MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Alamy.com => Topic started by: mtkang on July 17, 2010, 13:24
-
hi all, just started in alamy..and just realise keywords in alamy is a time-consuming job..
so my first questions is, is it possible to edit your keywords and other informations once submitted?
seconds question is.. as RM licensed images, is shouldn't be sold as RF before right?
-
To answer your first question, use their batch image management tool. It should simplify your life. And yes, you can edit the keywords after upload using that tool.
Question #2 - No, you can't sell an image RM if it has sold RF.
Don't be discouraged if it takes awhile for you to start getting regular sales on Alamy. It has taken me well over a year to start seeing regular sales there, but with the (generally) higher prices it is worthwhile doing. :)
-
To answer your first question, use their batch image management tool. It should simplify your life. And yes, you can edit the keywords after upload using that tool.
Question #2 - No, you can't sell an image RM if it has sold RF.
Don't be discouraged if it takes awhile for you to start getting regular sales on Alamy. It has taken me well over a year to start seeing regular sales there, but with the (generally) higher prices it is worthwhile doing. :)
Lisa;
do you shoot images specifically for Alamy? I mean knowing from the time you start the setup that you are sending these to Alamy?
-
In theory you can't sell an image RM if it has sold RF, however huge numbers of people do.
If your pics are on micro as RF, then there should not be a problem selling the same ones RM on Alamy. Some people will quite rightly argue this is not the way to go about things, but it is what lots of people including top microstockers do.
What I am trying to say here is don't panic, if you think your pics would do best as RM on Alamy, do that.
Rgds
Oldhand
-
Lisa;
do you shoot images specifically for Alamy? I mean knowing from the time you start the setup that you are sending these to Alamy?
Not so far. Mostly it's my micro portfolio on Alamy - selling RF, not RM
In theory you can't sell an image RM if it has sold RF, however huge numbers of people do.
If your pics are on micro as RF, then there should not be a problem selling the same ones RM on Alamy. Some people will quite rightly argue this is not the way to go about things, but it is what lots of people including top microstockers do.
You may be right, Oldhand, but I certainly thought that most people who sell the same images on the micros and on Alamy (like me) are selling Royalty-free in both locations.
-
In theory you can't sell an image RM if it has sold RF, however huge numbers of people do.
If your pics are on micro as RF, then there should not be a problem selling the same ones RM on Alamy. Some people will quite rightly argue this is not the way to go about things, but it is what lots of people including top microstockers do.
What I am trying to say here is don't panic, if you think your pics would do best as RM on Alamy, do that.
Rgds
Oldhand
:o Uhhhh what?
Let me read THIS again:
...If your pics are on micro as RF, then there should not be a problem selling the same ones RM on Alamy. ...
I thought the former discussions were about the moral or ethical part of business regarding offering our images as RF for $1 on the micros and $300 on Alamy (as RF).
RF on Alamy naturally does not guarantee the exclusive or limited use of an image, the same as in Microstock.
RM regulates the use of an image for a specific purpose (one license for print ad, one license for TV commercial, one license for online ad ...). Every use requires a license.
In some cases the buyer even requires exclusive use of the image for the required period of time.
How on earth do you justify offering Microstock images at Alamy as RM? :o
I can't believe I'm reading this here.
While I respect the opinion of contributors saying it's unethical to offer the same image for $1 on the Micros while offering it also at Alamy for $300, I cannot wrap my mind around the idea of offering a Microstock image as RM at Alamy.
Those are two completely different types of licensing. I'm not ignoring the fact that some people do that (RF Micro and RM Macro) but to suggest that on a photographers forum, is a bit "not right" (biting on tongue until it falls off...).
Wow, just wow.
Please tell us that you are yanking our chains...
-
I can't believe I'm reading this here.
I am also surprised about such statements (and others have this odd understanding as well). I was raised in another planet, I guess. ;D
-
I mean Microstock has turned the stock image industry upside down as it is.
But to come along and support the idea of offering the same image as RF and RM (not even to mention the mix of Micro and Macro) will sooner or later end up in major distrust of buyers across the board.
Not to mention that Getty and other Macros will give you the boot once they find out.
Good luck for your "professional" career as a stock photographer... :-X
-
In theory you can't sell an image RM if it has sold RF, however huge numbers of people do.
If your pics are on micro as RF, then there should not be a problem selling the same ones RM on Alamy. Some people will quite rightly argue this is not the way to go about things, but it is what lots of people including top microstockers do.
What I am trying to say here is don't panic, if you think your pics would do best as RM on Alamy, do that.
Rgds
Oldhand
I am sure this isn't true. I know an agency accidentally put Yuri's micro RF portfolio on alamy as RM but I think he made them change that as soon as he found out. I am also sure alamy don't want people selling the same images as RF on micro and RM on alamy. There is something in their rules about this. Go and ask the question in their forum :)
-
I mean Microstock has turned the stock image industry upside down as it is.
But to come along and support the idea of offering the same image as RF and RM (not even to mention the mix of Micro and Macro) will sooner or later end up in major distrust of buyers across the board.
Not to mention that Getty and other Macros will give you the boot once they find out.
Good luck for your "professional" career as a stock photographer... :-X
Like you, I just can't believe what I'm reading here and in the other thread.
-
hi all, i think maybe oldhand just make a mistake of his statement, why don't wait for his confirmation?
I think he may mean if the image had been sold as RF in microstock, it can still be sold in alamy under RF license.
i think one should not try to sell same images as different license, not because of price or fairness to buyer, but it is because basically the RM license needs certain of exclusive in usage, like if a company used a image for a promotion poster, it may not want to see same photos to be used in another competitor website.
-
It always surprised me that people want to maximize their profits, even at the risk of harming their reputation. My concepts of photography as a business were formed before the internet, learnt from professional photographers, even if by then I had no business intention at all.
-
hi all, guess we can settle with what alamy thinks..
http://www.alamy.com/contributor/help/image-licences.asp (http://www.alamy.com/contributor/help/image-licences.asp)
there is a statement
solely features a logo, trademark or copyrighted building - this is a copyright or trademark infringement. Note, images where the logo, trademark or copyrighted building is incidental (e.g. it’s visible but isn’t the central focus) can be submitted as Royalty Free.
i think it is something new for some microstocker, since most microstock rejected any visible copyright item even isn't the central focus.
-
have 1 more questions,
can we submit an image as RM for editorial without model release, but change it after to RM with model release after we got the model release successfully?
-
Hi all
My apologies for stirring up a hornets nest. Mtkang - take the other people's advice where it won't cause you a problem.
I used to work for the devil as far as cut your throat and sell your mother business practices went in photography. Here the line was blurred between RM and RF as long as a sale was made. Ethics aside all was well until someone complained (never happened), then it was profuse apologies and no harm done.
My colleagues experience on the forum remain at odds with my long involvment in the macro world. They are kind, courteous and well informed. I on the other hand should keep dubious practices to myself as this is no place for them.
Please accept my apologies, but I really don't relish a long debate on the issue. Now I'm off back into the seedy world of smoke and mirrors.
I bid you good day!
Oldhand the chastized would be whistleblower
-
solely features a logo, trademark or copyrighted building - this is a copyright or trademark infringement. Note, images where the logo, trademark or copyrighted building is incidental (e.g. it’s visible but isn’t the central focus) can be submitted as Royalty Free.
This is grey area to me, because in fact I don't think there should be anything wrong if you have a travel agency selling a trip to London and show the London Eye on it in a general view of the Thames in that area. It's not like you are using the London Eye or British Airways to sell anything. The London Eye is part of London, simply that. I mean, there are uses in which showing a logo should not be a problem.
Is there RF Editorial at Alamy? I really don't know, as I am basically uploading RM there.
One thing they never clarified to me is that we have to choose if a release is required or not, and in many cases we don't know (I'm talking about buildings/landmarks). All I can say is that I don't have a release. If I go on the safe side and always choose that a release is required or set the only allowed use as editorial, this may throw a buyer away. I have asked them with some real examples and their answer was evasive.
-
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=162221&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=162221&page=1)
-
Hi all, i notice that there is a 'more(numbers)' more by this photographer under the some images that got up in search, it seems that group all similar or same events photos from that photographer.
I can't see how to add similar photos together..anyone got an idea?
-
I think the grouping is done automatically according to the keywords and/or description. I've seen that happen even with images uploaded separately.
-
i read this somewhere that's their policy if 1 image isn't accepted, the whole batch will be rejected without reviewing the rest. I wonder is it true? doesn't sound logical to me.
-
i read this somewhere that's their policy if 1 image isn't accepted, the whole batch will be rejected without reviewing the rest. I wonder is it true? doesn't sound logical to me.
It is true, although they don't always review all pending batches so if they review 3 pending batches with 10 pictures in each batch they might only actually review the first 5 images of the first batch. If they are ok all batches will pass. If one ore more out of the 5 reviewed images has a problem they will fail all batches (30 images).
-
oic..thank you for your reply. So does it mean they don't even check what is the remaining images? so you may get unlucky got whole batch rejected because of a mistake, or you may get lucky got whole batch approved because of a good shot?
what is the logic behind? would like to understand so know what i can do..so can we resubmit? and i read that they are reviewing 'technical quality' so no rejection on poor light, bad composition?
i read this somewhere that's their policy if 1 image isn't accepted, the whole batch will be rejected without reviewing the rest. I wonder is it true? doesn't sound logical to me.
It is true, although they don't always review all pending batches so if they review 3 pending batches with 10 pictures in each batch they might only actually review the first 5 images of the first batch. If they are ok all batches will pass. If one ore more out of the 5 reviewed images has a problem they will fail all batches (30 images).
-
what is the logic behind? would like to understand so know what i can do..so can we resubmit? and i read that they are reviewing 'technical quality' so no rejection on poor light, bad composition?
you can look at them as the mid-stock agency for "grown ups". that is, they expect you to be photographically competent and know what is good lighting and good technical quality. so they're giving you the benefit of the doubt about your technically excellent photos and not really checking the entire batch. however, if they catch even one, then they think you've not really done your homework on the rest.
however, you'll never get a photo rejected for bad composition for they don't care about its aesthetic quality nor its subject matter. if this is just too vague, you can always go back to the handholding of the micro sites.
-
ok, quite surprise the way of quality review, i will assume the whole rejected batch idea is to keep away people from uploading 'quantities' of their portfolio. So it sounds like uploading little quantity batch by batch is the way to go.
what is the logic behind? would like to understand so know what i can do..so can we resubmit? and i read that they are reviewing 'technical quality' so no rejection on poor light, bad composition?
you can look at them as the mid-stock agency for "grown ups". that is, they expect you to be photographically competent and know what is good lighting and good technical quality. so they're giving you the benefit of the doubt about your technically excellent photos and not really checking the entire batch. however, if they catch even one, then they think you've not really done your homework on the rest.
however, you'll never get a photo rejected for bad composition for they don't care about its aesthetic quality nor its subject matter. if this is just too vague, you can always go back to the handholding of the micro sites.
-
Hi,
I have to say that is not true, at least not in my case.
It used to be that way but lately Alamy changed it, if there is problem with the image in the batch they will only reject that image and accept rest.
-
Hi,
I have to say that is not true, at least not in my case.
It used to be that way but lately Alamy changed it, if there is problem with the image in the batch they will only reject that image and accept rest.
That is also true. It does happen what you're talking about.
But it also depends on your track record. If you have been uploading shots that all got accepted in the past they might just reject one and accept the rest.
In other cases where people kept uploading inferior images, Alamy reserved the right to fail all uploaded batches if one images looked bad.
-
Hi,
I have to say that is not true, at least not in my case.
It used to be that way but lately Alamy changed it, if there is problem with the image in the batch they will only reject that image and accept rest.
That is also true. It does happen what you're talking about.
But it also depends on your track record. If you have been uploading shots that all got accepted in the past they might just reject one and accept the rest.
In other cases where people kept uploading inferior images, Alamy reserved the right to fail all uploaded batches if one images looked bad.
Thanks for clarification
-
i read this somewhere that's their policy if 1 image isn't accepted, the whole batch will be rejected without reviewing the rest. I wonder is it true? doesn't sound logical to me.
This is true.
The only time they reject one image and pass the rest is "processing error" or system problems. One fail all fail is still the standard. If you have 200 images in one batch uploaded and upload 10 more photos in another batch, and one of those fails, while both batches are awaiting QC ALL WILL BE FAILED. It's not complicated and I don't know why people try to find exceptions to the rules, which may give someone false hope.
One fail all fail.
The logic is just was someone else wrote. They are not going to babysit and review. They don't judge for content, it's easy if someone only has to produce good quality images, and self evaluate. On the other hand you can send something very nice and well exposed to micro and get it rejected for some individual reviewers opinion "not suitable for stock" or "too many like this".
-
i read this somewhere that's their policy if 1 image isn't accepted, the whole batch will be rejected without reviewing the rest. I wonder is it true? doesn't sound logical to me.
This is true.
The only time they reject one image and pass the rest is "processing error" or system problems. One fail all fail is still the standard. If you have 200 images in one batch uploaded and upload 10 more photos in another batch, and one of those fails, while both batches are awaiting QC ALL WILL BE FAILED. It's not complicated and I don't know why people try to find exceptions to the rules, which may give someone false hope.
One fail all fail.
The logic is just was someone else wrote. They are not going to babysit and review. They don't judge for content, it's easy if someone only has to produce good quality images, and self evaluate. On the other hand you can send something very nice and well exposed to micro and get it rejected for some individual reviewers opinion "not suitable for stock" or "too many like this".
Please, check this out. Pay attention to June 11. 2010. (I just copy and paste this)
11 June 2010 OL658544 Online upload 10 1 9 0 18 June 2010 Partially Failed
All the best
Kone
NOTE:
This post has been modified by Kone
Sorry, was my mistake
-
well all, does it has an official statement about their QC standards? or it is just based on contributors experience?
does it mean sending small batch by batch with good quality is a better way? instead of sending everything as a batch?
-
well all, does it has an official statement about their QC standards? or it is just based on contributors experience?
does it mean sending small batch by batch with good quality is a better way? instead of sending everything as a batch?
i think you would get all these answers on the alamy forum where there are many, many contributors there compared to here. there is a specific section that just answer qc questions, which is where i get a lot of my info.
-
"Partially Failed" usually means there was an image processing error on one of the images, not a QC failure.
In that case they will pass the rest, assuming they pass QC. Click on the batch number (OL658544) to see the full results.
-
"Partially Failed" usually means there was an image processing error on one of the images, not a QC failure.
In that case they will pass the rest, assuming they pass QC. Click on the batch number (OL658544) to see the full results.
That's what I thought - check that batch and let us know what the "rejection" reason was. I had only partially failed ones because of processing errors and not inferior images.
-
"Partially Failed" usually means there was an image processing error on one of the images, not a QC failure.
In that case they will pass the rest, assuming they pass QC. Click on the batch number (OL658544) to see the full results.
That's what I thought - check that batch and let us know what the "rejection" reason was. I had only partially failed ones because of processing errors and not inferior images.
Ups!
You have a right, it is my mistake. I am sorry.
Rejection reason, "Image processing error".
Regards
Kone
-
Ups!
You have a right, it is my mistake. I am sorry.
Rejection reason, "Image processing error".
Regards
Kone
No biggie. It's just so the newbies won't get confused. At least some things should work as expected these days 8)
-
You can resubmit the one with the error - it was probably just a transmission glitch.
-
this must be the most out of focus stock photo ever. must've made it through alamy qc on the coat tails of their checking only one photo out of the entire batch.
http://tinyurl.com/256llde (http://tinyurl.com/256llde)
-
this must be the most out of focus stock photo ever. must've made it through alamy qc on the coat tails of their checking only one photo out of the entire batch.
[url]http://tinyurl.com/256llde[/url] ([url]http://tinyurl.com/256llde[/url])
Why would someone submit that? ???
-
Hi all, i copy and paste what i found in alamy website, it said that one rejected and all the 'awaiting QC' will be rejected. But i am not sure if only the first batch is inspected for rejection or whole batches will be inspected.
Base on what i read somewhere, does it mean some photos that is not meeting the technical requirement will pass through as alamy just check the first batch?(to explain how that out of focus jewelery photos is there)
Ongoing submissions
Once you’ve passed your QC test we only check a sample of images in subsequent submissions.
A submission is defined as any group of media that are awaiting QC at the same time regardless of the day they were submitted (they will all have the status “Awaiting QC”).
If we fail one image, we will reject all images in all media awaiting QC.
Media grouped together as a submission will be QC’d together and will have the same QC date in “Track submissions”.
We will indicate the media which contains the failed image, with an information icon in Track submissions.
Avoid rejection by always checking each of your images at 100% looking for all possible QC failure reasons.
The average amount of time for a contributor to wait for their QC outcome is 48 hours – please note that we do not undertake any QC at the weekend.
Ongoing QC failures can result in your online upload privilege being frozen for 30 days and in extreme circumstances your account being terminated. Blog post on freezing procedure
QC waiting time is dependent on your QC history, failing QC successive times harms your QC rank meaning that it may take longer for your work to be quality controlled. Blog post on QC time dependent on your QC history.
-
Ups!
You have a right, it is my mistake. I am sorry.
Rejection reason, "Image processing error".
Regards
Kone
No biggie. It's just so the newbies won't get confused. At least some things should work as expected these days 8)
That was the point, not to point at anyone else. Processing errors will be ignored, failure for image quality hasn't changed.
Good news it wasn't a problem with the image. ;D
-
this must be the most out of focus stock photo ever. must've made it through alamy qc on the coat tails of their checking only one photo out of the entire batch.
[url]http://tinyurl.com/256llde[/url] ([url]http://tinyurl.com/256llde[/url])
Why would someone submit that? ???
Clearly that image is sharp, it just happened to be a 2 Megapixel source image. All loss of detail occurred during up-sizing. :D
-
have 1 more questions,
can we submit an image as RM for editorial without model release, but change it after to RM with model release after we got the model release successfully?
It's my understanding that you cannot change the type of image license once it's Set at Alamy.
-
have 1 more questions,
can we submit an image as RM for editorial without model release, but change it after to RM with model release after we got the model release successfully?
It's my understanding that you cannot change the type of image license once it's Set at Alamy.
It's correct, that you can't change the license type once you've set it, but if you sell your RM as editorial, you also have to set restrictions. If you have the MR and/or the PR you can delete these restrictrions and your image is then a normal RM.
-
Is there RF Editorial at Alamy? I really don't know, as I am basically uploading RM there.
No, if you would sell your images as Editorial, you must set it as RM (with restrictions).
You can sell pics without a MR and/or PR also as RM and not as Editorial.
Here is a response from alamy member services:
Actually this is your take!
If you think that these restrictions were placed because there are recognizable people and properties with no relevant release or for any other valid reason, then these restrictions are free to remain as such. The restrictions will help the contributors from not getting into potential legal issues.
The disclaimer that comes with each image pop up, places the equal responsibility on the buyer too. It is always not necessary that all images with no releases should have restrictions set to it. But these should be annotated correctly as to the number of people and identifiable property and the relevant releases. This will help in giving the correct licence type to the images. If the image is of licence type 'L' this will help in knowing the end usage.
So in general... if you feel that the images contain people/subject matter that require more sensitivity... (funeral, wedding, people in a state of undress or anything else that if used could cause a problem for the model if printed)... then it might be advisable to set Editorial Only restrictions as extra security. Alamy will not by ourselves set ‘any’ usage restriction to any images.
Otherwise you do not "HAVE" to set restrictions, as long as you have accurately annotated (saying they do not have MR or PR) and images are "L". The onus is on the end user to decide if they need a release for their use.
Hope this explanation helps.
-
Is there RF Editorial at Alamy? I really don't know, as I am basically uploading RM there.
Here is a response from alamy member services:
<big snip>
... then it might be advisable to set Editorial Only restrictions as extra security. Alamy will not by ourselves set ‘any’ usage restriction to any images.
<snip>
The irony being that they don't actually allow the most obvious thing which is an Editorial Only option, you have to 'opt out' of all other uses, which is more complicated than it should be.
For example, you set that you don't want your images to be used in any of the commercial options (several clicks back and forward). Then you decide that you don't want your images to be used commercially in any country, so you place restrictions on every country - and you've shot yourself in the foot: now your image is not available to be sold, for any purpose, in any country.
It's really counter-intuitive, when all they need to do is provide a button for 'Editorial Only'.
Goodness knows why they keep refusing to do this.
Slainte
Liz
PS: unless the thinking is that a commercial buyer might buy an unreleased image because they really like the image and themselves clone out any unreleased people or items.
Also, giving the buyer some discretion could be valuable. For example, a genuine photo of Princes Street, Edinburgh with unreleased people and shop signs, busses, taxis etc would never be allowed on the Micros. I once read that it's OK for such a photo to be used editorially in a guide book, but for example a Tourist Board using it in a publication would be 'commerical use'. However (always depending on the actual use), it's highly unlikely that a Tour Company or Tourist Board using such an image would be sued.
In the same vein, on my protest website, I've used three 'creative commons' images of famous people: because these people publicly support the wider cause, and I decided (unilaterally) that they were unlikely to sue for non-commercial use of their photo in conjunction with quotations by them supporting the general cause.
-
Odd, I've been setting my images "Licensed" Editorial Only, one click, since I started with Alamy? As soon as I click "no model release", it's sets that license, I don't have to do anything.
http://www.alamy.com/contributor/help/image-licences.asp (http://www.alamy.com/contributor/help/image-licences.asp)
to avoid legal issues you must never set a licence as RF (but only as L with restrictions set for “Editorial use only”), if it:
* contains people or domestic buildings without releases.
* solely features a logo, trademark or copyrighted building - this is a copyright or trademark infringement. Note, images where the logo, trademark or copyrighted building is incidental (e.g. it’s visible but isn’t the central focus) can be submitted as Royalty Free.
I don't even get into the restrictions settings.
Is there RF Editorial at Alamy? I really don't know, as I am basically uploading RM there.
Here is a response from alamy member services:
<big snip>
... then it might be advisable to set Editorial Only restrictions as extra security. Alamy will not by ourselves set ‘any’ usage restriction to any images.
<snip>
The irony being that they don't actually allow the most obvious thing which is an Editorial Only option, you have to 'opt out' of all other uses, which is more complicated than it should be.
For example, you set that you don't want your images to be used in any of the commercial options (several clicks back and forward). Then you decide that you don't want your images to be used commercially in any country, so you place restrictions on every country - and you've shot yourself in the foot: now your image is not available to be sold, for any purpose, in any country.
It's really counter-intuitive, when all they need to do is provide a button for 'Editorial Only'.
Goodness knows why they keep refusing to do this.
Slainte
Liz
PS: unless the thinking is that a commercial buyer might buy an unreleased image because they really like the image and themselves clone out any unreleased people or items.
Also, giving the buyer some discretion could be valuable. For example, a genuine photo of Princes Street, Edinburgh with unreleased people and shop signs, busses, taxis etc would never be allowed on the Micros. I once read that it's OK for such a photo to be used editorially in a guide book, but for example a Tourist Board using it in a publication would be 'commerical use'. However (always depending on the actual use), it's highly unlikely that a Tour Company or Tourist Board using such an image would be sued.
In the same vein, on my protest website, I've used three 'creative commons' images of famous people: because these people publicly support the wider cause, and I decided (unilaterally) that they were unlikely to sue for non-commercial use of their photo in conjunction with quotations by them supporting the general cause.
-
Odd, I've been setting my images "Licensed" Editorial Only, one click, since I started with Alamy? As soon as I click "no model release", it's sets that license, I don't have to do anything.
It actually says 'editorial only'?
When I click no release, of course it sets to Licensed, but it doesn't say editorial only. A licensed image can be used for advertising (and in some cases might be highly desirable, as paying enough would stop possible use by competitors), but the 'no release' (model or property) alerts the potential buyer that some uses would not be available. So no release implies 'editorial and possibly other limited uses at the buyer's responsibility'.
The link you gave suggests setting restrictions:
You must have model and property releases for relevant subject matter in an image. If you don’t have them you can set restrictions to licence the image for “Editorial use only”.
-
Ok, I haven't been uploading there for a while, but if I remember it right, we must mark is a release is required or not; if required, we have to mark whether we have it or not. So it is clear for the buyer that a release is required but unavailable, so he has to go after proper authorization.
I have sold an image in such conditions in a direct negotiation. I warned the buyer and he said he would handle this. In my invoice, I included a paragraph about this too.
If you want to be more restrictive, you can set the image as editorial only (I wished we had a simple check box for that).
My problem is however when to say a release is required for public buildings. Some historical buildings are protected, and even this may vary from country to country. Setting them as editorial only is playing on the safe side, but I am sure most, if not all, times other uses would be ok too. I don't think the UK government would mind someone using the Big Ben for a travel advertisement, but may not to sell watches? Alamy never clarified this to me and I am (unfortunately) playing on the safe side, but I see I am in disadvantage with other sellers by doing so. I even saw London Eye images selling as RF without any restriction.
-
I'll have to upload a photo to see how I'm doing it, and I'm booked for the next four days, then a couple days in the office and a four day weekend. I don't expect to have anything edited for upload for at least two weeks. :)
No release, includes people, no release, I believe it defaults to "Editorial Only". I don't click the property that needs a release, just the people, because it's one less click, click.
Alamy makes it clear that it's the responsibility of the BUYER to make sure the use is done properly and legally. I know that's different from Micro that Micro_Manages everything from multiple submissions, to keywords, to deciding what's of interest to buyers. Alamy on the other hand, says, if it's a good exposure, you can sell it. Plus, the buyer is responsible for the legal complications. This leaves out the agency and the photographer! Kind of nice when you think about it?
The whole issue of property releases for common houses constructed before 1990 in the US is faulty. There is no law requiring them. Micro wants all kinds of things that they don't need, which makes people paranoid and nervous.
Try to keep this in mind. The correct usage and liability rests with the BUYER! Example, you sell an image Editorial Only and the buyer uses it for a soap ad. You aren't responsible. As long as the photographer properly identifies and truthfully licenses the image, it is the responsibility of the buyer. Also if the photographer makes a mistake, it's going to come down to the buyer being responsible, because they are supposed to verify what they use. See where this is leading?
Yes, if the photographer lies or has a fake model release, then they can be liable, but if licensed properly, the end user is responsible for the final usage.
Odd, I've been setting my images "Licensed" Editorial Only, one click, since I started with Alamy? As soon as I click "no model release", it's sets that license, I don't have to do anything.
It actually says 'editorial only'?
When I click no release, of course it sets to Licensed, but it doesn't say editorial only. A licensed image can be used for advertising (and in some cases might be highly desirable, as paying enough would stop possible use by competitors), but the 'no release' (model or property) alerts the potential buyer that some uses would not be available. So no release implies 'editorial and possibly other limited uses at the buyer's responsibility'.
The link you gave suggests setting restrictions:
You must have model and property releases for relevant subject matter in an image. If you don’t have them you can set restrictions to licence the image for “Editorial use only”.
-
Side question. Do Alamy ever change the licence type attached to an image ? Do the photographers have complete control ? If we set the use to RM and specify editorial use only can we be certain that this will stick ? If an image is specifies as RM is there any danger of it being switched ?
-
Side question. Do Alamy ever change the licence type attached to an image ? Do the photographers have complete control ? If we set the use to RM and specify editorial use only can we be certain that this will stick ? If an image is specifies as RM is there any danger of it being switched ?
There is no current way of specifying 'editorial use only' other than by setting many restrictions for commercial use - though as has been pointed out in this and other threads, and the Alamy forum, just saying that there are people without MRs or property without PRs is enough.
But not supplying MRs (there isn't currently any way of supplying an MR for editorial use only, and no current need for one) or PRs, and marking your image as such means that if an agency switched an image to RF, they'd carry the can.
BTW, when uploading to Alamy, it clearly warns that you can't change from L to RF or vice versa after an image is on sale (you'd have to go through their support system).
-
Thanks ShadySue.
if an agency switched an image to RF, they'd carry the can.
Expanding the terms of my question slightly, is there any possibility or history of that happening, Alamy or any other site deciding to switch an image from RM to RF without consulting the photographer or rights owner ?
-
Thanks ShadySue.
if an agency switched an image to RF, they'd carry the can.
Expanding the terms of my question slightly, is there any possibility or history of that happening, Alamy or any other site deciding to switch an image from RM to RF without consulting the photographer or rights owner ?
Once an image has been in Micro or RF, no it can never be sold as RM. Rights-managed-RM simply means there are rights involved, copy, worldrights, etc, to basically ensure the same pic isnt sold to two compeeting concepts ( within same branch), this is why big AD-agencies, etc, always buy RM for their clients. This is why an RM picture is often much more expensive.
Its estimated that if a client buy an RM pic for say 500 bucks, all the rights involved mounts up to 400 bucks and the actual picture only a 100 bucks.
The RM industry is the Traditional way of selling pictures and is mostly associated with professional photographers, at least they are the prefered contributors.
-
Thanks Lagereek. But you answered to a different question :)
Here it is again ..... is there any possibility or history of .. Alamy or any other site deciding to switch an image from RM to RF without consulting the photographer or rights owner ?
Obviously that could be even before it has ever sold.
-
Thanks Lagereek. But you answered to a different question :)
Here it is again ..... is there any possibility or history of .. Alamy or any other site deciding to switch an image from RM to RF without consulting the photographer or rights owner ?
Obviously that could be even before it has ever sold.
Dont think so, they would have to consult the photographer in question because once its been in RF, it can never go back to RM.
-
Thanks Lagereek and ShadySue.
-
Just started at Alamy. I am curious about what is popular at Alamy and also if contemporary personality/celebrity shots have a place on Alamy or if there is another on-line stock site micro- or macro- that would be good for that content. I have also been approved for the reportage/archival path as well. I shoot many assignments each year for magazines or promotion with reality tv stars, musicians, business people and have freedom to release for editorial usage after publication. Didn't see a category that seemed obvious or natural on Alamy site for this type of image. I know that Corbis handles this type of stuff regularly, but I have regular stock agency already. Not sure I'm ready to make wholesale switch.
For those who are active in micros as well as Alamy, any thoughts about which type of imagery you submit to IS/SS/DT etc rather than on Alamy or vice versa?
-
I have also been approved for the reportage/archival path as well.
hi dan:
i applied for this also, but keep having problems with their online form submission. i also emailed their support with no reply. any tips on this?
i think the alamy forum is a much better place for your questions or do a search there. but from what i gather, there are a couple of celebrity stock sites based in the uk that would want these shots for news, rather than archival. again a search on alamy would retrieve those names for you. (rex features?)
-
I don't really set 'editorial' for alamy, i think you just need to set no model release and no property release for it.
I don't think an agency will change the license without informing you.
RM to RF is possible, but if an image had been sold as RF, it seems violating the RM license, unless you know who download it and tracked down how it had been used.
Side question. Do Alamy ever change the licence type attached to an image ? Do the photographers have complete control ? If we set the use to RM and specify editorial use only can we be certain that this will stick ? If an image is specifies as RM is there any danger of it being switched ?
-
hi all.
Just want to share that i begun on Alamy last week and i was confused about the lack of activity (sales) but today i found i had a sale for 152$ (91,2 royalty) HEY if that´s how it goes, i can wait a week between sales!!!
-
hi all.
Just want to share that i begun on Alamy last week and i was confused about the lack of activity (sales) but today i found i had a sale for 152$ (91,2 royalty) HEY if that´s how it goes, i can wait a week between sales!!!
You're either very, very good or very, very lucky. Could even be both. Alamy is not a big volume seller, sales often take months to report. It took about a year before I got my first sale, now I usually get one or two a month, often for not much more than a couple of dozen dollars commission.
In answer to an earlier question, Alamy decided to switch most of my files from RM to TL a couple of years ago, I don't know why. Unreleased files (editorial) now default to TL.
-
hi all.
Just want to share that i begun on Alamy last week and i was confused about the lack of activity (sales) but today i found i had a sale for 152$ (91,2 royalty) HEY if that´s how it goes, i can wait a week between sales!!!
You're either very, very good or very, very lucky. Could even be both. Alamy is not a big volume seller, sales often take months to report. It took about a year before I got my first sale, now I usually get one or two a month, often for not much more than a couple of dozen dollars commission.
Guess i´m very lucky, besides the image sold was one of the less sold i have in other sites, again luck and having just what a person looks for in a concrete moment, then again luck.
-
I signed up for Alamy a little over a week ago but didn't get to upload anything until last Sunday. I read through the Alamy forum threads there and it seems wait times for the "Awaiting QC" step is usually 1 to 2 days. But it's been a little over 5 days now. Is this what everyone else is experiencing?
This is my first very small batch to Alamy to test the waters. These images were my better sellers in the past.
-
Hmm, think my most recent QC wait was under 24 hours, but that was earlier this week. The one before that was atypical, a few days over a long holiday weekend. I agree with those A forum posts - Alamy's generally quite efficient, speedy. But first QC waits could very well be different, can't remember mine.
I signed up for Alamy a little over a week ago but didn't get to upload anything until last Sunday. I read through the Alamy forum threads there and it seems wait times for the "Awaiting QC" step is usually 1 to 2 days. But it's been a little over 5 days now. Is this what everyone else is experiencing?
This is my first very small batch to Alamy to test the waters. These images were my better sellers in the past.
-
I signed up for Alamy a little over a week ago but didn't get to upload anything until last Sunday. I read through the Alamy forum threads there and it seems wait times for the "Awaiting QC" step is usually 1 to 2 days. But it's been a little over 5 days now. Is this what everyone else is experiencing?
This is my first very small batch to Alamy to test the waters. These images were my better sellers in the past.
it takes longer when you are new or if you have a high failure rate, when you have a reputation for minimal failures it is usually under 24 hours (but I dont know how submissions this takes sorry).
-
Also, if there's a 'processing' (i.e. technical) problem with one of your images in a batch, that whole batch (but not subsequent ones) will be held up for a week, then someone goes in and manually shifts the problem.
That doesn't necessarily mean there's something wrong with your file. I put three 'stickers' (without change) in one batch and uploaded them and they all went through in the usual 24 hours.
-
Good info to know. I will wait a little while longer. Thanks.
On a side note: I never though Right-Managed would be a direction I would go in but something in the back of my mind always had me not putting some of my favorite images up on the Micro sites because I believed those pictures were worth much more than a few dollars.
-
hi all.
Just want to share that i begun on Alamy last week and i was confused about the lack of activity (sales) but today i found i had a sale for 152$ (91,2 royalty) HEY if that´s how it goes, i can wait a week between sales!!!
You're either very, very good or very, very lucky. Could even be both. Alamy is not a big volume seller, sales often take months to report. It took about a year before I got my first sale, now I usually get one or two a month, often for not much more than a couple of dozen dollars commission.
Guess i´m very lucky, besides the image sold was one of the less sold i have in other sites, again luck and having just what a person looks for in a concrete moment, then again luck.
It's often photos that you wouldn't expect to do well on the micros that get the sales on Alamy. It's really unpredictable.
-
Good info to know. I will a little while longer. Thanks.
On a side note: I never though Right-Managed would be a direction I would go in but something in the back of my mind always had me not putting some of my favorite images up on the Micro sites because I believed those pictures were worth much more than a few dollars.
I always wanted to do Editorial/RM, but had to earn the equipment on iStock before I could afford/justify the gear! But gosh, Alamy's such a slow waiting game - to get sales and then to get paid after you get the sales.
-
One can not expect regular sales on alamy with an avarage portfolio, before there about 2500+ images online.
Remeber - you are compeeting against 20 million other iomages there.
If the portfolio is truly outstanding, sales might be regular before such high numbers.
And on Alamy - its "allways" the unexpected that gives you the sales....
Atleast thats how it is for me...
-
The top two pieces of advice I'd give to someone entering stock:
1) Focus on quality images in well-targeted areas - at the expense of volume, if necessary.
Expect a strong port of 100 or less to at least equal earnings of an average one of thousand+....
2) If your subject matter and technique fit, focus on macro over micro. And keep the two portfolios completely separate.
-
One of the thinks I've always hated about Micro is that I have to apply noise reduction to get nearly anything through the inspection process. I hate it because I know there is more detail in my photos than what I'm supplying. I can't always shoot at ISO 100 to get the right exposure. I don't mind taking out the color noise but to get rid of the ISO grain all together for Micro... I hate it.
So, with that said do have to make everything look like plastic for Alamy too? Do skys have to be completely grain free for Alamy?
-
One of the thinks I've always hated about Micro is that I have to apply noise reduction to get nearly anything through the inspection process. I hate it because I know there is more detail in my photos than what I'm supplying. I can't always shoot at ISO 100 to get the right exposure. I don't mind taking out the color noise but to get rid of the ISO grain all together for Micro... I hate it.
So, with that said do have to make everything look like plastic for Alamy too? Do skys have to be completely grain free for Alamy?
honestly you sould try to be always at 100.. you can believe or not but I have never reduce noise in my pictures, got a few at on 200, 400 and some 800.. and were approved! (not talking about Alamy but all other stock agency)
you can always have a tripod around :P
-
I'm surprised by that too.
I have never applied more than minimal noise reduction for iStock, because if I did the image would be rejected instantly. And when I do have to apply it, I try to do it via a mask so only where it's needed - usually just the dark bits. And I'm shooting with a 4/3 camera.
-
That's just been my experience mostly with Istock. So it's all I know. (The other Micro sites have been recent additions to the list I submit to.)
I've submitted photos in the past (to test the waters) in which I had the right exposure, removed the color noise in the RAW converter, did minimal (if any) processing, saved the JPG at level 12 in Photoshop and they'd still send it back for artifacts and noise. I'd take it and run it through some noise reduction and it would get accepted. To me, it looked like I was removing detail. So irritating.
What about Alamy? Anyone?
-
That's just been my experience mostly with Istock. So it's all I know. (The other Micro sites have been recent additions to the list I submit to.)
I've submitted photos in the past (to test the waters) in which I had the right exposure, removed the color noise in the RAW converter, did minimal (if any) processing, saved the JPG at level 12 in Photoshop and they'd still send it back for artifacts and noise. I'd take it and run it through some noise reduction and it would get accepted. To me, it looked like I was removing detail. So irritating.
What about Alamy? Anyone?
For now I have just a few photos at Alamy but no rejections.. try small batches
-
WOW!! i have sold another today, yeah! this is great with just two sales in less than a month i have made 151,75$ comission. This puts alamy in 5th place of my list, lets hope this trend of sellilng continues :D
-
congratulations! i am still waiting for my first sale..
may i know what kind of images you have sold? landscape? editorial or RF or RM?
WOW!! i have sold another today, yeah! this is great with just two sales in less than a month i have made 151,75$ comission. This puts alamy in 5th place of my list, lets hope this trend of sellilng continues :D
-
WOW!! i have sold another today, yeah! this is great with just two sales in less than a month i have made 151,75$ comission. This puts alamy in 5th place of my list, lets hope this trend of sellilng continues :D
Just sold 2 in a week !!! ($148 !!) my first 2 !! and RF too !?
Hope this is a sign for the future ! :) Beats micro to death !! ;)
-
That's interesting. I have never had a resubmitted image accepted at iStock. They usually rejected my images for "Overfiltered". So I resubmitted with no processing except to convert to JPG. Then it was rejected for artifacts. I corected them and resubmitted - then rejected again for "Overfiltered".
Now my images are rejected for "lighting" and "Color not correct". Before I shoot, I use the ExpoDisc. Since I use good glass (Nikkor Lenses f/2.8) and a Nikon D-300, I just don't understand why I can't seem to get anything accepted. After 2 years with iStock getting 95% rejections, I finally gave up uploading to them. It would be very difficult for me to catch up to taht Yuri fellowat that rate! ;D
Now I'm concetrating on two micro sites and Alamy. With Alamy I have a 90% acceptance rate. So I guess that makes me an inferior photographer. ::)
-
...With Alamy I have a 90% acceptance rate. So I guess that makes me an inferior photographer. ::)
That's nothing to get excited about, I haven't been able to get a rejection with alamy yet, other than when I got the size wrong once. They are much easier than any of the micros I have tried.
-
...With Alamy I have a 90% acceptance rate. So I guess that makes me an inferior photographer. ::)
That's nothing to get excited about, I haven't been able to get a rejection with alamy yet, other than when I got the size wrong once. They are much easier than any of the micros I have tried.
They don't judge content !! just technical quality ;) So anything goes !! :)
-
So are people getting more regular sales now? I keep getting to the brink of applying, and then remember how others said they had one sale in two years (or similar).
Sounds as though things have moved on since then(?)
-
So are people getting more regular sales now? I keep getting to the brink of applying, and then remember how others said they had one sale in two years (or similar).
Sounds as though things have moved on since then(?)
Who knows ?? nothing for first year, then bang !! 2 sales ! u figure it ! ;)
-
Ah OK... well I'm encouraged by your news.... and I'm keen for 60% of sales.... so I'll dip my toe in the water and hope for friendly fish...
-
...With Alamy I have a 90% acceptance rate. So I guess that makes me an inferior photographer. ::)
That's nothing to get excited about, I haven't been able to get a rejection with alamy yet, other than when I got the size wrong once. They are much easier than any of the micros I have tried.
They have a pretty good search, no sales for me yet (although I finally started to upload some more) but I really wish they would clean up some of the pretty bad images that are on there.
-
My sales have improved at Alamy in the past year. I used to get a sale every 3months or so (with approx. 200images on line). I now usually get sales monthly and often multiple sales in a month. I haven't uploaded much in the past year (anywhere). Alamy would probably be in the number 3 or 4 position this year as compared to micros.
-
Thanks kingjon. That's very helpful info.
-
hi all, just started in alamy..and just realise keywords in alamy is a time-consuming job..
so my first questions is, is it possible to edit your keywords and other informations once submitted?
seconds question is.. as RM licensed images, is shouldn't be sold as RF before right?
Imho alamy has one of the best, if not the best batch editing tools, it's fast, and youn can also edit any images at any phase - ready, not ready, on sale, with the same great tool. This is lightyears ahead of most micro sites where you often forced to edit images at any phase one-by-one with a lot worse interface
-
Been picking up for me as well. 3 RF sales in the last week. Not huge commissions, but still good ones. Its encouraging, most of my sales there are RF.
-
I recently started back to focusing on them after i found I had a sale moths ago that I put as RM. So used to seeing the Micro commission.. then I see 1 license for 110 which got me 66. That is motivation there..lol. I do dribble in some of my Micro stuff there since I dont have to blow them up as much. but I also do RF specifically for them that dont hit my Micro sites.
I do love the editing tool and my que times are around 24 hours for inspection then the next day after keywording it is on sale. 100% Approval rate so far on my images.. but as said.. they do not check for content.. just quality.
May not be a big seller but the sales can be big on a single image. Deff. worth it to give them a shot.
-
Finally close to my first payout ($8 more!!) with less than 200 photos online. Started uploading about 2 years ago but stopped after a few months because of rejections caused by the size restrictions. Now that they have lowered the minimum size, I've been uploading regularly again and get more zooms and sales. I hope they start doing well so I don't have to worry so much about losing IS sales. I upload RF and RM photos.
-
Finally close to my first payout ($8 more!!) with less than 200 photos online. Started uploading about 2 years ago but stopped after a few months because of rejections caused by the size restrictions. Now that they have lowered the minimum size, I've been uploading regularly again and get more zooms and sales. I hope they start doing well so I don't have to worry so much about losing IS sales. I upload RF and RM photos.
Yeah, cats out of the bag now. I tried to explain last year how I found success on Alamy, more sales and better pay, but the naysayers jumped all over that. Then I figured, less competition was a good thing. Still averaging over $80 a download. The complainers? Well they say Alamy is selling Novel Use for microstock prices, why would I argue with them, based on old payments due, an old discontinued program and a very small number of sales for those rates. (squeaky wheel complaining because of one crummy 50c sale)
Sure Alamy hardly reads IPTC data at all, but now someone has also outed the batch editing and simple click on a thumbnail, edit the data and save, which is fast and easy.
So much for trying to keep a good thing a secret and keep the competition down.
For anyone who thinking of joining, please join their forums and read about the search changes, how it's making stacks of similar images from photographers, which is kind of dumb. Instead of mine saying (700) similar images under a match, which I thought was a good point for someone looking for that subject, knowing I was specializing, now it shows one batch with 54, the next with 33 and another with 66, which splits up my big numbers and mystically stacks images, under images, which means they can't be seen! It's like a machine deciding what's similar based on keywords. And oh yes, the computer decides which picture will be first, not us, so it can be a total crap photo showing with 60-70 hidden behind it!
Everyone gets a better diversity placement and more people will have their images on the front page of sorts. I hate it!
Oh yes, and the horrible payment situation, (that's what the complainers said) where they pay us with Paypal or no charge direct transfer. I tell you, it's bad, bad, bad, please don't join Alamy! ;)
-
re noise, alamy is good, just dont try and send in underexposed, fixed with levels iso1600 shots :)
-
the new 'stack' search results is quite confusing, so should we upload similar images at one upload? i sometimes break into many uploads for same collections..
-
Congratulations, epantha!
RacePhoto - final paragraphs of your post are classic
....................
Doing test searches using term(s) likely to include your images in results should be a good way to see how new search system affects you and whether you should change how you submit images for now.
To help avoid having somewhat similar images all represented by one top image of stack, it might pay to submit them separately. So, for example, you could submit editorials of Manhattan Stock Exchange separate from ones of Trump Globe near Central Park.
Stacks might not include images, even if closely related, from more than one submission, so it sounds like a good idea to submit all closely related images at once if goal is to have buyer find them all in one stack.
BTW, I did read that the more specific a search is, using several search terms, the better this new search system works.
-
(double post)
-
At least you figured it out fast. Some people have made the mistake of taking me seriously. :D
Congratulations, epantha!
RacePhoto - final paragraphs of your post are classic
....................
Doing test searches using term(s) likely to include your images in results should be a good way to see how new search system affects you and whether you should change how you submit images for now.
To help avoid having somewhat similar images all represented by one top image of stack, it might pay to submit them separately. So, for example, you could submit editorials of Manhattan Stock Exchange separate from ones of Trump Globe near Central Park.
Stacks might not include images, even if closely related, from more than one submission, so it sounds like a good idea to submit all closely related images at once if goal is to have buyer find them all in one stack.
BTW, I did read that the more specific a search is, using several search terms, the better this new search system works.
-
hi all, i know in alamy the QC is one failed and the rest of batches in queue will be rejected too.
But the failed one can be in any batches or just the first batch?
will it has the situation that the first batch image is perfect, and some of the images in subsequent batches are not okay but all passed because off the first batch is observed as okay?
thank you.
-
hi all, i know in alamy the QC is one failed and the rest of batches in queue will be rejected too.
But the failed one can be in any batches or just the first batch?
will it has the situation that the first batch image is perfect, and some of the images in subsequent batches are not okay but all passed because off the first batch is observed as okay?
thank you.
You got it right!
Alamy will check randomly to see if an image looks good. If it passes (or the images they chose to look at) all other images will pass also.
It's possible that they look at a "good" image and will automatically accept "bad" images in the batch - if you are lucky. But I don't think you're doing yourself a favor.
Only upload your best work so the buyers will be happy.
-
Only images strong enough to show to a direct client should be sent to a stock agency.
If you take X number of photos during a photo shoot for client, and 20% of X are solid, it's better that the client just sees them, rather than having those images drown in an ocean of mixed-bag shots. Same goes for stock.
"Submit quality, salable images that stand out" is more useful advice than "submit, submit, submit" and "keep your weak images on port forever" while citing that agencies have millions of images.
No one has unlimited time, so each hour you spend working on fair shots is an hour you've missed building a port that's going to stand out from the masses.
and I totally agreed with:
click_click: "Only upload your best work so the buyers will be happy."
-
hi all, i know in alamy the QC is one failed and the rest of batches in queue will be rejected too.
But the failed one can be in any batches or just the first batch?
will it has the situation that the first batch image is perfect, and some of the images in subsequent batches are not okay but all passed because off the first batch is observed as okay?
thank you.
You got it right!
Alamy will check randomly to see if an image looks good. If it passes (or the images they chose to look at) all other images will pass also.
It's possible that they look at a "good" image and will automatically accept "bad" images in the batch - if you are lucky. But I don't think you're doing yourself a favor.
Only upload your best work so the buyers will be happy.
Also I suspect that Alamy tags people according to accepted photos vs rejections. So if you have problems, they will look closer than someone who has 2000 images accepted and one rejection two years ago for uploading some really bad photoshop work. (points finger towards himself) I've had batches of over 200 just fly through. When I have something I wonder if it's really good enough I actually send in a single photo so I know it's asking to be looked at.
Sneaking a poor quality image through may be a nifty trick, but it would just make me look bad and make Alamy look bad, when some buyer finds it. There's no winning a game of getting junk past reviewers. Agencies do allow returns for unacceptable photos, which would be more embarassing than just not having it up there in the first place.
What he said: Only upload your best work so the buyers will be happy.
-
Also I suspect that Alamy tags people according to accepted photos vs rejections. So if you have problems, they will look closer than someone who has 2000 images accepted and one rejection two years ago for uploading some really bad photoshop work. ...
That is correct. Alamy was very frank with everyone in the past about that. If a contributor had a "high" rejection rate the reviewers would look closely at more images. If one had 100% approval rate the batches just sail through. I cannot vouch though if that policy is still in place like that.
Although it might not be "smart" to upload single image batches I'm still doing it because I have very bad experiences with their upload system (even the new beta one) if I upload more than 2 images. Processing could take almost a week sometimes longer. If I upload single image batches one after another the images pass the next day.
-
off-topic, but re RacePhoto's
"What he [click-click] said: Only upload your best work so the buyers will be happy."
click_click is a guy?
am I confusing click_click with clapper? (hmm, say that 3x fast)
-
off-topic, but re RacePhoto's
"What he [click-click] said: Only upload your best work so the buyers will be happy."
click_click is a guy?
am I confusing click_click with clapper? (hmm, say that 3x fast)
I wouldn't know, could be that Click_Click is a she, but whatever it's not the same person as CClapper. :D
-
oic, so the reviewer is not doing a 100% technical quality check on files. the reason i asked is sometimes i want to know a certain image meets their criteria or not, so i guess best way is to upload that image alone.
sometimes just want to know it before start to edit a batch of images that may not meet their criteria.
hi all, i know in alamy the QC is one failed and the rest of batches in queue will be rejected too.
But the failed one can be in any batches or just the first batch?
will it has the situation that the first batch image is perfect, and some of the images in subsequent batches are not okay but all passed because off the first batch is observed as okay?
thank you.
You got it right!
Alamy will check randomly to see if an image looks good. If it passes (or the images they chose to look at) all other images will pass also.
It's possible that they look at a "good" image and will automatically accept "bad" images in the batch - if you are lucky. But I don't think you're doing yourself a favor.
Only upload your best work so the buyers will be happy.
-
I wouldn't know, could be that Click_Click is a she, but whatever it's not the same person as CClapper. :D
I'm a "he". ;D