KODAKovic Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 Just wondering how many of you gave a try to RF instead of RM. I mean, did you try some batch of pictures like RF after a long time of RM? Any increase of revenues? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinS Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 Leaving all mine as RM. I guess that makes me a luddite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jill Morgan Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 I changed a few, but its way to early to notice any change in revenues. Jill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KODAKovic Posted March 24, 2017 Author Share Posted March 24, 2017 I'm asking because i read here someone made $300 from a single RF file! I guessed that was only possible with RM and also Alamy suggests to use RF where possible (for i.e. RF editorial) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 I have a pseudo with about 250 images devoted to "design" images -- backgrounds, textures, abstracts, etc. These images don't sell well (huge competition), but I really enjoy this type of photography. I've switched almost all of them to RF to see if it makes any difference (none so far). However, my main collection will remain RM, with a handful of exceptions. RM is still more editorial photographer-friendly IMO. For example, three "print-run extensions" showed up this month in my sales history. Had the images been RF, I would have missed out on this extra revenue, which was fairly good. In short, I'll be flying my RM flag for as long as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 Like JohnM, most of my snaps are RM. I've changed all my at-home cooked food pics to RF. No dramatic events have happened because of that. Piano piano, va bene? RF or RM, this past year has been my best with Alamy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 Stayed with almost entirely RM Kumar (the Doc one) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KODAKovic Posted March 24, 2017 Author Share Posted March 24, 2017 Ed, "benne" is with just one "n" so "bene" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KODAKovic Posted March 24, 2017 Author Share Posted March 24, 2017 My first impression when Alamy suggested this change was they could potentially give less revenues to contributors with RF but actually to be honest Alamy seems to be the agency which pays the most expensive RFs among the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotoDogue Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 I had a $300 RM license last year and a couple of $250 RM licenses this year. I don't see a reason to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 Like JohnM, most of my snaps are RM. I've changed all my at-home cooked food pics to RF. No dramatic events have happened because of that. Piano piano, va benne? RF or RM, this past year has been my best with Alamy. I've changed most of my food shots to RM editorial (no home cookin' on my limited menu). No bites or even nibbles to report yet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betty LaRue Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 I'm changing over quite a few to RF. I think 6 months down the road I'll understand if that's wise. No big deal to change some of them back if it's not working. The unknown always teases me. Better to test it than always wonder if the boat sailed without me. Betty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niels Quist Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 Stayed with almost entirely RM +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arletta Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 Why would I change something good into opposite? For me RM works better than RF. No point in changing that... Becase any agency gave us the option? So what? Gladly I still can decide what's best for my business. Besides, I've said it many times - I find no answer why RF could be good for authors. And yes, it can (but doesn't have to) be good for SOME clients. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 Staying put. Last month I finally got a distributor payment for an RF image I'd found which had been unreported since 2013. $1.92 net. Should I have got the 2013 price? No point even asking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KODAKovic Posted March 25, 2017 Author Share Posted March 25, 2017 I imagine niche images could sell for higher RM prices with no problems. May be some others more popular than the above will never sell as RM , may be they could sell RF (micro?) or it's probably better delete them completely. I agree with some people who are stating deleting some pics which don't grab enough attention could improve selling of the entire portfolio. So, i'd like to have a higher RPI .. if RM doesn't permit this , it may be better to switch some pics to RF or delete them (at least from Alamy). Just my 2 cents obviously... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 Ed, "benne" is with just one "n" so "bene" Grazie. I do speak Italian, and I've been known to misspell words and make typos in English too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KODAKovic Posted March 25, 2017 Author Share Posted March 25, 2017 Jeff, i understood that you can sell RM (not necessarily exclusive) every image that never sold as RF elsewhere. If you have unsold RF images in other agencies you could sell them here --that's the way many micro contributors sell here as RM and RF elsewhere (same images) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Brooks Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 ...gave a try to RF instead of RM... My not-a-lawyer understanding, any image licensed as RF can NEVER again be offered as RM exclusive...? I may shoot new RF, may never switch any RM to RF. Any reasonable RM $$ vs. RF $$ comparison related to switching must involve thousands of images switched that have afterwards spent multiple years both as RM & then RF & assumes limited market morphing during that overall period...? (A STATISTICALLY RESPONSIBLE CONTRIBUTOR WON'T HAVE IT ANY OTHER WAY!!!) My good RM news: exclusive tradebook cover this month licensed for $475 net My not-as-good RM news: ~120K other RM images this year did NOT yet license for $475 net or more... The only way you will ever know is to submit everything as RF for the next 2 years, and then do a comparison with the RM part of your portfolio. I think my switch of the RM part of my portfolio to RF will be to my financial advantage. I think the calculated risk in switching will pay off. It seems that the line between RF and RM becomes more indistinct every day, so your concerns about RF/RM conflicts may not be valid. Make it a fair RF test, do not be a RM snob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nacke Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 I have no use for RF, I've been that way for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Bell Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 I have no use for RF, I've been that way for years. +1 Problem is RM seems to be the new RF. Allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin P Wilson Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 I have no use for RF, I've been that way for years. +1 Problem is RM seems to be the new RF. Allan At least with RM there is some pretence at managing usage In many cases there is actually control and even repeat usage fees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 I have no use for RF, I've been that way for years. +1 Problem is RM seems to be the new RF. Allan At least with RM there is some pretence at managing usage In many cases there is actually control and even repeat usage fees. I had three "print run extensions" show up this month. Wouldn't have happened with RF. Sometimes it pays to be a snob. That said, RF makes sense for some types of images. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Yarvin Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 In answer to the very original question at the top of this thread; I started submitting images as RF back in 2002. It didn't take long for me to realize that I needed to have a steady stream of images going into both models in order to maximize my revenues. I find that I need to be looking at how buyers in my areas of specialty are searching and how many dollars per year each image I put out there is generating. When it comes to the work I do, individual sales amounts are meaningless. It all adds up - or doesn't - based on how well I engage the market, not on the amount of one or two big (and unpredictable) sales. My target market uses a bit of everything and every price point, I want to be there for every customer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nacke Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 John and all, Being a "snob" has nothing to do with RM VS RF. It is just business, good business VS bad business, for the photographer, Image creator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.