�

Getty is on the list, but not enough people report their sales there to actually show on the chart, like all the rest with no results.
Presumably not enough people have asked for the other macros to be added. I've maybe seen a couple of requests for Corbis to be added, but 'so many' people have to add their sales figures for any value to show on the chart.

By the rpd I get on Alamy, it's midstock at best, especially this year.

I submit to Alamy and iStock. So far, I always earn much more on iStock (different images). My iS port is older and bigger, but the Alamy earnings have always been relatively much lower.
Still, this year, iS earnings are sinking rapidly and Alamy is up on last year, and I'll be focussing on Alamy for the next few months while I take stock.
However, I don't currently post my Alamy results, as if I did, the 'system' would automatically make my iS earnings 'indie' which would be wrong. I have no idea whether my modest Alamy earnings would boost their figures or slump them.

The poll tells us almost nothing (what's the point of knowing what people earn if we don't know the size of their port etc.). Some people with big earnings have big expenses, and only profit really matters. And it's only people on here who choose to take part who post their figures.

Be aware that people here post net earnings viz net of the agency's commission, not net of tax); most people on Alamy quote gross earnings.

Because for years people asked that it be added.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/alamy-com/alamy-on-poll-results/

I can't give an exact comparison because I've been on iStock since very late 2006, but on Alamy only since April 2010 (when I'd earned enough on iStock to pay for a 5D2 and appropriate lenses). I have almost 3900 pics on iStock and over 2800 on Alamy (different files).
My iStock total net earnings around 8x of my Alamy net, but over an extra 3.3 years and with a lot more files.

Since iStock started subs, earings there have shot down, I'm projecting to be 40% down on earnings from iStock this year compared to last year.
Even so, this year, my projected iStock net earnings are still a bit more than 4x my net Alamy earnings, but iS is sinking fast, and realistically I can't see it coming up again.

I see you've asked in another thread about editorial on the micros. Until iS mucked search up in late 2012 and then again since they started selling subs, I'd definitely have said I was doing better selling editorial via istock (and until early last year iStock's acceptance standards were higher than Alamy's, but now ... not so).
Even now, a disproportionate number of the little I'm selling as credits there seems to be editorial uploaded specifically in 2011; but that information is no good for future projections, as what I've uploaded at iS this year is selling almost solely as subs, so I've virtually stopped uploading there since summer. Possibly (I have no way of proving it without buying a package) subs buyers see a different best match to credit buyers.

Exclusive editorial files are allegedly going to be mirrored on Getty, but that's a double-edged sword, as we only get 20% there and some Getty sales have netted me 18c (apparently that's a one-day web usage deal, or similar  ).

Sorry, I've conflated your two threads in this one answer. However, you'll hopefully get, on your other thread, info about the other micros (about which I know nothing) from other people .

I just had a sale on Alamy (after nothing for 3 months).   It's for educational use, front cover of a book.  7 dollars, of which I get $3.5.   So if Alamy isn't a microstock today, I don't know what to call it.

I've been with Alamy since 2009 and have seen prices there dip, but this year they seemed to rise again. Despite a handful of sales in the <$10 range, my average download there this year was $75 - with $37.50 to me and best license there this year was $400 (of which I got $200), so despite some micro prices, most of my licenses this year were in $45-85 range, so I'd consider them in the midstock to macrostock range. In 2013 and 2014 my average license there was ~$40, so the improvement was noticeable this year.

Since many of us here are on Alamy, and since many here license images to both the macro and micro markets, it makes sense for Alamy to be in the poll - just as Getty, 500px, and Stocksy are also in here. As the stock photography market has changed, with more overlap between the macro and micro sites, IMHO it makes sense for all those sites to be listed here.

COntributors that are submitting RM or RF that is not on microstock are making very good money there. If they also would put their earnings here Alamy would be in the top tier without question.

Make that, "Some contributors that are submitting huge numbers of RM or RF that is not on microstock are making very good money there. If they also would put their earnings here Alamy might be in the top tier without question."
If we all put in our Alamy sales (I think most iS exclusives don't, for the reason I mentioned above) it's hard to speculate how their position might change.
I have to say that the reported monthly results over on the Alamy forum isn't very encouraging, considering the number of files in people's ports.
I accept that a only a tiny proportion of Alamy contributors reports there, as msg members don't all complete the poll here.

Congrats, Lanabyko, that's probably an Alamy record!

Istock editorial needs for every place an release anyway. Feels like commercial. While i am struggling to get releases or adjust every caption for every agency i already took the next hundreds photos for Alamy. So considering the time i got for editorial much better results on Alamy. Also they are automatically distributed with national agencies like Mauritius or ImageSelect.  Commercial on micros. Thats how i split it.
Mirco

I'm not trying to argue with you, honestly; but didn't you get the email last week, linking to the (too-brief and not detailed enough, IMO) blog post below, suggesting very similar restrictions to Editorial as iStock has. iStock guarantees files to be safe, so you'll get them rejected on iS, whereas Alamy accepts files on our responsibility and don't guarantee the files to buyers, as they don't check releases.
http://www.alamy.com/blog/photography-private-property?utm_campaign=221491_Tips%20for%20photographing%20on%20public%20property&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Alamy%20Contributors%20&dm_i=2SWW,4QWJ,12I733,DU6I,1

Bottom line is, results at different agencies are different for everyone (I know people who do badly on SS with excellent files, but the subjects presumably aren't of interest to SS buyers), and we each have to somehow second guess what's going to be best for us going forward. As it's not likely to be iStock, I'll be focussing more on Alamy like I said, but I'm not fully convinced.

[snip] All pictures that I would never sell for $ .36 and that I want with my signature printed.

How do you guarantee getting your name credited on all of your Alamy RM sales?  Most of my found in-uses are either credited to Alamy or not credited (editorial RM).

Also, although maybe Alamy sales are not at 36c quite yet (I had one at $1.55 net for a five-year editorial website use pop in yesterday), it's probably only a matter of time, and as Alamy officially confirmed on here that you can't shield any 'special' images from low prices, as it's all down to the discount the buyers have.

BTW: I'm straddling the New Year making and merging Google reverse image screenshots of in-uses of one particular RM file which has sold 22 times from Alamy but has >60 in-uses, dating back to 2011, 39 from one particular UK website (not the usual suspect), yet each small-value sale for 'editorial website' specifies one article for one week, then archived.
Of course, I don't know if they are the ones who have made some purchases or not. I'll present the long, long screenshot jpg to CS and see what they say.   

I have almost left DT because when I have alerted about a picture that was distributed only through DT, and sold only one time, that I found printed in a magazine with the signature of another agency, they have answered that can happen.

I've never been on DT, but I have had a few instances where Alamy have confirmed that in-uses I've found have not been purchased, they are not going to pursue it, but I can if I want to. It would help if they would work with the big-buyers-with-heavy-discounts to make even a little effort to protect images, as a high proportion of these have been lifted from one regular Alamy buyer then appear all over East Asia (difficult to pursue, but prolific) long before the sale has been notified. I know that determined thieves can always find ways of stealing content, but there is no barrier at all to stealing from this publication - even I can copy out a page or an image.

I don't think Alamy is bad, I just think you've been lucky so far. I've seen enough other reports to know I'm not unusually unlucky. Did you see the thread over there about an RM file getting $8 gross for a book cover?
http://discussion.alamy.com/index.php?/topic/4982-front-cover-for-8