Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Thanks Matt, that was a great read and I am really looking forward to it. 

 

Not "between the lines" but between the lines ;) there is also a release date for the new contributor tools for September. 

My abstinence uf uploading and keywording is about to come to an end ... YEAH!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Not "between the lines" but between the lines ;) there is also a release date for the new contributor tools for September. 

 

 

Yes, I noticed that too. I'm not sure it's quire how they intended to announce a release date for the new contributor tools but seems they've let the cat out of the bag now!  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Not "between the lines" but between the lines ;) there is also a release date for the new contributor tools for September. 

 

 

Yes, I noticed that too. I'm not sure it's quire how they intended to announce a release date for the new contributor tools but seems they've let the cat out of the bag now!  :)

 

Still its out in the public now, I have been waiting for these nearly since they initially annonced them. 

I hoped for an earlier release and not to upload and keyword is really becoming a pain now

Almost too many pictures in my queue now, I would hardly like to wait any longer. 

Edited by hdh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like a big improvement. I found the old restrictions system to be very cumbersome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like a big improvement. I found the old restrictions system to be very cumbersome.

 

fully agree with the understatement ;) - as I do with the improvement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes enormous sense. It will be a big help when accreditation to sport and other events only permits me to use resulting images for editorial purposes.

 

Unless I am specifically constrained by accreditation or other agreements I will still leave most pictures to the discretion of the client. I will be honest about model and property releases and clients can decide for themselves whether they have the clearances they need for their particular use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Looks like a big improvement. I found the old restrictions system to be very cumbersome.

 

fully agree with the understatement ;) - as I do with the improvement

 

 

I was trying to be a nice Canadian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds good and simple. However how would one set a restriction on 'Sensitive Issues'?

For example, in the case of an image of a child, I wouldn't mind it being used as editorial but not if it's a sensitive issue.

How will this be done? Presumably I would have to ask Alamy to do it manually?

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a welcome change.  It would also be useful to have more clarity on when/if setting restrictions will have an impact on distribution sales.  For example, setting a restriction blocking personal use, which will not impact distributor sales, might be a no-brainer, but if the image(s) will no longer be available for distribution, it would be good to know so that the pros and cons can be weighed appropriately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way under this new system to block sensitive uses. For those of us who shoot any lifestyle images, this is a huge problem. Alamy already made it so that you couldn't have RF lifestyle if you wanted to restrict sensitive use, now this will also be the case for RM images. All the micro sites specifically restrict sensitive uses in their terms of service. I guess I may be moving my lifestyle images. This is really disappointing and not the way, IMHO, an RM site should work. You also can't just restrict a certain industry which again is the benefit of RM and being able to set specific restrictions is the reason some people are comfortable modeling for RM images. I'm really unhappy with this.

 

Meantime, I don't see anything about RF editorial which they've been promising for months. As an American, it makes sense for me to put my newsworthy photos on the micros and/or on other higher priced sites that are solely RF as well as on Alamy, and I've been looking forward to this change. 

 

Very disappointed. 

Edited by Marianne
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Looks like a big improvement. I found the old restrictions system to be very cumbersome.

 

fully agree with the understatement ;) - as I do with the improvement

 

 

I was trying to be a nice Canadian.

 

No need to try. It's innate. :)

No harm in practising, though.

Edited by spacecadet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am also concerned that it looks as though I will not be able to add a restriction for "sensitive issues".  This is something I often do for model released images of the younger members of my family if they can be identified.  I shall write to Alamy to find out what can be done about this.

Although I agree that the present situation is cumbersome, simplification can be overdone I think.

 

Pearl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I welcome the addition of the end date and the simplified options, I am very disappointed that the existing options will be removed. I regularly sell exclusive licenses to buyers direct and though specialist agency. If I sell an exclusive license for greetings cards in the US I will no longer be able to offer that same image for any consumer goods anywhere in the world on Alamy. Likewise an exclusive magazine cover in the UK will exclude it from any editorial sales in the world.The blanket block on consumer goods is especially frustrating as the types of images I exclusively license are the sort of images that can go onto sell for wall art, calendars etc.

 

I think Alamy are throwing the out the baby with the bath water here. The new options are a great time saver, but the existing options must still remain.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally have never added any restrictions so no problems there....but what I would like, as mentioned by many others, is a simple opt out of personal use...how difficult can that be?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have some model released images that are not to be used for 'sensitive issues'.  Does this mean I will have to remove them, or will there be a 'sensitive issues' restriction? While I love that the restrictions are being simplified, IMO the sensitive issues one would still be required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, in agreement with the 'sensitive issues' argument. Generally, I think that the changes are positive, as the system was unnecessarily complex, but I may be having to drop a few images, if the sensitive issues option can't be allowed for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand the need, and the challenge, but surely the sensitive issues restriction was pretty ineffective in the old version? Indeed many complained that restrictions generally were largely ineffective in many, if not most, cases.

 

To properly manage sensitive issue usage the photographer has to manage it themself, only they know what is, or is not, acceptable under the terms of the sensitive issues agreement with the subject. Expecting a largely automated sales process to get it right in all cases is a triumph of hope over experience.

 

For the majority of purposes i would suggest this new approach is a big step forward. When designing processes (part of my background) one should design for the commonplace to maximise efficiency and then treat exceptions separately. Perhaps Alamy's mass marketplace is not the place for images that have sensitive image restrictions?

Edited by Martin P Wilson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I welcome the change and simplification but will have to remove a couple hundred images I have restricted based on geography.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I welcome the change and simplification but will have to remove a couple hundred images I have restricted based on geography.

The geographic restriction change is a problem for me as well. Once I found one of my well paying existing clients found my work on Alamy where they could license for a fraction of what I was getting I started blocking specific images from the US where my client is.

 

I have also been using the geographic restrictions when I found copyright infringements to block infringers from simply buying a low budget Alamy license post theft. Following up on copyright infringements with Alamy has been really, really difficult since we have to find image uses online on our own, then wait a couple months to see if an image has been licensed, then check with Alamy to see if all the uses are legit.

 

There are other potential issues that arise now too, like how copyright is handled in different countries- statues in the US, the lighting on the Eiffel Tower in France and that sort of thing. 

 

I just switched to restricting all of my images from the US and UK and will eventually see whether fewer direct sales will be better than more small Alamy sales. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, so I ended up opting to restrict all images from a given region as is now required from Alamy. Yesterday I got a panicked e-mail and phone follow up by somebody who had used an image once and wanted to use it again. In fact they had placed the image and their publication was going to press. 

 

Hi, Michael.

 
I already sent a request through the form. We need to purchase rights to XXXX which we've already used in a brochure produced for us by XXXXXXXXXX. That company bought the rights for use in the brochure through Alamy. We'd like to use it again, in our XXXXXXX, but the site now says it is unavailable, with no further explanation. 
 
We've already laid out the magazine with this image on one of the pages. We simply want to pay you and credit the image accordingly. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. The magazine is scheduled to go to press TODAY. The editor thought that our department had rights through the XXXXXXXXXXX usage, but apparently that's not the case.
 
Please call or email me as soon as you read this. I hoped to call you directly, but there's no phone number at your website, and Alamy wouldn't give us one.
 
Thanks!
 
XXXXX
 
Somehow I think there has to be a better way for all involved. Personally I'd rather Alamy or somebody else handle all this stuff and I can spend more time photographing.
 
(BTW, I XXXXX'd any personal details from the client's email and obviously they figured out my phone number as I got a call a few minutes after this arrived.)
  • Upvote 1

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.