pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: My pictures on Inmagine without reference to my name  (Read 7586 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: December 29, 2011, 15:31 »
0
I know 123Rf is owned by inmagine and i saw some of my images there. But is it normal that there is no reference to me the photographer. http://www.inmagine.com/alamy/c94952-photo
Will i be paid 50% if an image of me is sold there ?
Since Alex http://my.linkedin.com/pub/alex-p-ng/24/ba1/a71 is involved in both sites can he make something clear on this ?

Some more links to pictures of me

http://www.inmagine.com/alamy/c94k4h-photo
http://www.inmagine.com/alamy/cbf85p-photo

Did some more investigations seems pictures are coming via Alamy on Inmagine without reference to photographer ?
« Last Edit: December 29, 2011, 16:09 by 7Horses »


« Reply #1 on: December 29, 2011, 18:50 »
0
RacePhoto sent me this link, which might answer some of your questions...or thoroughly confuse you.   ;)

Do microstock agencies violate photographers DMCA copyright?

« Reply #2 on: December 29, 2011, 19:05 »
0
123RF (Inmagine) offers this really "handy" tool for buyers to check if an image on Alamy is also available for less $$$ on 123RF.

The URL that you posted showed one of your images with the Alamy reference ID in the URL.

I was also wondering why I couldn't see a watermark on that image as well, which is not cool.

It appears that images that do match with the Alamy database are automatically displayed without the watermark or do all images on Inmagine lack a watermark?

I tried it with one of my images and it also shows up without a watermark, so there are several issues going on here.

Could you contact 123RF about this issue? Or at least let us know if you write them or not so we can follow up.


« Reply #4 on: December 29, 2011, 21:20 »
0
It appears that our entire 123rf portfolios are on Inmagine -- as a "value" collection - although only one size - scaled up a bit for $10. No credit there except that the 123rf user name is in the URL so you can find yourself. See an example with the 123rf version and the Inmagine version.

Couple of things: no credit, as you mentioned; they note on Inmagine that the compressed size of an enlarged (from my 21MP original) download is 1MB! The JPEG I uploaded (with metadata and an ICC profile) was 9.7MB.

The lack of a name is pretty standard for the macro agencies - Getty does it with the collections it ships off to other distributors (Ocean images for some of the iStockers' content, I think).

« Reply #5 on: January 02, 2012, 01:40 »
0
Does anyone know what the 123rf contributor makes on one of these $10 inmagine sales? In theory it should be $5, right - 50% of $10?

I may not have received on of these - I did a check for the last few months and couldn't find any $5 XXL TIFF or XXL JPG royalties in my list. I did find some at lower amounts - from $2.15 to $4.70 which I assume were from sales via 123rf? How would I tell where the sale was from?

What occurred to me was that I wouldn't be happy if there were some sort of distributor commission taken off the top - buyer pays inmagine $10, inmagine pays 123rf $8 and I get $4. As inmagine and 123rf are the same company it would just be a way of effectively lowering contributor's take on what should be a one party sale.

I looked to see if I could find any sort of details on these types of sales, but couldn't - just the blanket statement that I get 50% of the net price. Does anyone else have a link to more information on this or can Alex provide us with some details please?

« Reply #6 on: January 02, 2012, 09:07 »
0
Does anyone know what the 123rf contributor makes on one of these $10 inmagine sales? In theory it should be $5, right - 50% of $10?

I may not have received on of these - I did a check for the last few months and couldn't find any $5 XXL TIFF or XXL JPG royalties in my list. I did find some at lower amounts - from $2.15 to $4.70 which I assume were from sales via 123rf? How would I tell where the sale was from?

What occurred to me was that I wouldn't be happy if there were some sort of distributor commission taken off the top - buyer pays inmagine $10, inmagine pays 123rf $8 and I get $4. As inmagine and 123rf are the same company it would just be a way of effectively lowering contributor's take on what should be a one party sale.

I looked to see if I could find any sort of details on these types of sales, but couldn't - just the blanket statement that I get 50% of the net price. Does anyone else have a link to more information on this or can Alex provide us with some details please?

I'm not sure but you could be right as we get $4 on the $10 sales, as far as I know. I think I forgot or wasn't aware that inmagine and 123rf were the same company when I commented here.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/123royaltyfree-com/different-sales-prices-at-123rf

« Reply #7 on: January 02, 2012, 12:56 »
0
Does anyone know where to locate the Artist's Agreement on 123RF?  I can't find it for the life of me!

« Reply #8 on: January 02, 2012, 13:17 »
0
Does anyone know where to locate the Artist's Agreement on 123RF?  I can't find it for the life of me!


http://www.123rf.com/terms.php

« Reply #9 on: January 02, 2012, 13:31 »
0
Does anyone know where to locate the Artist's Agreement on 123RF?  I can't find it for the life of me!


http://www.123rf.com/terms.php


That's not the ASA; that is the terms of use for the site. When I signed up with 1234f they were still doing paper contracts (which I have a signed copy of). I'm sure things have been updated since then, but I don't know where it is online. It should either include a rate schedule or reference an external one. Somewhere talking about the 50% and distributors, partners, etc.

« Reply #10 on: January 02, 2012, 14:09 »
0
I can't even find it in the Wayback Machine, thinking there might have been an oversight or something during the last site revamp.  Um...I'd kinda like to know what I'm authorizing 123RF to do on my behalf.

Ed

« Reply #11 on: January 02, 2012, 17:39 »
0
123RF and Inmagine are two different brands as far as I know.

It looks to me that Inmagine is acting as a sub-distributor to Alamy through Alamy's distribution scheme.  In that case, you need to have elected into that scheme from Alamy and you will be getting the commission associated with the Alamy TOS if you are an Alamy contributor.

I have no idea what 123RF is doing with Inmagine.  Maybe Alex can explain.

« Reply #12 on: January 02, 2012, 18:05 »
0
123RF and Inmagine are two different brands as far as I know.

It looks to me that Inmagine is acting as a sub-distributor to Alamy through Alamy's distribution scheme.  In that case, you need to have elected into that scheme from Alamy and you will be getting the commission associated with the Alamy TOS if you are an Alamy contributor.

I have no idea what 123RF is doing with Inmagine.  Maybe Alex can explain.

Back at the beginning of 123rf, (2005) you signed the contract with inmagine because there wasn't any online signup. 123rf is wholly owned by inmagine and my entire 123rf port is on inmagine (those files aren't on Alamy at the moment so they can't have come from there).

 For there to be other than a 50/50 split of the $10 when you have two web sites from one company seems to me to be a really unreasonable sleight of hand that stiffs contributors out of $1 per sale.

Ed

« Reply #13 on: January 02, 2012, 18:11 »
0
123RF and Inmagine are two different brands as far as I know.

It looks to me that Inmagine is acting as a sub-distributor to Alamy through Alamy's distribution scheme.  In that case, you need to have elected into that scheme from Alamy and you will be getting the commission associated with the Alamy TOS if you are an Alamy contributor.

I have no idea what 123RF is doing with Inmagine.  Maybe Alex can explain.


Back at the beginning of 123rf, (2005) you signed the contract with inmagine because there wasn't any online signup. 123rf is wholly owned by inmagine and my entire 123rf port is on inmagine (those files aren't on Alamy at the moment so they can't have come from there).

 For there to be other than a 50/50 split of the $10 when you have two web sites from one company seems to me to be a really unreasonable sleight of hand that stiffs contributors out of $1 per sale.


Yes, I remember when I joined 123RF the first time and it has nothing to do with what is going on here.  

We are talking about Inmagine here...and 7Horses files.  His/her files are being hosted on www.Inmagine.com with Alamy reference numbers.  Inmagine sells both RF and RM images - some through the distribution scheme at Alamy.  7Horses has 107 images up and online at Alamy under that pseudonym...and the images he references are included.  Do an image search at Alamy with the Alamy reference number on the portfolio.  Images distributed through Alamy sub-distributors receive a 40% commission => http://www.alamy.com/distribution-terms.asp paid through Alamy (since Inmagine is a distribution partner).

Inmagine also has 22,126 images (as of me writing this) on Alamy as Alamy is also a sub-distributor of Inmagine.

This is the danger of submitting microstock portfolio images to traditional agencies.

As mentioned, I don't know what arrangement 123RF is using on the Inmagine site.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2012, 18:13 by Ed »

« Reply #14 on: January 02, 2012, 18:51 »
0
Perhaps I should start a separate thread if it's too confusing to put the two issues in one - I definitely want to get details on the royalty to 123rf contributors from sales via inmagine's Value 10 collection.

« Reply #15 on: January 02, 2012, 20:01 »
0
Hello All,

Contributor's Agreement:
http://www.123rf.com/submit/agreement.php

For all intents and purposes, 123RF and Inmagine are two separate entities. Inmagine is a 123RF Authorized Partner Reseller. All sales will be reported as such and we still do a 50-50 split with what 123RF earns.

Thank you very much.

Alex.

« Reply #16 on: January 02, 2012, 21:03 »
0

Contributor's Agreement: http://www.123rf.com/submit/agreement.php

For all intents and purposes, 123RF and Inmagine are two separate entities. Inmagine is a 123RF Authorized Partner Reseller. All sales will be reported as such and we still do a 50-50 split with what 123RF earns.


Thanks for the link to the agreement - it might be good to have it on the site somewhere other than as part of the upload process. Have we all missed where there's a link to it from the contributor's section?

And as far as Inmagine being separate, I have a hard time accepting that if they have the same owners as 123rf. This just means the agency is pocketing 60% instead of 50% on those transactions and that's not right. As contributors, perhaps we don't have the right to know about the ownership of both companies, but when you say "for all intents and purposes" that sounds like same owners two legal entities (parent - subsidiary, common owners). What's to stop Inmagine from deciding that of the $10, only $5 goes to 123rf, thus leaving contributors with $2.50? If it were a separate company with separate owners you'd not want to do that as the agency would loose as well as contributors. When your own parent is acting as a distributor you have no incentive to minimize the cut the distributor gets.

This is just wrong.

« Reply #17 on: January 02, 2012, 23:29 »
0
Thanks, Alex!   :)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
1809 Views
Last post March 11, 2013, 17:18
by VB inc
4 Replies
4039 Views
Last post August 25, 2013, 08:25
by Tryingmybest
2 Replies
2244 Views
Last post December 18, 2013, 12:30
by lucato
2 Replies
2128 Views
Last post November 09, 2014, 12:21
by Uncle Pete
6 Replies
3239 Views
Last post January 14, 2017, 15:43
by niktol

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle