Jump to content

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Colblimp said:

 

I worry I'm missing out on sales by keeping all my images as RM, or am I worrying over nothing?!

 

To complicate things further, the biggest mistake you can make when starting out in RF is to consider RF the minor leagues, or a different market, and choose weak or different images for RF.

 

I would suggest that if you are seriously considering RF, then leave your present RM as RM but shoot RF exclusively for 18 months.  6 months to get RF sales started, and then a further years shooting to evaluate. After 18 months evaluate your RF sales going back one year verses your RM. NO cheating !! No matter how wonderful an image is, it goes into RF during that 18 months.

 

If RF does not work out for you, then convert any RF images that have not sold as pure RF, back to RM.

 

The new AIM makes the transition of old RM to RF easy for the photographer, where previously it was impossible unless you deleted RM and then reuploaded the same images as RF. I think that ease of transition speaks volumes about where Alamy thinks the market is going.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

Or as an alternative to Bill's 18 months experiment you could check through the various images sold threads on here and see which type of licence is being bought. 

 

You could even do a comparison with a thread 12 or 18 months ago and see if there have been any significant changes. 

 

Another idea is to look through the 'How was last month' threads and see who is doing best and what image licence they favour. Or Alamy's $100,000 club blog and again check the favoured licence. 

The trouble with that premise is that nearly all reporting in those threads are uploading RM only, or have a very small RF presence. No way would that give anything close to a true comparison.

When you consider the very strong presence of RM shooters on Alamy....well.....not to say the day when RF has a large presence it will come out on top, but methinks it will (would) stand up.

Bill’s statement that there is no true test if one simply goes through the port they have and change the dogs to RF has significance. There needs to be equal competition between equally good images.

Betty

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Stokie said:

 

My second best seller, in terms of numbers, has been a repeat RM seller, all used in the Sun newspaper.

 

John.

 

If you changed it to RF, it wouldn't surprise me if it was snapped up pretty quickly and the (one off) RF price would be lower than the (multiple) RM price you've received to date !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill's suggestions sound very good for anyone who wants to "transition" into RF. I'm not eager to do this myself, but it looks as if we'll all get shoved into the RF pool eventually. You could argue that this has already happened with 1000-year licenses, etc.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 

If the most successful Alamy photographers are sticking with RM isn't that telling you what you need to know?

No, it's totally moot.

I got one of these (mentioned above) effectively-RF thousand-year sales on an RM image today:

Country: Worldwide
Usage: Single company - multiple use editorial only
Industry sector: Education
Start: 23 November 2017
End: 23 November 3017

For all of $22.48 net.

Edited by Cryptoprocta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

If we didn’t have something to wring our hands over, life would be dull, wouldn’t it? It keeps the cobwebs from gathering in our brains.

Thanks for the math, Martin. I used to be good in math but never had to use anything but simple addition, subtraction and division in my jobs or life since school. The rust is definitely there.

Betty

 

Thanks Betty - always nice, more useful and interesting to establish hard facts, rather than having to read people's opinions stated as facts - then the reality is what it is, and it might differ from one person to the next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 

If the most successful Alamy photographers are sticking with RM isn't that telling you what you need to know?

 

Eh no*, not really, instead hard facts based on numbers and industry insight/reports tell me things. We can put blinders on all we like and resist until we're blue in the face, but don't tell me that RF isn't something to consider and things seem to happen regularly that weakens the RM argument (sadly I would say).

 

The most interesting part is what was just surfaced - there used to be 10-year licenses, now apparently 1000-year licenses exist - the difference, even here, between RM/RF is so slim that the discussion is almost pointless, the choice (or "control") is no longer ours, bar being able to fling on a few more restrictions when we so wish - whoho haha. How does a 1000-year license, worldwide, multiple use license affect your ability to reap any benefits over RF? Don't know if it is the first, second or or third nail in the coffin, but RM seems to become more and more of an illusion, with a bit of a good old days feel-good factor to it. If this becomes the norm, then selling 1000-year, multiple use, worldwide licenses and call oneself RM photographer = delusion. The proper meaning of RM has been diluted. We're all RF now, whether we like it or not, admitting it is the first step ;)

 

*Success hahaha - what is that - highest total revenue, highest number of sales...no - think one has to consider investment, especially time spent, before establishing who's successful or not.

 

^IMHO^ of course.

 

Adios - off for some exercise, age is another thing we can't escape and this old bod needs it!

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Martin Carlsson said:

 

Eh no*, not really, instead hard facts based on numbers and industry insight/reports tell me things. We can put blinders on all we like and resist until we're blue in the face, but don't tell me that RF isn't something to consider and things seem to happen regularly that weakens the RM argument (sadly I would say).

 

 How does a 1000-year license, worldwide, multiple use license affect your ability to reap any benefits over RF? Don't know if it is the first, second or or third nail in the coffin, but RM seems to become more and more of an illusion, with a bit of a good old days feel-good factor to it. If this becomes the norm, then selling 1000-year, multiple use, worldwide licenses and call oneself RM photographer = delusion. The proper meaning of RM has been diluted. We're all RF now, whether we like it or not, admitting it is the first step ;)

+1

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Martin Carlsson said:

 

...

*Success hahaha - what is that - highest total revenue, highest number of sales...no - think one has to consider investment, especially time spent, before establishing who's successful or not.

 

^IMHO^ of course.

 

Adios - off for some exercise, age is another thing we can't escape and this old bod needs it!

 

+1.  But what is time price ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Cryptoprocta said:

No, it's totally moot.

I got one of these (mentioned above) effectively-RF thousand-year sales on an RM image today:

Country: Worldwide
Usage: Single company - multiple use editorial only
Industry sector: Education
Start: 23 November 2017
End: 23 November 3017

For all of $22.48 net.

 

Moot for sure. I wonder if the price would have been any higher if you had designated this image RF to begin with.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Bill Brooks said:

 

To complicate things further, the biggest mistake you can make when starting out in RF is to consider RF the minor leagues, or a different market, and choose weak or different images for RF.

 

I would suggest that if you are seriously considering RF, then leave your present RM as RM but shoot RF exclusively for 18 months.  6 months to get RF sales started, and then a further years shooting to evaluate. After 18 months evaluate your RF sales going back one year verses your RM. NO cheating !! No matter how wonderful an image is, it goes into RF during that 18 months.

 

If RF does not work out for you, then convert any RF images that have not sold as pure RF, back to RM.

 

The new AIM makes the transition of old RM to RF easy for the photographer, where previously it was impossible unless you deleted RM and then reuploaded the same images as RF. I think that ease of transition speaks volumes about where Alamy thinks the market is going.

 

Wow, that's some experiment!  I might take the plunge and give it a go.  Thanks for your suggestion.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 

It doesn't. But it means the same images can be accepted at other agencies as 'RM'. If they were called RF I would be severely restricted to where else they could go.

 

I see this perpetual 'RM licence' as an inevitable and sensible reaction from Alamy and at least they come with restrictions.

 

I look forward to the day when there is no such thing as RF and RM.

 

Edit: Only a handful of my RM licences have a crazily long time period, every single RF licence comes with one.

 

 

 

I know that you are editorial-focused and therefore your view is a bit "clouded", but for someone with a 360 degree outlook (i.e. not pigeon-holed) I would say that insisting on RM is more limiting in terms of distribution than RF, and increasingly so. IMHO of course. 

 

+1 for getting rid of the RM/RF - licensing needs to get with the time, neither RM or RF is 2017. I keep saying it - impression based licensing - true usage, fair and square.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 

It doesn't. But it means the same images can be accepted at other agencies as 'RM'. If they were called RF I would be severely restricted to where else they could go.

 

 

 

Just the opposite. You can put a, none exclusive to Alamy, RF image anywhere.

 

As to having RM at different agencies, you would have to have 24/7 rights clearance, and have all agencies and their subagencies reporting sales in real time. Nobody does that these days. What happens if there are two conflicting exclusive sales, for the same usage of the same RM image, are made to two different clients, by two different agencies, at the same time?

 

This can happen with non exclusive RF, but neither the  photographer or agency, is on the hook for damages. They could be on the hook with the same RM at different agencies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Martin Carlsson said:

+1 for getting rid of the RM/RF - licensing needs to get with the time, neither RM or RF is 2017. I keep saying it - impression based licensing - true usage, fair and square.

 

Tough to argue with this, but for some reason that old saying, "Be careful what you wish for." keeps coming to mind. B)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bill Brooks said:

 

Just the opposite. You can put a, none exclusive to Alamy, RF image anywhere.

 

As to having RM at different agencies, you would have to have 24/7 rights clearance, and have all agencies and their subagencies reporting sales in real time. Nobody does that these days. What happens if there are two conflicting exclusive sales, for the same usage of the same RM image, are made to two different clients, by two different agencies, at the same time?

 

This can happen with non exclusive RF, but neither the  photographer or agency, is on the hook for damages. They could be on the hook with the same RM at different agencies.

 

1 hour ago, geogphotos said:

 

Weirdly, you seem to be telling me that what I do is not what I do.:)

 

I actually do have my images with different non-exclusive RM agencies - the same images. I'm surprised that you are not aware that exclusive uses are fairly rare these days and so not exactly a major issue.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You are leaving the impression that you have an employee or yourself watching all your sales reports 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and that Alamy, and your other agencies, and their subagencies, report to you for central clearance, the second they they make a sale.

 

I am well aware that higher priced exclusive RM uses are rare these days. That is another reason to abandon RM. It only takes one exclusive RM/RM conflict between agencies, out of your 56,574 images, for it to become a major issue. I am very surprised that you would allow the clients to take that chance, and that your RM images are not really Rights Managed. If an image is to be truly Rights Managed shouldn’t it be at only one sales outlet?

 

I think you are in a difficult position. 56,574 RM images that are at more than one agency, so that converting your RM to RF would be difficult. You would have to coordinate the changeover between agencies, and get all your agencies to agree to the same change for each image. Like herding cats. For you any changeover RM to RF could be a real mess.

 

Some of us are not in your position, so your RF concerns do not necessarily apply to all of us. Your suggestion of a hybrid license would solve your RM to RF conversion problems, but that is a conversion problem that many of us do not have.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

For you any changeover RM to RF could be a real mess.

 

Don't want to divert the discussion too much, but out of curiosity, is there such a thing as a professional indemnity insurance for UK sole-trader photographers in case there are legal issues with both clients and agencies? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 

 

RF distribution? Mainly through micros or at G for 20% commission, then factor in distribution networks and commission plunges to even lower.

 

Anything as RF on Alamy could be on a micro, anything RM should not be.

 

A bit of non-argument to say that you have 360 degree vision and that my view is 'clouded'. 

 

 

 

I knew you would take offense to that one - sorry I was in a hurry. It certainly wasn't meant as offensive, more that you are editorial focused and I'm more 'jack of all trades' - does that make sense? You are more editorial, I'm more commercial - that makes our outlook on the market/opportunities and licenses vastly different. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suggest we leave off the insults, hurried or otherwise, and stick to facts. 

 

I'm not a fan of RM. It's overcomplicated and open to manipulation. But what counts for me is what buyers want - particularly editorial buyers since I shoot mostly editorial. And I have yet to be convinced that buyers want RF. Now I have had some sales like this, which is effectively disguised RF:

 

Country: Worldwide
Usage: Single company - multiple use editorial only
Industry sector: Media, design & publishing
Start: 21 September 2017
End: 21 September 3017

 

But most of my sales continue to be like these:

 

Country: United Kingdom
Usage: Editorial
Media: Newspaper - national
Print run: up to 2 million
Placement: Inside and online
Image Size: 1/4 page
Start: 01 August 2017
End: 02 August 2017
Any placement in paper and online. One use in a single editorial article used within the print and digital versions of a single publication. Digital usage includes archive rights for the lifetime of the article.

 

Country: Germany
Usage: Editorial
Media: Newspaper - national
Print run: up to 25,000
Placement: Inside
Image Size: 2 page spread
Start: 01 September 2017
End: 02 September 2017
Quantity discount. Flat rate per image.

 

Country: German Speaking Countries
Usage: Magazine, Editorial print and digital use. Full pageinside.One time use only.
Industry sector: Media, design & publishing
Start: 13 October 2017
End: 13 October 2022

 

None of these sales were for RM calculator prices, meaning they were negotiated with Alamy. So if they wanted to, the buyers could have asked for multiple use and unlimited duration. But it seems they didn't. The day such sales (especially to newspapers) become multiple use and unlimited duration is the day I will believe that editorial buyers prefer RF. Until then I will stick with RM. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, geogphotos said:

Isn't it great that Alamy allows us both to choose our own paths. :D

It used to be, but as

" Country: Worldwide
Usage: Single company - multiple use editorial only
Industry sector: Media, design & publishing
Start: 21 September 2017
End: 21 September 3017
"

is, in all senses RF, given I'm not going to be around in 3018 to make sure they've stopped using the file :rolleyes:, the choice has effectively been removed.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cryptoprocta said:

It used to be, but as

" Country: Worldwide
Usage: Single company - multiple use editorial only
Industry sector: Media, design & publishing
Start: 21 September 2017
End: 21 September 3017
"

is, in all senses RF, given I'm not going to be around in 3018 to make sure they've stopped using the file :rolleyes:, the choice has effectively been removed.

But if you spot an advertising use of the image next week, you've got a juicy infringement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, KevinS said:

But if you spot an advertising use of the image next week, you've got a juicy infringement. 

Yes, but it is an unreleased image, so could only be used as editorial whether RM or RF.

If editorial hadn't been in the usage, my gripe would have been with Alamy.

Edited by Cryptoprocta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/24/2017 at 11:37, geogphotos said:

 

 

RF distribution? Mainly through micros or at G for 20% commission, then factor in distribution networks and commission plunges to even lower.

 

Anything as RF on Alamy could be on a micro, anything RM should not be.

 

A bit of non-argument to say that you have 360 degree vision and that my view is 'clouded'. 

 

 

 

+100

Alamy and Big G are the fews allowing RMs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, geogphotos said:

 

 

But you have no problem with RF? That seems contradictory to me.

 

RF means use in any way you like, as many times as you like, for ever and ever. Amen. 

 

Now if you are happy to sign up to that it seems  bit churlish to complain about RM licences ( which are being developed to incorporate elements of RF) for doing the same sort of thing. 

Yawn, you're so predictable. -_-

Who was complaining about that?

I was answering your point (which you chose to snip) about Alamy giving us the choice, which is now almost meaningless, and gives problems for those of us with exclusive-RF contracts elsewhere.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • 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.