marc Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 I want to start editing down some of my images. I was thinking of moving some photos which I judge are weaker or less viable to another pseudonym. Is this a good strategy? If not, what would forum members suggest? Thanks for any input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 I only have two pseudynoms, the main and a junk heap. The junk heap is used to house images during the protracted deletion process, i.e. when I decide that I have a better version or I want to cull similars. If I replace an image with an almost identical lookalike (maybe better light) I normally ask MS to delete the earlier image, and explain that its replacement has now arrived, but most deletions go through the normal procedure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 It's hard to see the difference between these two images with the Alamy watermark where it is. But they are the same image. I clean up the tomato sauce drip that you see on the original image on the right. The one on the right sold, the other has not, not yet. Since I'm just shooting for stock now, not for art or for assignments, I have two "rules." I shoot only what I like the look of and what I can immediately think of a caption for. Oh, and what is possible for me to capture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 I created a secondary pseudo mainly for organizational purposes -- i.e. I wanted to separate my travel-related images from my more general ones. However, it has been suggested in previous conversations that putting seriously "underperforming" images in another pseudonym is a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 It's hard to see the difference between these two images with the Alamy watermark where it is. But they are the same image. I clean up the tomato sauce drip that you see on the original image on the right. The one on the right sold, the other has not, not yet. Since I'm just shooting for stock now, not for art or for assignments, I have two "rules." I shoot only what I like the look of and what I can immediately think of a caption for. Oh, and what is possible for me to capture. I can't even see the tomato drip that you mentioned, which I'm finding a bit worrying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 LOL, yeah -- almost impossible to see. I'll put up the thumbnails in a bit, where it's easier to see the drip. My point (if I have one) is we know what sold last month/year but we don't know what will sell next. Here you go: Okay, they went for the imperfection. I thought the little piece of bread was imperfection enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc Posted December 27, 2014 Author Share Posted December 27, 2014 Thanks for the posts, guys. I think I will start moving some less compelling images into a pseudo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 Finally spotted Edo's edit this morning, I clearly need new specs! Not sure how to treat some markets, where there is steady demand, but lots of competition. Is it better to have plenty of choice available, or only your strongest images? Tending towards the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 Don't think it's your specs, Bryan -- even I can't clearly see the diff in the side-by-side eggplant rollatini (called involtini di melanzane in Rome). It's more useful to understand how designers/buyers pick images. They have a space they need to fill, a point they need to illustrate. They may also want to match or contrast a color, project reality or romanticism. The next bunch of buyers' needs are vast and unknown. In this matter I am an agnostic. Oh oh, I'm off subject again, so let me close by saying I don't use pseudos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 Finally spotted Edo's edit this morning, I clearly need new specs! Not sure how to treat some markets, where there is steady demand, but lots of competition. Is it better to have plenty of choice available, or only your strongest images? Tending towards the latter. Think I would need an electron microscope to see the tomato-drip edit. I'm lousy at pixel-peeking, it seems. Personally, I feel that it is better to have more choice available for high-demand markets (e.g. textbooks). I continue to be surprised by sales of images that I never thought would move. Also, I imagine that many buyers turn to Alamy because they can find photos here that no one else has -- i.e. that probably would have been rejected by edited agencies. What I think are my "best" or favourite shots are seldom the ones that lease. It's all very subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Bell Posted December 29, 2014 Share Posted December 29, 2014 John said, "I imagine that many buyers turn to Alamy because they can find photos here that no one else has -- i.e. that probably would have been rejected by edited agencies." That is why I think Alamy should up their game with regard to the prices they charge per image. Allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dlmphotog Posted December 29, 2014 Share Posted December 29, 2014 Marc, I have separated my collection into 27 pseudonyms that reflect geographical locations and subjects. Such as people with model releases, items shot in a studio, subjects relating to healthcare or photos taken in Spain... The reason I segregated my images this way was to track various locations and subjects and in an effort to keep a poor preforming pseudonym from polluting the rest. I have not tried to separate “good” images from “bad” as experience has shown me many of my “bad” images do sell. Editing IS important but I do that before I submit images to Alamy. Happy New Year! David L. Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc Posted December 30, 2014 Author Share Posted December 30, 2014 Thanks for that feedback David I have not yet reached 1000 images. When I get to your 19000 I will probably need to do exactly what you have done. Not least to keep myself organised. It is not so much about "bad" images. have some images that are really not commercial for stock. Rather than delete them, I would like to move them to another pseudo so they are not dragging down the CTR on my collection. In the event that they might sell, I would rather keep them available. to see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dlmphotog Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Marc, I should have not use the good/bad example. I think it wise to segregate your images by whatever criteria you choose as long as you keep all your images online ready for a sale… David L. Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betty LaRue Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 I believe Edo posted his comparison pictures to make us all run to the phone to make an eye exam appointment. He is getting kickbacks from the Ophthamology and Optomitrist associations. He's making enough at this that he no longer needs to be in the stock game. You notice he said he's not been shooting lately. Betty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I'm sorry, Betty, I'm having trouble reading your post -- can't you use a larger font? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynn Palmer Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I had an eye exam just a few months ago, I'm wearing new glasses and despite looking at the images three times I still can't see the drip...there's no hope for me! As for pseudos, I have one for some Mexico images taken with an older APC sensor camera. They passed QC but I've never been comfortable with their quality so I segregated the images. If they don't start selling soon I'm going to have them deleted. I also keep a "Delete" pseudo for duplicate images, images I want to replace, or that I think aren't worth keeping. Aside from that I have no plans for more pseudos since I'm still unable to accurately judge what will or won't sell. I am becoming a little more careful about what I upload but I hesitate to remove many. So far I feel maybe 50% of the few images that licensed were strong images but the remainder almost were't uploaded at all because of concerns the subject wasn't in high demand or appropriate. I haven't made enough sales yet to judge which are keepers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 LOL "I had an eye exam just a few months ago, I'm wearing new glasses and despite looking at the images three times I still can't see the drip...there's no hope for me!" -- Lynn Okay, ladies -- it looks like I'm the only viable visible drip around here. "Aside from that I have no plans for more pseudos since I'm still unable to accurately judge what will or won't sell. I am becoming a little more careful about what I upload but I hesitate to remove many." -- Lynn Yeah. I see no reason to believe in any of the "logic" most of our sales theorist put forth. What sold last month or last year does not necessarily mean those subjects will sell next month or next year. We just have to be sharks and keep moving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynn Palmer Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I guess you're just a perfectionist Ed, or your glasses are better than mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCat Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I had an eye exam just a few months ago, I'm wearing new glasses and despite looking at the images three times I still can't see the drip...there's no hope for me! The secret is to stop looking for it on the plate. I did that for a very long time. It is on the eggplant. Well, now I guess I've spoiled the fun. Paulette Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynn Palmer Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Thank you, I see it now Paulette, but I think that small amount of the delectable tomato sauce dribbling over the edge of the eggplant makes the food even more appealing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 That seems to be what the buyer thought too, Lynn. I can't recall now what point I was trying to make when I posted those two shots. I'll have to read back over the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynn Palmer Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Either way it's a nice shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Thanks . . . it was tasty, too. And look at this using the trick Paulette just discovered -- a clear view of drips! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betty LaRue Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Yes, I was also looking for the drip on the plate, not the food itself. When I put something in the plate, the mess is always from the side I serve from. Naughty, naughty, Edo. One thing for sure, you had us studying your image for more than the usual time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.