of income tax".  Do I need to do anything with this?  It looks like the WTH was deducted.  I'm in the US.  I don't think they should be deducting anything, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My payment came a while ago but today I got a letter in the mail stating how much I got etc. but there is also a form called "Certificate of deduction of income tax".  Do I need to do anything with this?  It looks like the WTH was deducted.  I'm in the US.  I don't think they should be deducting anything, right?

 

I received my payment a couple of weeks ago plus a followup letter in the mail yesterday. No taxes were withheld; however, I'm in Canada. I've heard from other US photographers that DACS withholds 20% from you guys. Don't know why that should be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • 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.