Author Topic: Alamy Questions (Read 50245 times)

Freezingpictures · « **on:** August 31, 2007, 11:28 »

I have just been accepted by Alamy. I do have a few questions:

1. Can someone tell what you can expect to make in the average on alamy in $/month per images.
(I guess for most of us it is $1-$2 per month /image on microstock.)

2. What is the percentage of images from your portfolio at Alamy you can expect to have a download?

3. Is it wiser to sell an image Royalty Free if you do not sell it anywhere else or to sell is RM or licensed?

I am really curious about Alamy.
I know that the answers might differ a lot, but just to give me an idea.

Thanks!

jeancliclac · « **Reply #1 on:** August 31, 2007, 14:10 »

Jan ; I have about 300 pictures at alamy, I started there about 1 year ago and had up to now only non RF pictures that I had exclusively there. I have sold one so far....
Now I will try some RF pictures that are on micro, this might not be wise, but on the other hand I cant shoot exclusive pictures for alamy if those are not selling.
I'll also try different pictures that I try to sell either RF or other licence, but I'm curious to hear about the best strategy. By the way you probably noticed there is a forum there and this question is quite often discussed,
jean

leaf · « **Reply #2 on:** August 31, 2007, 17:33 »

hmm.. i can check my graphs later, but I think Alamy has made about the same as dreamstime for me, or somewhere between shutterstock and dreamstime. I have over a thousand images on alamy mostly rights managed images that i couldn`t put on the micros. I wouldn`t say it is the best sales avenue but it is allright. It is nice to see the big sales once in a while, but i wish they would come a little more often.

leaf · « **Reply #3 on:** August 31, 2007, 17:35 »

oh and just as a side not

I once sold an extended license at Lucky Oliver (which is basically the same license that alamy gives) that was also in the slide show. I recieved quite a bit more than I have received for many of my Alamy sales.

So it isn`t always pennies on the micro`s / big bills on the macros.

Perrush · « **Reply #4 on:** August 31, 2007, 17:38 »

Quote

I guess for most of us it is $1-$2 per month /image on microstock

excuse me ?? I'm WAAAYYYY over that figure. And what I've read a lot of guys are.

Actually I did a little research for my article (big update comming, actually I rewrote it completely) and as I hear the $/image/year figure of the alamy guys ... then I'm happy I choose micros instead.

Must get $3 to $5 / image / year ... ... that less than half of what I get.

leaf · « **Reply #5 on:** August 31, 2007, 17:44 »

Quote from: Perrush on August 31, 2007, 17:38

Quote
I guess for most of us it is $1-$2 per month /image on microstock

excuse me ?? I'm WAAAYYYY over that figure. And what I've read a lot of guys are.

Actually I did a little research for my article (big update comming, actually I rewrote it completely) and as I hear the $/image/year figure of the alamy guys ... then I'm happy I choose micros instead.

Must get $3 to $5 / image / year ... ... that less than half of what I get.

did you misread his post or are you making an insane amount off your images?

freezing said $1-$2 / image / month ... that is $12-$24/image/year ... if you are making WAY more than that.. that would mean something like $100/image/year which is ... well... .. better than lisa gagne.

traveler · « **Reply #6 on:** August 31, 2007, 20:57 »

Freezing Pictures,
I would do a little test and try some images as royality free and the others rights managed. I don't know what kind of images you have but if you have a lot of nature images I would try those in royality free, travel I would take common locations such as Italy in royality free and maybe some lesser traveled places in rights managed. I have about 800 images on Alamy and I don't actively work this agency as I do with Corbis and/or Getty, (for obvious reasons). I think Alamy has a lot of potential but they have a few problems that need to be worked out and I think they are very well aware of them. The real key to success at Alamy as it is with any agency is keywording. Keywording is more important than a pretty picture. Alamy has millions of images online and if a buyer can't find yours it doesn't matter how pretty it is. Most photographers on Alamy have no clue as to how to keyword images. When keywording is done incorrectly it turns buyers off and they won't waste their valuable time coming back. Most buyers who purchase from Alamy are professionals from design studios, ad agencies, etc... where as for microstock most are one, two or three person businesses or personal projects that bring users to these sites and of course need of protecting an image from a competitor using the same image is not a worry. When you keyword, think like a buyer not like a photographer. Check out Corbis and Getty and look at some of their keywords. If your selection of royality free and rights managed turn out not so good don't worry about it and learn what works and doesn't work. I never worry about the images I have already created and being marketed by my agencies, I keep looking forward to creating new images and getting those in circulation. My sales are not the greatest from Alamy but they do bring in on average about $500 to $1000 a month for 800 images not great but not bad. If your work is good, spend time learning how to keyword and you treat photography like a business I think Alamy will pay much better than any Microstock site.

Best of luck
Traveler

wysiwyg_foto · « **Reply #7 on:** August 31, 2007, 22:47 »

Quote from: traveler on August 31, 2007, 20:57

My sales are not the greatest from Alamy but they do bring in on average about $500 to $1000 a month for 800 images not great but not bad. If your work is good, spend time learning how to keyword and you treat photography like a business I think Alamy will pay much better than any Microstock site.

That's really good Traveler, and I've heard of other people having the same success. My experience is much different. I've been with Alamy for eleven months. I have 894 images (admittedly, many are of the same topic - not necessarily similar) and I have an UNCLEARED BALANCE of $16.20. I plan to upload many more expanding the diversity if my topics, but I think it would be misleading to tell someone they can expect an average of $750/month on 800 images (at least based on my experience).

yingyang0 · « **Reply #8 on:** August 31, 2007, 23:13 »

Quote from: Perrush on August 31, 2007, 17:38

Quote
I guess for most of us it is $1-$2 per month /image on microstock

excuse me ?? I'm WAAAYYYY over that figure. And what I've read a lot of guys are.

Actually I did a little research for my article (big update comming, actually I rewrote it completely) and as I hear the $/image/year figure of the alamy guys ... then I'm happy I choose micros instead.

Must get $3 to $5 / image / year ... ... that less than half of what I get.

Lets do a little math. $5/image/year = about $0.42/image/month . If that's less than half of what you get, that means you're making more than $0.82/image/month. I remember from math class that 0.82/image/month is less than $1-$2/image/month.

I think you misread the month for year.

fintastique · « **Reply #9 on:** September 01, 2007, 03:22 »

In my experience keywording at Alamy is a bit strange as they have a description box where some folk seem to write assays.

I was recently contemplating whether to upload some photos of St Andrews castle to Alamy or the micros, it gives very few results at the micros but not many sales. When I searched at Alamy for "St Andrews castle fife" i found images of lighthouses and sail boats in Fife which fortunately appeared towards the end of the search but still ahead of genuine results.

One word of warning there is a six month wait to delete an image and once an image is uploaded as RF you can't switch it to RM or vice versa unless you request deletion wait 6 months and upload again. I have heard of one exception of someone switching their entire portfolio from RM - RF but I think it was a rather rare occurance.

Has anyone ever had images rejected?

leaf · « **Reply #10 on:** September 01, 2007, 04:35 »

it seems they only reject images where the size spec´s do not meet their minimum, or the uprezing was poorly done.

Freezingpictures · « **Reply #11 on:** September 01, 2007, 06:12 »

Thank you all for the information. If it is as Leaf said arround the earnings between Dreamstime and Shutterstock then it definetely is worth my time. And if it is as much as Traveller said, that would be great! However Traveler, if I make the amount /image/month as you do in the average on Alamy , it will still be below my microstock earnings. But I would be interested to see your portfolio, you seem to be one of the more successful from us on Alamy. You can send me also a PM if you do not want share it in public. Anyway, I understand if you want to stay anonym and do not want to show me your portfolio. I am selling mainly penguins, but probably will have a few editorial images soon.

madelaide · « **Reply #12 on:** September 01, 2007, 15:08 »

Is it my impression, or don't images in Alamy have watermarks?

Regards,
Adelaide

traveler · « **Reply #13 on:** September 01, 2007, 20:15 »

Freezing pictures,

I'm surprised that any one would consider $800 to $1200 a month with roughly 800 images is good money. Alamy is much more of a numbers game than the two bigger agencies. I don't want to mislead you, what I probably should have said is $800 is typical and a good month is around $1200. I do see on my report for the month of August I have $1750, which is my best month ever. Keep in mind I don't actively work with Alamy it has been almost two years since I uploaded any images. 800 images at Corbis or Getty can easily gain you $5,000 to $7,000 a month maybe more depending on what one has on file. If you want to make bigger dollars at Alamy you probably need to be in the 10000 image number to see significant numbers. If I remember correctly, I believe someone mentioned changing RF to RM or RM to RF at Alamy. I would be very careful at changing anything after you mark these one way or the other. You could find yourself in some big trouble. Live with the label you put on your photos, don't go changing them. You'll lose a lot of credibility with photo buyers and maybe in court. As I mentioned in my first posting, don't dwell on the images you already have in the market place, put your energies into the new images you create. Freezing pictures, I will be happy to share info with you, but I'm off to Montreal, Quebec City and Ottawa for a photo tomorrow. I be gone for two weeks and when I return I'll get back with you and see if we can connect up. I might mention I don't work in the Micro Stock agencies but enjoy listening to what you folks are doing. I like sharing info and hope to help a couple of you folks out when I can

Good Luck to all
Traveler

hatman12 · « **Reply #14 on:** September 01, 2007, 23:36 »

Traveler, clearly you believe there are better returns to be gained at Getty and Corbis.

Are you preapred to devote a little bit of time to tell us more about your experiences at those agencies, and what the best route to take with them might be?

Also, you haven't mentioned Jupiter. Do they not figure in your work?

Leaf - perhaps we should have a section devoted specifically to the 'old school' agencies?

traveler · « **Reply #15 on:** September 02, 2007, 07:24 »

Hatman,

I would be happy tp discuss the matter, but I'm off to the airport this morning for a photo shoot. I'll be back on September 14th. I'll log on when I get back and I'll share my experiences and for those interested my thoughts on the industry as a whole. I am very active in the industry and think I can share some insights that might be of help or at least food for thought.

Take care,

Traveler

Pixart · « **Reply #16 on:** September 02, 2007, 11:05 »

Back freezing's post and I've heard this before on $1-$2 per image.

Can someone please clarify for me - if I have same image on 6 sites, is that 1 image or 6 images?

My #'s vary hugely from site to site and unless they are exactly the same I wouldn't know how to calculate.

Freezingpictures · « **Reply #17 on:** September 03, 2007, 02:07 »

Traveller, it is good money for a student, and if I get that amount, I will do better $/month/image than on some microstock sites, (not all), and it would definetely be worth my time. Your are a professional, photography for me is currently a part-time work. I never have done any photography courses and thats how it is with most microstock photographers, keep that in mind. . So $/image/month on Alamy would be a nice increase. Why should you be surprised? A post before you said Alamy would pay much better than any microstock site. Which is not the case for me, if I would earn as much as you per image, by the way.
However, what can I say, I know nothing about the traditional agencies compared to you, so here I am to listen, what you have to say

Well I will wait until you are back

Looking forward to it. All the best for your shooting!

Pixart, you can calculate it this way: E.g. you have 100 images at IS and $200 earnings this month at IS. So you calculate 200/100 ($/number of images). That equals $2 per month/image at IS. You do that for every agency. And than add the average $/month/image from every agency together. Thats the total amount you will earn $/month/image. Lee did it in this way at www.microstockdiaries.com. Go back to his thread about the earnings of August. It is quite interesting.

sharply_done · « **Reply #18 on:** September 03, 2007, 02:51 »

Heh ... using that method puts me at 2+ $/image/month. This is not a very meaningful number, though. If I multiple $2 by the size of my portfolio I do not get a number that mirrors my income.

Freezingpictures · « **Reply #19 on:** September 03, 2007, 03:23 »

If you devide in my example $200 by 100 images, you will get $2 and if you multiply it again with the size of your portfolio at IS you should get exact the income that $200 you started with.

If you mean that for several sites, than you cannot really use that, because you probably do not have exact the same amount of images at each stock agency. I agree.

But I really do like that method for comparing agencies.
It also gives feedback how am I doing in gerneral compared to others or this general assumed $1-$2 average. Should I improve or not. In your case I think you are above the average. Maybe the average is even lower than $1-$2. I should start a poll..
This method is also great to look if you yourself have improved by just calculating the average for your last 50 images and then compare that to the rest of your portfolio and so on. Its not perfect of course at SS for example..

Freezingpictures · « **Reply #20 on:** October 30, 2007, 05:34 »

Wow I got my 1 sale! With 6 images online, within two month!! Maybe I really should focus more on Alamy!
And a nice sale!

I think my commission is $189 from a Gross sale $347..., its a bit confusing..

Pixart · « **Reply #21 on:** October 30, 2007, 10:01 »

That's great! Is it enough to cash out over there (30 days too isn't it?) What are you sending them, Freezing? Do you have any penguins left for the macros?

zorki · « **Reply #22 on:** October 30, 2007, 10:16 »

I sent them a CD with my initial 10 images about 2 years ago and all were accepted and until they got FTP recently I had completely forgot about them. When I got the email that ftp had been turned on for my account, I see that I had a sale for a profit for me of around $125. Now comes the hard part, uploading more so I can actually hit the $250 minimum payout...

jsnover · « **Reply #23 on:** October 30, 2007, 22:59 »

I got my first Alamy sale this month (I started uploading in August) - $220 of which I get $143.

Although I can't cash that out until the payment clears and I reach $250, the way I look at it, it's as if I'd added another micro to my list and $143 a month would be pretty good for a new micro. I also haven't really filled out my portfolio there (it's 80 images or so).

It's definitely encouraging, although we'll have to see after a year or so.

Freezingpictures · « **Reply #24 on:** October 31, 2007, 03:56 »

Yes apparently you need 250 for cashout, so it is not enough yet. But quite encouraging. I just send them a couple more yesterday. No I do not have much left. For Alamy I check my files more carefully and rework my penguin designs. They look a bit different though not much but are better quality. I guess thats the way I will go with Alamy. Yesterday I spend one hour to improve and modify an upsampled popular penguin file. Hope it was worth the time. I also will try normal stock images.
In future I will also try to do new designs of my old files and so get more images. Like I can create more variations of the Global Warming theme. Good to hear jsnover, maybe Alamy indeed can be like an income of another major microstock agency. I also believe we newcomers have definitely a chance now, because of Alamy's own disambiguation. I think hundreds of thousands if not millions of images might get lost, because authors do not care or do not have the time to change their file information. I am sorry for them but all together I think it will help to let the buyer finds what he wants.

zorki · « **Reply #25 on:** October 31, 2007, 08:32 »

Yes, this whole keywording snafu is a chance for new uploaders to rise to the top of the search engine. When I get a chance in a couple of weeks, I plan on uploading a few dozen images. It's amazing the amount of crap that's on Alamy. I would say 80% of it wouldn't pass muster on a microstock company. I've read elsewhere that several die hard Alamy supporters have tried recently to get into micros and complain on how hard it was!

w7lwi · « **Reply #26 on:** October 31, 2007, 14:02 »

Just cleared up one issue with Alamy that I've seen others struggling with. The issue of editorial images.

I have editorial images posted on both SS and Alamy. With the new changes at Alamy, anything showing a person and no model release must be Licensed. No RF. Well needless to say my pictures of Barak Obama have no model releases and are on SS as RF. I queried Alamy about this and asked if an editorial image that was already posted elsewhere as RF could remain on Alamy as Licensed or had to be deleted. Their response was to leave the image on Alamy as licensed and restrict its usage to editorial only. A little tricky to do this, but no big deal once you get the hang of it.

Under each thumbnail in the "Manage my Images" section is a link called "More Options." Down at the bottom of the more options page is a section where you can place restrictions on the image's usage. Leaving countries, medias, industries and sub-industries set to "ALL", simply restrict all six "USAGE" categories that are not editorial. Kind of backs into the restriction. Instead of saying the image to be used on editorial only, it states the images cannot be used anywhere except for editorial. End result's the same, just a different way of saying it.

Freezingpictures · « **Reply #27 on:** January 15, 2008, 04:08 »

Ok, I can payout now, I think in future I will upload a bit more to Alamy, it seems to work well. There are two options to pay out: By check and by funds transfer.

But by fund transfer into your bank account you do not even have to give your account number, how does that work?

I would also take the check, but does someone who lives in Germany know how much they charge to turn in a check from Alamy?

Anybody here from Germany who knows which is the best payout method for us?

ptlee · « **Reply #28 on:** January 15, 2008, 08:32 »

zero sale, nothing. Ok, so I've got only like 60 images online, but am I doing something wrong?

zorki · « **Reply #29 on:** January 17, 2008, 11:29 »

In general with place like Alamy you'll need a couple hundred images before you see a download or see downloads in general. I've heard that you won't see consistent downloads until you hit 1000 uploads. I have to caveat with the fact that many of the people I see say these things on the Alamy forums basically upload travel photos or whatever they see around them and could stand to tighten up their portfolios quite a bit. I had 10 images on line for about a year and had a $200 sale, so know I'm uploading many more to get a payout from them.

madelaide · « **Reply #30 on:** January 17, 2008, 15:39 »

Can someone help me with RFxRM in Alamy? Do we choose which model we want, or do they have their own policy?

Regards,
Adelaide

ptlee · « **Reply #31 on:** January 18, 2008, 02:33 »

Quote from: zorki on January 17, 2008, 11:29

In general with place like Alamy you'll need a couple hundred images before you see a download or see downloads in general. I've heard that you won't see consistent downloads until you hit 1000 uploads. I have to caveat with the fact that many of the people I see say these things on the Alamy forums basically upload travel photos or whatever they see around them and could stand to tighten up their portfolios quite a bit. I had 10 images on line for about a year and had a $200 sale, so know I'm uploading many more to get a payout from them.

Thanks zorki, for the insight. I've also taken a quick glance at the Alamy measures stats, and I see emphasis on certain set of images in my humble portfolio.

This gives me a better focus on what images to upload in future to improve my exposure.

I'm targeting to have about 200 images up there by end Feb, and moving forward, increase my portfolio gradually. Hopefully I will have some good news to share in future.

cheers.

Freezingpictures · « **Reply #32 on:** January 18, 2008, 03:27 »

Madelaide,

you choose yourself, if you want to sell RM or RF. But if you have the pictures somehwere else as RF I would recommend you click on RF

zorki · « **Reply #33 on:** January 18, 2008, 12:20 »

There is always a running debate on the AlamyPro forum about what makes you more money being all RF or RM or a mix. It seems that RF sells more volume, RM can get more per individual sale but come more slowly. If you have a large enough portfolio I would do a mix. If you want to sell the image in multiple places, RF is probably the best...

Michael · « **Reply #34 on:** January 18, 2008, 15:25 »

Quote from: ptlee on January 15, 2008, 08:32

zero sale, nothing. Ok, so I've got only like 60 images online, but am I doing something wrong?

This is normal in mid- and macrostock. microstockphotographers often have many problems when they put photos to theese agencys, cause they used to have many clicks and sellings every day. In mid- and macrostock sometimes you don`t sell something for months, but you can earn much more. my best selling at alamy has 1200.- $ and i got 65% percent from that. How much photos you must sell in microstock for that fee?

But... 60 Photos are a very small stock. The chance to get a better search-placement is relatively small, cause alamy has a click-rated search engine.

jorgeinthewater · « **Reply #35 on:** January 18, 2008, 22:15 »

Quote from: Michael on January 18, 2008, 15:25

Quote from: ptlee on January 15, 2008, 08:32
zero sale, nothing. Ok, so I've got only like 60 images online, but am I doing something wrong?

This is normal in mid- and macrostock. microstockphotographers often have many problems when they put photos to theese agencys, cause they used to have many clicks and sellings every day. In mid- and macrostock sometimes you don`t sell something for months, but you can earn much more. my best selling at alamy has 1200.- $ and i got 65% percent from that. How much photos you must sell in microstock for that fee?

But... 60 Photos are a very small stock. The chance to get a better search-placement is relatively small, cause alamy has a click-rated search engine.

Could you elaborate a bit more on this click-rated search engine?

Michael · « **Reply #36 on:** January 19, 2008, 07:28 »

Quote from: jorgeinthewater on January 18, 2008, 22:15

Quote from: Michael on January 18, 2008, 15:25
Quote from: ptlee on January 15, 2008, 08:32
zero sale, nothing. Ok, so I've got only like 60 images online, but am I doing something wrong?

This is normal in mid- and macrostock. microstockphotographers often have many problems when they put photos to theese agencys, cause they used to have many clicks and sellings every day. In mid- and macrostock sometimes you don`t sell something for months, but you can earn much more. my best selling at alamy has 1200.- $ and i got 65% percent from that. How much photos you must sell in microstock for that fee?

But... 60 Photos are a very small stock. The chance to get a better search-placement is relatively small, cause alamy has a click-rated search engine.

Could you elaborate a bit more on this click-rated search engine?

Uff, my english is not the best and it is a complicated mathematic formula. But... take a look here and you see it directly:

http://www.alamy.com/contributors/alamysearch/default.asp

The most important thing are the klick-rate (only by known customers!). Klicks from your friends and you don`t matters. So you need time to reach a better position in the search engine, when your photos are relative new at alamy...

araminta · « **Reply #37 on:** January 19, 2008, 17:56 »

The Alamy ranking is smart IMHO.

Thumbnail view does count positively only when followed by a "click" or better a sale. Otherwise it count negatively to your ranking.

This is smart because it gives advantage to portfolios which are diversified and disadvantage keyword spamming.

If you have many similar photos, you may get many views from a search, but the buyer will probably only click on a few of them as they are similar. Your rating will then go down.

If you spam with keywording, you will get views, but the buyer will not click as the photo is irrelevant to the search. Your rating will go down.

I really like the Alamy ranking system. Still waiting for my first sale however... but I'm just starting here

dbajurin · « **Reply #38 on:** January 19, 2008, 18:38 »

Can I sell images on Alamy witch I selling allready on other sites? Or images on alamy has to be exclusive?
Thanks

jorgeinthewater · « **Reply #39 on:** January 19, 2008, 19:05 »

Quote from: Michael on January 19, 2008, 07:28

Quote from: jorgeinthewater on January 18, 2008, 22:15
Quote from: Michael on January 18, 2008, 15:25
Quote from: ptlee on January 15, 2008, 08:32
zero sale, nothing. Ok, so I've got only like 60 images online, but am I doing something wrong?

This is normal in mid- and macrostock. microstockphotographers often have many problems when they put photos to theese agencys, cause they used to have many clicks and sellings every day. In mid- and macrostock sometimes you don`t sell something for months, but you can earn much more. my best selling at alamy has 1200.- $ and i got 65% percent from that. How much photos you must sell in microstock for that fee?

But... 60 Photos are a very small stock. The chance to get a better search-placement is relatively small, cause alamy has a click-rated search engine.

Could you elaborate a bit more on this click-rated search engine?

Uff, my english is not the best and it is a complicated mathematic formula. But... take a look here and you see it directly:

http://www.alamy.com/contributors/alamysearch/default.asp

The most important thing are the klick-rate (only by known customers!). Klicks from your friends and you don`t matters. So you need time to reach a better position in the search engine, when your photos are relative new at alamy...

Thanks Michael very informative reading.

madelaide · « **Reply #40 on:** January 19, 2008, 19:20 »

There is nothing like a rainy night to give me patience to read the license agreement... Can anyone help me with some comprehension issues?

1) What is "Novel use"?

2) What does this paragraph mean?

Quote

Where the Contributor appoints Alamy as its agent to grant Royalty-Free Licences in respect of an Image, Alamy may vary the Licences it grants in respect of that Image from Royalty-Free to Traditional by giving 45 days prior notice to the Contributor at any time. If the Contributor notifies Alamy during the 45 day notice period that it does not agree to such variation then Alamy may either continue to grant Royalty-Free Licences in respect of that Image or, at Alamy’s option, may delete that Image from the System.

3) And this one? If someone buys the same image elsewhere, I have to pay Alamy a commission??

Quote

The Contributor shall report all sales made by the Contributor or the Contributor’s Sub Agents where either a sale was made where a Customer has stated that the Image they require was found on the web site maintained by any company in the Alamy Group, or where Alamy has provided a high resolution Image for the fulfilment of the sale by a Contributor. A statement by a customer as to where they first found an Image shall be conclusive evidence as between the Contributor and Alamy as to whether the Image was found via the Alamy web site.
The Contributor shall report the sale and pay 10% of the sale value (net of any transaction or sales tax including VAT) to Alamy within 30 days of receiving payment for the sale.

Also in paragraph 14d they talk about that. How can I know if a buyer saw the image first in Alamy and they purchased it elsewhere??

4) Does selecting distribution locations work for RM only or RF as well? Can it be set on a per-image basis?

5) As far as I understand, they call RM "Traditional Licence", yet it can be with or without Rights Protection, is that so? I'm confused. RFxRM I understand. What is "Traditional" then and if it's RM how can it be "without Rights Protection"?

Regards,
Adelaide

madelaide · « **Reply #41 on:** January 19, 2008, 19:22 »

Quote from: dbajurin on January 19, 2008, 18:38

Can I sell images on Alamy witch I selling allready on other sites? Or images on alamy has to be exclusive?

Yes. It's in paragraph 1 of the Contributor Agreement:

Quote

Under this contract the Contributor has the right to:(...)
Supply their Images on a non exclusive basis and may therefore sell their Images in any other way they wish.

Regards,
Adelaide

NumberSix · « **Reply #42 on:** January 20, 2008, 04:46 »

If you have your Alamy images as 'Licensed' (RM), can you legally sell the same images via another agency as RF? Or is it just considered 'unethical'?

leaf · « **Reply #43 on:** January 20, 2008, 05:03 »

Quote from: NumberSix on January 20, 2008, 04:46

If you have your Alamy images as 'Licensed' (RM), can you legally sell the same images via another agency as RF? Or is it just considered 'unethical'?

No, absolutley not. By sell them as RM, you are giving the buyer permission to have 'full rights' for a certain country, or certain type of use or different things. if a buyer decideds he wants these special types of rights, and the image has been sold as RF (where they buyer can use the image for whatever he wants) - that makes problems.

So in short. If an image has EVER been sold as RF you CANNOT EVER sell the image as RM

NumberSix · « **Reply #44 on:** January 20, 2008, 05:35 »

Leaf - many thanks for the swift reply and excellent advice. Presumably you could have such a mix of the same images (RM on one agency, and RF on another) and then if sold on one, remove (or place restrictions) on the other agency for that particular image? If permitted to do so of course...

sharpshot · « **Reply #45 on:** January 20, 2008, 05:50 »

If a buyer sees you selling the same image RF on one site and RM on another, they are not going to buy the RM are they? They probably wont buy anything from you. People think that buyers only use one site but I think there are a lot that use multiple sites.

leaf · « **Reply #46 on:** January 20, 2008, 06:14 »

Quote from: NumberSix on January 20, 2008, 05:35

Leaf - many thanks for the swift reply and excellent advice. Presumably you could have such a mix of the same images (RM on one agency, and RF on another) and then if sold on one, remove (or place restrictions) on the other agency for that particular image? If permitted to do so of course...

no, you simply can't list the same image with both types of licenses. A RF license means there are basically no restrictions.

If you want to list an image on two different sites, some of them allow you to have them listed as RM on both sites but then you have to watch closely and alter the license on both sites. - and both sites have to allow not having exclusivity on the images

If you want to list the images as RF on both sites, then it is not a problem (if the sites allow it)

You cannot mix and match licenses.... period.

NumberSix · « **Reply #47 on:** January 20, 2008, 06:15 »

Thanks Sharpshot - seems logical and think I'm gradually getting my head round the different systems. One final combination - is it acceptable/legal/appropriate to sell the same images as RM via different agencies? (appreciate this is the 'norm' for RF)

NumberSix · « **Reply #48 on:** January 20, 2008, 06:17 »

Thanks Leaf - posted at the same time, and you've answered all my questions. Greatly appreciate the advice.

leaf · « **Reply #49 on:** January 20, 2008, 07:31 »

Quote from: NumberSix on January 20, 2008, 06:15

Thanks Sharpshot - seems logical and think I'm gradually getting my head round the different systems. One final combination - is it acceptable/legal/appropriate to sell the same images as RM via different agencies? (appreciate this is the 'norm' for RF)

It depends on which sites you are listing with. Some sites require that you ONLY have your images with them.

Alamy for example though allows you to list your RM with them, AS WELL as with other companies, I however don't. it is too much trouble to try and keep track of which image sold where and which licenses were purchased, then notify the other agencies where the images can and cannot be used etc. Most agencies wouldn't allow you to sell RM images on another site.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #50 on:** January 20, 2008, 08:51 »

Quote from: leaf on January 20, 2008, 05:03

So in short. If an image has EVER been sold as RF you CANNOT EVER sell the image as RM

I forget where, but we were discussing this. I was of similar opinion. However, I now agree with the other person who was saying that unless the RM agency you are listing with makes some guarantee as to the history of the image being available, you can do this. Mostly because you are making no claim to what else is out there, and just that Mr X. now has permission to use it for 3 months on a cover. I wouldn't offer it concurrently, however.

sharpshot · « **Reply #51 on:** January 20, 2008, 09:23 »

So what happens if you sell an RM image for use only in one country and the person who has bought it sees it being used by someone else? The person who has bought the RM image will ask for a refund, there are a few threads about refunds in the alamy forums, some of them are a long time after the sale. Is it worth risking losing a big fee and possibly future downloads from an alamy customer?

It might be possible to sell an image that has sold RF as RM but it could cause problems and the loss of sales from alamy.

leaf · « **Reply #52 on:** January 20, 2008, 09:57 »

it just doesn't make sense to sell it at RM after someone has purchased a RF license.

That person who purchased the RF license could use it as they please, while buyer 2 thinks he is buying exclusive rights in europe, or even the world and paying BIG $$ for that, only to find out he doesn't have exclusive rights.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #53 on:** January 20, 2008, 11:28 »

Quote from: sharpshot on January 20, 2008, 09:23

So what happens if you sell an RM image for use only in one country and the person who has bought it sees it being used by someone else?

So what? There is no promise that I know of of exclusivity in any sense.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #54 on:** January 20, 2008, 11:30 »

Quote from: leaf on January 20, 2008, 09:57

That person who purchased the RF license could use it as they please, while buyer 2 thinks he is buying exclusive rights in europe, or even the world and paying BIG $$ for that, only to find out he doesn't have exclusive rights.

As I said, I don't of anything promising exclusivity rights, unless the agency specifically mentions it. All you are granting is permission to use X image in Y capacity for Z time. Of course, you couldn't offer it with the exclusivity clause if it was RF before.

leaf · « **Reply #55 on:** January 20, 2008, 11:50 »

from alamy's page

Quote

To ensure customer confidence in your images and avoid potential legal problems:

* you cannot change the licence type for an image once it is set.
* you must not submit the same or similar images as different licence types.

Check out more info http://www.alamy.com/licensing.asp

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #56 on:** January 20, 2008, 11:52 »

and... ? See - nothing about exclusivity, unless you offer RP.

leaf · « **Reply #57 on:** January 20, 2008, 11:56 »

Quote from: sjlocke on January 20, 2008, 11:52

and... ? See - nothing about exclusivity, unless you offer RP.

yes, I agree. This was my statment earlier

"Alamy for example though allows you to list your RM with them, AS WELL as with other companies, I however don't. it is too much trouble to try and keep track of which image sold where and which licenses were purchased, then notify the other agencies where the images can and cannot be used etc. Most agencies wouldn't allow you to sell RM images on another site."

what exactly are we debating here now? perhaps we agree with eachother!

ParisEye · « **Reply #58 on:** January 20, 2008, 12:14 »

It seems to me to be one out out of two choices : either you grant one agency the right to manage all the rights for you (RM) and you don't sell anything anywhere else, or you chose to sell it everywhere to whomever ask and for whatever they offer. But you can't sell it to everybody on one side and grant to some agency an exclusive right on the other side.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #59 on:** January 20, 2008, 12:27 »

Quote from: leaf on January 20, 2008, 11:56

what exactly are we debating here now? perhaps we agree with eachother!

I'm saying that you can offer previously offered RF as RM, since there is no guarantee of exclusivity, unless listed as RP.

Michael · « **Reply #60 on:** January 20, 2008, 16:57 »

Attention with RF and RM licences! for example: You sell an RM photo excklusively for a package. Another costumer use the same photo for another package. The RF-buyer can`t do anything. He has to knew the risk of dubble-printings. but the RM-buyer can do a lot: He can destroy all packages and press the production money from the photographer. Then you don`t looses just the fee. You`ll loos a very big summary of money!

The most RM licences can be exclusicve. But Alamy will asked you bevor they sell it exclusiv for one photo area. Last year i had a selling of a photo from tunesia for a tourist flyer. The Alamy-office asked me do ban the photo for one year for all other usings as tourist-advertising. I got good money for the photo so i decide to do it. but you never can ban a photo which is anywhere offers in rf-licence.

Make a clear decision and break between booth licences. Sell some Photos in RF, some other in RM, but NEVER offer the photos in booth licences.

This is my opinion, and sorry for my bad english

madelaide · « **Reply #61 on:** January 20, 2008, 17:26 »

I have images offered as RM in FP and MyLoupe that I have elsewhere as RF (in sites that only take RF). If I sell the RM, I delete the RF from other sites, and vice-versa. In a direct negotiation, if a person is interested in a RM license of an image I sold as RF before, I'd say that and offer the RF license instead of the RM. Now, if the buyer prefers the RM anyway, he knows what he is doing.

Now, what is RP?

Regards,
Adelaide

tommroch · « **Reply #62 on:** February 16, 2008, 10:13 »

Hello Madelaide, I am currently reading through Alamy's agreement and Iam also having trouble understanding section 7:

7 Contributor reporting of sales to Alamy

a. The Contributor shall report all sales made by the Contributor or the Contributor’s Sub Agents where either a sale was made where a Customer has stated that the Image they require was found on the web site maintained by any company in the Alamy Group, or where Alamy has provided a high resolution Image for the fulfilment of the sale by a Contributor. A statement by a customer as to where they first found an Image shall be conclusive evidence as between the Contributor and Alamy as to whether the Image was found via the Alamy web site.
b. The Contributor shall report the sale and pay 10% of the sale value (net of any transaction or sales tax including VAT) to Alamy within 30 days of receiving payment for the sale.

Would anyone else care to interpret this please?

thanks

Quote from: madelaide on January 19, 2008, 19:20

There is nothing like a rainy night to give me patience to read the license agreement... Can anyone help me with some comprehension issues?

1) What is "Novel use"?

2) What does this paragraph mean?
Quote
Where the Contributor appoints Alamy as its agent to grant Royalty-Free Licences in respect of an Image, Alamy may vary the Licences it grants in respect of that Image from Royalty-Free to Traditional by giving 45 days prior notice to the Contributor at any time. If the Contributor notifies Alamy during the 45 day notice period that it does not agree to such variation then Alamy may either continue to grant Royalty-Free Licences in respect of that Image or, at Alamy’s option, may delete that Image from the System.

3) And this one? If someone buys the same image elsewhere, I have to pay Alamy a commission??
Quote
The Contributor shall report all sales made by the Contributor or the Contributor’s Sub Agents where either a sale was made where a Customer has stated that the Image they require was found on the web site maintained by any company in the Alamy Group, or where Alamy has provided a high resolution Image for the fulfilment of the sale by a Contributor. A statement by a customer as to where they first found an Image shall be conclusive evidence as between the Contributor and Alamy as to whether the Image was found via the Alamy web site.
The Contributor shall report the sale and pay 10% of the sale value (net of any transaction or sales tax including VAT) to Alamy within 30 days of receiving payment for the sale.
Also in paragraph 14d they talk about that. How can I know if a buyer saw the image first in Alamy and they purchased it elsewhere??

4) Does selecting distribution locations work for RM only or RF as well? Can it be set on a per-image basis?

5) As far as I understand, they call RM "Traditional Licence", yet it can be with or without Rights Protection, is that so? I'm confused. RFxRM I understand. What is "Traditional" then and if it's RM how can it be "without Rights Protection"?

Regards,
Adelaide

tommroch · « **Reply #63 on:** February 16, 2008, 11:00 »

Here is the related section 14 that Madelaide mentions.
I can't make much sense of this either.

14 Audit Rights of Alamy on Contributor

1. Alamy shall have the right, not more than once every calendar year, to audit the records of the Contributor to check that sales made by the Contributor which have either originated from a search of the Alamy Group web site, or where Alamy has provided a high resolution Image for the fulfilment of the sale by a Contributor, are being reported and paid in line with the reporting requirements detailed in the sections entitled Contributor reporting of sales to Alamy Clause a). An independent accountant or lawyer or a member of the Alamy Group internal audit team may carry out the audit.
2. The Alamy Group shall give 30 days’ notice before any such audit shall take place.
3. The audit of the Contributor shall be paid for by the Alamy Group except where the Contributor is found to have underpaid amounts due to the Alamy Group in excess of US$500 in any 12 month period, above which level the Contributor will have to pay the costs of the audit.
4. Alamy also reserves the right to carry out spot checks on Contributors to assess whether they are complying with the requirement to report sales which have originated from a search of the Alamy Group web site. These spot checks may include, but are not limited to, contacting Customers or other third parties who have downloaded an Image to see if they have bought the Image direct from the Contributor and buying via a third party an Image from the Contributor, in respect of which the Contributor agrees a refund shall be given if demanded.

PecoFoto · « **Reply #64 on:** February 16, 2008, 16:01 »

Quote from: tommroch on February 16, 2008, 10:13

Hello Madelaide, I am currently reading through Alamy's agreement and Iam also having trouble understanding section 7:

It means if you sell an image directly to a client that was first seen by them on Alamy then you are to advise Alamy of the fact and pay them 10%

tommroch · « **Reply #65 on:** February 16, 2008, 17:39 »

Quote from: PecoFoto on February 16, 2008, 16:01

Quote from: tommroch on February 16, 2008, 10:13
Hello Madelaide, I am currently reading through Alamy's agreement and Iam also having trouble understanding section 7:

It means if you sell an image directly to a client that was first seen by them on Alamy then you are to advise Alamy of the fact and pay them 10%

Thank you PecoFoto

madelaide · « **Reply #66 on:** February 17, 2008, 15:21 »

But how can we know if a buyer saw it in Alamy and they purchased in another site? $:-\$

Regards,
Adelaide

Phil · « **Reply #67 on:** February 17, 2008, 16:46 »

averaged over the past 6 months alamy has made about the same as dreamstime for me.

BUT most of my sales are images that wouldn't get into the micros for 'poor lighting' or 'not stock'. If they did get into micros they wouldn't do well (but then there is a lot of stuff that doesn't sell, rather than 100 images each making $5 it is 2 images each make $250, 98 make $0)

graficallyminded · « **Reply #68 on:** February 21, 2008, 09:35 »

Do you guys take the time to fill in all of the keyword sections? I was just curious...that would take a while if I were to upload my entire portfolio.

PecoFoto · « **Reply #69 on:** February 21, 2008, 15:56 »

Quote from: graficallyminded on February 21, 2008, 09:35

Do you guys take the time to fill in all of the keyword sections? I was just curious...that would take a while if I were to upload my entire portfolio.

Yes, and its a pain. If you keyword in Photoshop and leave the commas in they come up like this 'keyword1,, keyword2,,' I'm not sure if this effects the search results - probably not.

PecoFoto · « **Reply #70 on:** February 21, 2008, 16:02 »

Quote from: madelaide on February 17, 2008, 15:21

But how can we know if a buyer saw it in Alamy and they purchased in another site? $:-\$

Regards,
Adelaide

I think it only applies if the customer tells you they saw it on Alamy and you negotiate a price with the customer and sell it directly without going through Alamy or another agency.

araminta · « **Reply #71 on:** February 21, 2008, 16:19 »

Quote from: graficallyminded on February 21, 2008, 09:35

Do you guys take the time to fill in all of the keyword sections? I was just curious...that would take a while if I were to upload my entire portfolio.

Alamy is the site which explains the most how their search engine works and what are the most important points to improve your visibility.

http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography-keywording.asp
http://www.alamy.com/contributors/alamysearch/stock-photography-alamysearch.asp

The Alamy ranking is essential and to improve your ranking, you definitively have to define very carefully your keywords and avoid any irrelevant ones (they would impact negatively your ranking).

The AlamyMeasures tool is quite impressive as it helps you to know precisely which keywords are the most used by the buyers for each photo.

The conclusion for me is that you HAVE TO define your keywords more precisely at Alamy as compared to any other microstock site IMHO.

In fact, I think it is by far better to have a quite small diversified portfolio with very accurate keywords rather than a big portfolio with more or less relevant keywords. This is macrostock not microstock ant the rules are different... the commission too

Just my thoughts.

Phil · « **Reply #72 on:** February 21, 2008, 18:02 »

i do the alamy keywords, cut and paste into each section and pick out the most relevant for 50 character part.

rf / rm

if someone licences an image as rm they are supposed to be able to request what other uses it has been used for, even without paying the extra to use it exclusive they may want to check to make sure there competition hasn't used it, some other company isn't going to run an advert using the same image in the same media (even for a totally different product) etc etc. Basically they want to make sure it aint going to go bad for them.

there are a number of cases of problems with rf images -> Dell and Gateway used the same image in a promotion, office supply companies using same image. The blonde girl that colorvision used for all its product and packaging stuff was used on a number of porn sites and to advertise 'enlargement' medication by a couple of companies

thats the breaks when you use RF. So if both of those companies has bought rf then too bad for them, and if both bought RM and haven't checked previous / current usage then again bad luck. BUT if the one bought RF and the other RM, then one who bought RM is going to go straight back to the agency and ask questions. Very simply they are likely to sue for all costs and damages, and I dont think the agency wont protect the photographer in these cases. Personally I wouldn't like to face someone like dell deciding I screwed up a national / international advertising campaign.

Just my thoughts

araminta · « **Reply #73 on:** February 21, 2008, 18:23 »

Quote from: rustyphil on February 21, 2008, 18:02

rf / rm
...
Personally I wouldn't like to face someone like dell deciding I screwed up a national / international advertising campaign.

Very interesting thoughts indeed. Thanks!

Do you have such interesting thoughts about having the same RF photo at Alamy and on other microstock sites? I've decided myself not to have the same RF picture on both side of the macro/micro border, but I was just wondering what would be the reaction of a buyer who purchase a RF license at Alamy for $200 and then discover the same picture at SS for $1.

Your thoughts are welcome

Phil · « **Reply #74 on:** February 26, 2008, 22:19 »

hi, yes I have issues with this ethically. about half my alamy collection is on micro. I was deleting images from micros if they sold on alamy, in the view that someone would then never see it. But then one of my best sellers on micro sold at a small size on alamy, my cut was what less than what I make in a month, so I couldn't bring myself to delete it.

I spoke to about 20-30 people that I know (none of them photogs) what they thought. every single one of them said that to sell it both. most of them saying about different prices at different shops and how they'd been ripped off somewhere. Personally though there is a lot of difference between $5 and $350. (although alamy rf = full extended licence so $100+ on istock but cheaper elsewhere)

My wife and a few other microstockers I know point to fact that there is quite a number of people doing both, including some of the higher profile photogs. but that is saying 'well they do it so can I'

1 person I know says you might as well make the money from both now, because the macro will be dead within 5 years and you wont be able to then.

so, I do it, but it is something I am uncomfortable about.

Phil

vphoto · « **Reply #75 on:** February 26, 2008, 22:55 »

I think if Alamy does not bother about it, we should not. Customer assumes, that buying from Alamy means quality. Alamy ensures that by not allowing over sharpening as one example.

sharpshot · « **Reply #76 on:** February 27, 2008, 02:52 »

I am doing new images for alamy and selling most of them as licensed. I still don't see why people are putting their miscrostock photos on there. If buyers read the forum (there is a link on the front page) they will see that people are doing this. Buyers will recognize microstock photos if they also use the micros.

I wonder how many people have lost a nice commission with alamy by doing this? They might of lost several sales and any potential sales from that customer in the future.

I have seen people buy a small image on istock and then later that day find it on shutterstock to get the full size image much cheaper. Buyers are going to do this with alamy and the more people that have microstock photos there the more likely it is going to happen.

I remember reading that a top microstock photographer doesn't do well on alamy, perhaps this is because he has his microstock portfolio there? I recognized his photos straight away and buyers that also use the micros will too. Are they going to pay lots more money to buy from alamy? I don't think so.

I am putting some photos on there that I have on midstcok sites at higher prices, as the price for an EL is similar to than on alamy.

borg · « **Reply #77 on:** February 12, 2009, 05:06 »

One question!

Example!

I shoot an object two times, but from a different angle or perspectives...
Then I put one of my images on some of microstock agenices and the other on Alamy (RM)...

Is it possible,two different licences,two similar photos but different, because that is same object, but different angles of shooting...!?

sharpshot · « **Reply #78 on:** February 12, 2009, 06:02 »

Quote from: borg on February 12, 2009, 05:06

One question!

Example!

I shoot an object two times, but from a different angle or perspectives...
Then I put one of my images on some of microstock agenices and the other on Alamy (RM)...

Is it possible,two different licences,two similar photos but different, because that is same object, but different angles of shooting...!?

If the two images look at all similar, I wouldn't have one as RM and one as RF.

borg · « **Reply #79 on:** May 16, 2010, 05:27 »

Does Alamy accept universal model release?

Thanks!

lagereek · « **Reply #80 on:** May 16, 2010, 05:38 »

Quote from: hatman12 on September 01, 2007, 23:36

Traveler, clearly you believe there are better returns to be gained at Getty and Corbis.

Are you preapred to devote a little bit of time to tell us more about your experiences at those agencies, and what the best route to take with them might be?

Also, you haven't mentioned Jupiter. Do they not figure in your work?

Leaf - perhaps we should have a section devoted specifically to the 'old school' agencies?

Hi Dave! fancy bumping in to you hear??

For RM and RF stock, you cant beat Getty, Ive been with their RM section since 93, came via Image-Bank and Stones, Getty are extremly good at selling and for good prices.

Theres always a but, that is that in todays digital era, RM or Macro-RF, isnt on the whole selling very well and for obvious reasons, the same quality is in fact available in the Micro/Macro industry as we all know. Some will argue here but the plain fact is: Micro has taken over from the Trad-agencies, no doubt.

Occasionally when a client needs worldrights, this and that, well ofcourse then they will buy RM.

The Getty-RM is today almost a closed shop, unless youve got extremly commercial material. I would therfore try my luck with, well why not Getty, but also Corbis and Jupiter.

best. Christian

trek · « **Reply #81 on:** May 16, 2010, 06:49 »

Re: Also, you haven't mentioned Jupiter. Do they not figure in your work?

Jupiter aka Stockexpert was bought out by Getty last year. They were shut down.

borg · « **Reply #82 on:** May 16, 2010, 08:22 »

Again!

Quote from: borg on May 16, 2010, 05:27

Does Alamy accept universal model release?

Thanks!

ap · « **Reply #83 on:** May 16, 2010, 12:35 »

Quote from: borg on May 16, 2010, 08:22

Again!

Quote from: borg on May 16, 2010, 05:27
Does Alamy accept universal model release?

Thanks!

i believe so. they went through with no problems.

ShadySue · « **Reply #84 on:** May 16, 2010, 14:27 »

Quote from: scoutingstock on May 16, 2010, 06:49

Re: Also, you haven't mentioned Jupiter. Do they not figure in your work?

Jupiter aka Stockexpert was bought out by Getty last year. They were shut down.

Really?
What's this then: http://www.jupiterimages.com

red · « **Reply #85 on:** May 16, 2010, 14:31 »

Per their site -

Jupiterimages is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Getty Images, the world's leading creator and distributor of still imagery, footage and multi-media products, as well as a recognized provider of other forms of premium digital content, including music.

ShadySue · « **Reply #86 on:** May 16, 2010, 16:01 »

Quote from: cuppacoffee on May 16, 2010, 14:31

Per their site -

Jupiterimages is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Getty Images, the world's leading creator and distributor of still imagery, footage and multi-media products, as well as a recognized provider of other forms of premium digital content, including music.

Yebbut they don't seem to be "shut down".
(Odd that their current 'featured collection' is Corbis.

trek · « **Reply #87 on:** May 16, 2010, 16:08 »

I stand corrected. Seems Getty let them live. Do they still allow submissions or are they a zombie (no new photos allowed) site like Jupiter's Stockexpert brand? Any one know?

Phil · « **Reply #88 on:** May 16, 2010, 20:30 »

Quote from: borg on May 16, 2010, 05:27

Does Alamy accept universal model release?

Thanks!

yes, until a few weeks back it was a tick box of yes I have a release which you didnt have to upload, they just trusted your honesty. Now it is a tick box, upload and assign to images if you wish

but if you want to just tick yes and not upload you can. I still dont think it is checked for any particular wording etc, it is assumed you have well worded releases with the info needed.