Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Jill Morgan

How Is This an RM Sale?

Recommended Posts

Can someone tell me how this is an RM sale?

 

Country: Worldwide

Usage: iQ sale: Single company - multiple use editorial only
Industry sector: Education
Start: 24 March 2017

End: Unlimited

 

This is the second one I have had. Both are iQ sales.  I know there is special licensing with iQ, and you are usually selling to the company that owns the brand in the image, but sill, is this not RF? With multiple use and unlimited time, how could this be classified as RM?

 

Jill

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

iQ sale with a rather extended license (almost in perpetuity :D ) ,,, RM/editorial only as it may have included unreleased property/models etc. Just my view.

​Kumar, India
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see licenses like this one fairly often. They take the RM/RF hybrid idea a step farther.

 

I' d say that they are RF Editorial rather than RM -- i.e. they are RM in name only. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got an UK gardening magazine that uses my images regularly so I tend to browse through their weekly issue on shopping trips.  There's no fun finding one of my images only to realise they've used it before and that the use is covered by one of these IQ hybrid RM/RF licences.  It just seems like a relatively low cost way of building an image bank by the company involved.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And then there's the thread about RM/RF. What's the difference? I feel your outrage, Jill. As long as IQ is out there, we might as well list RF (editorial). I don't see much "hybrid" about it. If it smells like a skunk.....

 

Betty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And then there's the thread about RM/RF. What's the difference? I feel your outrage, Jill. As long as IQ is out there, we might as well list RF (editorial). I don't see much "hybrid" about it. If it smells like a skunk.....

 

Betty

 

I'm not really outraged, just don't see the point of RM if its going to be sold RF whether I mark it that way or not.

 

Jill

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Open forum. Isn't it better to discuss those issues directly with Alamy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And then there's the thread about RM/RF. What's the difference? I feel your outrage, Jill. As long as IQ is out there, we might as well list RF (editorial). I don't see much "hybrid" about it. If it smells like a skunk.....

 

Betty

 

I'm not really outraged, just don't see the point of RM if its going to be sold RF whether I mark it that way or not.

 

Jill

 

 

I suppose that there could be limitations imposed in the license's fine print on "multiple use" -- i.e. the allowable usage may not be as extensive as RF.

 

Is there such a thing as one-time multiple use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

And then there's the thread about RM/RF. What's the difference? I feel your outrage, Jill. As long as IQ is out there, we might as well list RF (editorial). I don't see much "hybrid" about it. If it smells like a skunk.....

 

Betty

 

I'm not really outraged, just don't see the point of RM if its going to be sold RF whether I mark it that way or not.

 

Jill

 

 

I suppose that there could be limitations imposed in the license's fine print on "multiple use" -- i.e. the allowable usage may not be as extensive as RF.

 

Is there such a thing as one-time multiple use?

 

 

I see the only restriction is editorial and education, so I suppose that is the only limitation. I still mull over whether to make a lot of my images RF, with a few exceptions.

 

Jill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jill, the RM license you refer to, is a response to market demand. I have had lots of them. I welcomed them, before I converted everything to RF or RF editorial only.

 
I think that RM license it is an argument for RF or RF editorial only, over RM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

And then there's the thread about RM/RF. What's the difference? I feel your outrage, Jill. As long as IQ is out there, we might as well list RF (editorial). I don't see much "hybrid" about it. If it smells like a skunk.....

 

Betty

 

I'm not really outraged, just don't see the point of RM if its going to be sold RF whether I mark it that way or not.

 

Jill

 

 

I suppose that there could be limitations imposed in the license's fine print on "multiple use" -- i.e. the allowable usage may not be as extensive as RF.

 

Is there such a thing as one-time multiple use?

 

 

I see the only restriction is editorial and education, so I suppose that is the only limitation. I still mull over whether to make a lot of my images RF, with a few exceptions.

 

Jill

 

 

Fortunately, these "unlimited" iQ sales are still the exception. I have two of them this month, but I also have a number of traditional book sales -- three over $100 -- with properly defined usage terms and duration. Conclusion: there is still a healthy market for traditional RM despite whatever market pressures there might be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Jill, the RM license you refer to, is a response to market demand. I have had lots of them. I welcomed them, before I converted everything to RF or RF editorial only.

 

I think that RM license it is an argument for RF or RF editorial only, over RM.

The market might demand completely free images, but does that mean they should be handed over for nothing?

 

There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Unfortunately Microstock agencies are a big part of this problem, and I worry that Alamy are going further and further down that road.

 

Geoff.

 

 

 

There is no line to draw. I am not talking about lower prices for RF. Take a closer look at any difference between RF and RM. It is not about price or terms. Today RF and RM are essentially the same thing to the photographer. However the client wants RF

 
This month I had a mix of RF and RM, with RF predominating. The RM were for sales in progress, when I converted everything to RF in February.
 
The prices for RF and RM this month were essentially the same.
 
Most of the RF sales had terms attached to them that were similar to the terms attached to the RM sales.
 
Here are a set of RM and RF sales on the same date, probably to the same client, with the same terms, at the same price.
 
Rights Managed Country: Worldwide
Usage: iQ sale: Single company - multiple use editorial only
Industry sector: Media, design & publishing
Start: 23 March 2017
Duration: Unlimited $ 129.00
 
Royalty-free Usage: iQ sale: Single company - multiple use editorial only
$ 129.00
 
Here is another set of RM and editorial RF on the same date, probably different clients.
 
Rights Managed Country: United States
Usage: Editorial
Media: Travel guides -print and/or e-book
Print run: up to 100,000
Placement: Inside
Image Size: 1/4 page
Start: 01 January 2017
End: 01 January 2020
Duration: 2 years. $ 60.00
 
Editorial royalty-free Country: Worldwide
Usage: Magazines, newsletters and books
52 MB
5200 x 3467 pixels
3 MB compressed
Start: 28 March 2017
End: 28 March 2022       $ 50
 
Here is a one off RF sale with no terms attached.
 
Editorial royalty-free 26 MB
3400 x 2719 pixels
2 MB compressed       $ 164.32 
 
This image was made Editorial royalty free, from RM, in February
 
I have had a mix of RF and RM for years, and prices and terms have always been in the same ball park for both RM or RF. The market demands RF. Why would you not give the client the RF they are asking for, if it means a higher volume of sales at the same prices, terms, and conditions?
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Jill, the RM license you refer to, is a response to market demand. I have had lots of them. I welcomed them, before I converted everything to RF or RF editorial only.

I think that RM license it is an argument for RF or RF editorial only, over RM.

 

The market might demand completely free images, but does that mean they should be handed over for nothing?

There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Unfortunately Microstock agencies are a big part of this problem, and I worry that Alamy are going further and further down that road.

Geoff.

 

 

There is no line to draw. I am not talking about lower prices for RF. Take a closer look at any difference between RF and RM. It is not about price or terms. Today RF and RM are essentially the same thing to the photographer. However the client wants RF

 

This month I had a mix of RF and RM, with RF predominating. The RM were for sales in progress, when I converted everything to RF in February.

 

The prices for RF and RM this month were essentially the same.

 

Most of the RF sales had terms attached to them that were similar to the terms attached to the RM sales.

 

Here are a set of RM and RF sales on the same date, probably to the same client, with the same terms, at the same price.

 

Rights Managed Country: Worldwide

Usage: iQ sale: Single company - multiple use editorial only

Industry sector: Media, design & publishing

Start: 23 March 2017

Duration: Unlimited $ 129.00

 

Royalty-free Usage: iQ sale: Single company - multiple use editorial only

$ 129.00

 

Here is another set of RM and editorial RF on the same date, probably different clients.

 

Rights Managed Country: United States

Usage: Editorial

Media: Travel guides -print and/or e-book

Print run: up to 100,000

Placement: Inside

Image Size: 1/4 page

Start: 01 January 2017

End: 01 January 2020

Duration: 2 years. $ 60.00

 

Editorial royalty-free Country: Worldwide

Usage: Magazines, newsletters and books

52 MB

5200 x 3467 pixels

3 MB compressed

Start: 28 March 2017

End: 28 March 2022       $ 50

 

Here is a one off RF sale with no terms attached.

 

Editorial royalty-free 26 MB

3400 x 2719 pixels

2 MB compressed       $ 164.32 

 

This image was made Editorial royalty free, from RM, in February

 

I have had a mix of RF and RM for years, and prices and terms have always been in the same ball park for both RM or RF. The market demands RF. Why would you not give the client the RF they are asking for, if it means a higher volume of sales at the same prices, terms, and conditions?

+1. Can't argue with that.

I'm a cat that's used up a few of my 9 lives, but one thing I believe in is this.

Nothing is set in stone.

What was the norm yesterday isn't necessarily the norm today.

Everything pretty much is fluid, and I must be willing to put a finger on the pulse of today, not yesterday.

 

Sometimes things change for the worse, and I can't roll back the clock to those glory days. I must live in the here and now, and adjust to it the best I can. I need to quit pining for those frequent $180-200+ sales. They can be had, just not as often.

Betty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Sometimes things change for the worse, and I can't roll back the clock to those glory days. I must live in the here and now, and adjust to it the best I can. I need to quit pining for those frequent $180-200+ sales. They can be had, just not as often."

 

Let's not forget that we (human beings) create the future by our actions in the here and now.

 

Pollute the air, and future generations will have to breathe our shortsightedness.

 

BTW, this month I had three of those elusive $180+ RM book sales that you mention. Not the norm these days, I admit, but...

Edited by John Mitchell

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • 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.