Another best strategy thread...

[mjp]

Hi everyone,

I'm looking to best way to get start working with alamy. I have though several ways, but not sure which one will be the best for 1-2 year time line.

background:

I will start producing new higher quality images on specific category only. (I have come to two categories: food and fine dining (including wine, alcohol, gourmet and dining related life style images) or bio technology and biology/medical related images (access to labs etc are possible but may cost some amount of money). I can also finance little bit the image production (e.g. renting probs, hire models, hire chefs etc) but not in massive scale like Yuri like to do . Quality not quantity is the key and lot of work to do.

and now the questions:

1. Are the selected categories good enough or should I get better focus. I'm familiar with food stuff, but not with medical ones (I have friend who can arrange these things and help me out, but he wants his share of the sales, but thats ok to me).

2. RM or RF or both?

3. If I choose RF, is it still wise to sell same images in with (Finnish) mid-stock company (end user price level is 80-200euros).

4. Selling same images in micros are out of the question ? (downscaled, lowres?)

5. Anything else I should know/remember?

6. Is my current images good enough? (look links to portfolios from signature).

7. Other similar sites?

thanks in advance,

MJP

[redhat]

mjp,

Make your own decisions that way you get all the credit and can not blame someone else if things do not go as you hoped they would.  Be flexible, ready to change your decision if things are not working out.  Do not worry or pay attention to what other people think or tell you, only you know what you can & can not do and how much money and time you have to invest.  Make your own mistakes, you will learn more that way.

[mjp]

redhat: Thanks for your kind comments. Ofcourse I will make my own decission, but I'm just asking others opinnion (and learning by other succes and mistakes) to make best decission on based information.

br, MJP

[madelaide]

mjp,

I am not at Alamy myself.  I want to, but then their 40MB minimum file size is out of my reach, even with my XTi I don't get such a large TIFF file.  Unless that means a 16bit file, I don't see the point of not accepting a JPEG from an 8bit TIFF file if JPEG is 8bit also.  I'd appreciate if anyone can clarify that matter.

Anyway, just some thoughts: don't put at any macro the same images you have at micros, this is naturally seen as unprofessional.  I've read here of people having their best images in a series at macro and the inferior ones at micro, but personally I think this is also a bad move if the images are indeed similar (same set-up, just different angles).

What I have in macros is basically my travel photos (landscape/nature/architecture).  Images of specific places I set as RM, generic images as RF.  Some of these RM images are offered as RF in sites where RM does not exist (Shutterpoint, for instance), but if I sell it in one model, I remove it from the sites where I sell in the other.  If I sold an image as RF and someone contact me for a RM usage (this hasn't yet happened though), I would offer it informing that it had sold as RF before - it's the buyer's choice to buy it or not after knowing that. 

I don't think however I am a role model, as I haven't had that many sales in macro, but I'm satisfied with the sales I had - recently even an image for a book to be published by Oxford University Press.

Regards,
Adelaide

[stokfoto]

I am not at Alamy myself.  I want to, but then their 40MB minimum file size is out of my reach, even with my XTi I don't get such a large TIFF file.  Unless that means a 16bit file, I don't see the point of not accepting a JPEG from an 8bit TIFF file if JPEG is 8bit also.  I'd appreciate if anyone can clarify that matter.

Adelaide,
I think many people get confused by this I did too in the beginning.But answer is very simple.the size they refer actually is uncompressed jpeg size which means when you open jpg file in PS or  go to image size and you will see uncompressed size of the file.now all you need to do is to upsize your image (I upsize from 50%) I am sure it will work for you too.make sure you upsize with bicubic (smoother)mode which is said to be working best. There are also some specilized softwares for interpolation but PS does it just fine.

edit:btw the min required size is 48mb not 40 if I am not wrong.

[UberLens]

Alamy asks for 48MB that is megabytes (48*1024*1024) which equals to 50,331,648 bytes. Considering that each pixel is 3 bytes in a 8-bit jpeg file that will mean 16,777,216 pixels.

They say that you might need to upscale using a bicubic algorithm.

So how do you determine the factor to upscale the image? Easy: divide 16,777,216 by the number of pixels of your image area. One more thing: make sure you do a sqrt of that number to determine what to use for each dimension.

Here is an example:
I have a 2000x3000 photo. What factor should I use for each dimension to meet the minimum Alamy size?

First, dividing 16,777,216 by 6,000,000 and we get 2.8 (rounded of course). Secondly, square root of 2.8 will give you a 1.68. This is the number to use to upscale each dimension. To verify: 3*(2000*1.68)*(3000*1.68) = 50,803,200 bytes.
In other words, in Photoshop I would use 3360x5040.

Some might find this hard to believe but I have a bunch of 6 megapixels shots on Alamy.

Hope it helps.

[rosta]

ISome might find this hard to believe but I have a bunch of 6 megapixels shots on Alamy.

I do as well
rosta

[madelaide]

Thanks for the clarification, so upsizing explains it then.  How odd.  I wonder why they need upsized images when the original sizes are already so useful.  It kinds of feel like cheating the buyer...

I don't remember if it was Alamy or another, but when talking about scanned images they required something that was impossible for me to achieve - something like a minimum of 6MPix with 40MB. I wrote them and they insisted I could achieve that with 2100dpi scanning, which was impossible (I get about 20MB).  I later figured out that they probably meant 16bit TIFFs and not 8bit TIFFs I had, but they were not able to say that.

Regards,
Adelaide

[vphoto]

Adelaide,

if you upsize for Alamy, be sure that the resulting jpeg will not exceed 25mb.

vphoto

[ale1969]

Directly fro Alamy site help:

"Uncompressed file sizes of between 48MB and 200MB. This means you should make your JPEG file from an 8 bit TIFF file that is at least 48MB. Our maximum size for the uncompressed file is 200MB."

If you open "image size" into PS you can easily see the MB of your image and how much you have to enlarge it.

[zorki]

I have an XTI and I upscale to 131 percent with bicubic smoothing, then save as 12 jpeg and they accept everything I've thrown at them.

[jorgeinthewater]

Alamy asks for 48MB that is megabytes (48*1024*1024) which equals to 50,331,648 bytes. Considering that each pixel is 3 bytes in a 8-bit jpeg file that will mean 16,777,216 pixels.

They say that you might need to upscale using a bicubic algorithm.

So how do you determine the factor to upscale the image? Easy: divide 16,777,216 by the number of pixels of your image area. One more thing: make sure you do a sqrt of that number to determine what to use for each dimension.

Here is an example:
I have a 2000x3000 photo. What factor should I use for each dimension to meet the minimum Alamy size?

First, dividing 16,777,216 by 6,000,000 and we get 2.8 (rounded of course). Secondly, square root of 2.8 will give you a 1.68. This is the number to use to upscale each dimension. To verify: 3*(2000*1.68)*(3000*1.68) = 50,803,200 bytes.
In other words, in Photoshop I would use 3360x5040.

Some might find this hard to believe but I have a bunch of 6 megapixels shots on Alamy.

Hope it helps.

I have notice that when I open a raw image {nikon d50 6 mp} using ps cs2 there is a pull down menu on the bottom left hand area that gives you
different sizes I choose 5120 x 3404 which automatically gives me a file
size of 49 mb. I am not good at math but this seems easier, am I wrong or
those someone have an easier way to get from 6mp to 48+ mb?

[UberLens]

Alamy asks for 48MB that is megabytes (48*1024*1024) which equals to 50,331,648 bytes. Considering that each pixel is 3 bytes in a 8-bit jpeg file that will mean 16,777,216 pixels.

They say that you might need to upscale using a bicubic algorithm.

So how do you determine the factor to upscale the image? Easy: divide 16,777,216 by the number of pixels of your image area. One more thing: make sure you do a sqrt of that number to determine what to use for each dimension.

Here is an example:
I have a 2000x3000 photo. What factor should I use for each dimension to meet the minimum Alamy size?

First, dividing 16,777,216 by 6,000,000 and we get 2.8 (rounded of course). Secondly, square root of 2.8 will give you a 1.68. This is the number to use to upscale each dimension. To verify: 3*(2000*1.68)*(3000*1.68) = 50,803,200 bytes.
In other words, in Photoshop I would use 3360x5040.

Some might find this hard to believe but I have a bunch of 6 megapixels shots on Alamy.

Hope it helps.

I have notice that when I open a raw image {nikon d50 6 mp} using ps cs2 there is a pull down menu on the bottom left hand area that gives you
different sizes I choose 5120 x 3404 which automatically gives me a file
size of 49 mb. I am not good at math but this seems easier, am I wrong or
those someone have an easier way to get from 6mp to 48+ mb?

You got that right. This will work if you are using a 2:3 ratio. For 3:4, square etc you will need to find the right dimensions either by guessing or using the formula above. The formula above is helpful when you are trying to determine the right size to upscale low resolution images where you do not want to excessively upscale.

[jorgeinthewater]

"You got that right. This will work if you are using a 2:3 ratio. For 3:4, square etc you will need to find the right dimensions either by guessing or using the formula above. The formula above is helpful when you are trying to determine the right size to upscale low resolution images where you do not want to excessively upscale"

Thanks Uberlens, I will keep it in mind for any images that I crop.

[UberLens]

"You got that right. This will work if you are using a 2:3 ratio. For 3:4, square etc you will need to find the right dimensions either by guessing or using the formula above. The formula above is helpful when you are trying to determine the right size to upscale low resolution images where you do not want to excessively upscale"

Thanks Uberlens, I will keep it in mind for any images that I crop.

Thinking about it: the ratio won't matter but the total area. It will be sqrt of the same area no matter the shape. Anyway, probably Alamy should explain this better so people have a better understanding of what and why. Megabytes, megapixels, bytes per pixel could be confusing to many.

[mjp]

Hi all,

Thanks for clarification about alamys upscale process it helped a lot. Have anybody anything about question number 3. I posted. I have plans that every macro images is different from micros (no same session images on micros etc).

Madelaide: What other sites than alamy your are submitting?

br, MJP

[UberLens]

Hi all,

Thanks for clarification about alamys upscale process it helped a lot. Have anybody anything about question number 3. I posted. I have plans that every macro images is different from micros (no same session images on micros etc).

Madelaide: What other sites than alamy your are submitting?

br, MJP

My take is this: I do not have a problem selling the same image at different price levels assuming the same type of license, as long as the price is fair. They reach different markets with different needs. If the buyer finds my image quick on a given stock agency and has no problem paying $150 for it, why not?

So yeah, I load RF images to Photoshelter and Alamy. Sometimes at microstocks as well. It is a different story for RM (as defined by Alamy): they need to be exclusive.
Alamy also has L (Licensed) that is the equivalent to RM at Photoshelter (I know, confusing). No exclusivity here, the buyer pays for the intended usage as opposed to RF.

Bottom line: I own the images therefore I get to decide what the licensing model works best for me. The buyers know this very well (or they should). If they buy RF they know they are getting it cheaper than RM but that it also means that the same image could be sold elsewhere.

[zorki]

I've heard time and again that you shouldn't upload the same RF images to Microstock and Alamy, but I say why not? Consumers in general are willing to pay higher prices for the same thing at different stores, so I have no problem pricing my images at different levels....

[ParisEye]

Yes, when the prices variation is in a few percentage bracket but here you speak about selling the same pictures 200$ on Alamy and 1 $ or less in microstock agencies.

Everybody here seems trying to get a better return for their pictures, if you sell the same thing at both markets you just muddle the water a bit more.

Is it so difficult to keep some really good photos for the better paying market and help them to make a difference ?

[zorki]

If I had a portfolio of thousands of images, I would worry about diluting my "brand", but I dare anyone to find my stuff on Alamy and any micro... what is Alamy up to 7.8 million images??? I have .000001% of the total library there...

[ale1969]

I decided to divide my production not on the "tech quality" of the photo but its use.

For example if I have to shoot some fruits, the isolated ones go to micro while the ones with a proper setup including plates, towels, knives etc are for the my macro portfolio.

It makes sense also because the latter have a more different and limited market. A designer who need an isolated asettic lemon just to put it into a composition will never go to a macro site, while the opposite is akso pretty true.

An image with an already very defined "taste" need to be paid more because it won't ever sell to so many people as the former but it's ready to be used "out of the box" sparing the designer huge bucks and time.

[madelaide]

Madelaide: What other sites than alamy your are submitting?

Shutterpoint (RF only), TSS/MyLoupe (RF and RM) and FP (RF and RM).  Notice that I have a different account for macro in FP.  I have some in KeenImages and ImageVortex, but stopped uploading to both (although I'm an inch away of a payout in IV).  I'm considering opening an account in Photoshelter too, but people complain of their upload system so I'm delaying it.

I applied to AbsoluteStock months ago but never got a reply, nor even to my email, but people I know say the site had a good start but now is dead (and that may explain the lack of reply).


I remember seeing other sites that require large sizes also, do they accept upsizing as well?

Regards,
Adelaide

[photojay]

Alamy asks for 48MB that is megabytes (48*1024*1024) which equals to 50,331,648 bytes. Considering that each pixel is 3 bytes in a 8-bit jpeg file that will mean 16,777,216 pixels.

They say that you might need to upscale using a bicubic algorithm.

So how do you determine the factor to upscale the image? Easy: divide 16,777,216 by the number of pixels of your image area. One more thing: make sure you do a sqrt of that number to determine what to use for each dimension.

Here is an example:
I have a 2000x3000 photo. What factor should I use for each dimension to meet the minimum Alamy size?

First, dividing 16,777,216 by 6,000,000 and we get 2.8 (rounded of course). Secondly, square root of 2.8 will give you a 1.68. This is the number to use to upscale each dimension. To verify: 3*(2000*1.68)*(3000*1.68) = 50,803,200 bytes.
In other words, in Photoshop I would use 3360x5040.

Some might find this hard to believe but I have a bunch of 6 megapixels shots on Alamy.

Hope it helps.

I am currently using my 10.1MP Canon 40D, which has pixel dimensions of 3888x2592.  Using the math you gave me, I divide 16,777,216 by 10,077,696 which equals 1.665.  So if I multiply 3888x2592 *1.29(the square root of 1.665) I get 5015x3344. 

This gives me a little over an 18.44MP image.   For the image in question, when saved as an 8-bit jpeg at maximum quality (minimum compression) converted first from raw(17MB) then to a 16-bit TIFF(57MB), I end up with an 8.15MB file. 

So, as long as my TIFF file is larger than 48MB, I am not sending them the TIFF, I am sending them the 8.15MB 8-bit JPEG file, right? 

[ParisEye]

They accept only JPEG. So, as long as your TIFF file is more than 48MB you save it in JPEG, you send the JPEG. Et voil� !

[HermanM]

mjp,

I am not at Alamy myself.  I want to, but then their 40MB minimum file size is out of my reach, even with my XTi I don't get such a large TIFF file. 

I have sold images taken with a 300D at Alamy, upscaled with Genuine Fractals and after 1200 images (many with the 300D and 20D) have had cero rejections.

With an XTi it should be no problem at all.