Author Topic: RF - Alamy and others (Read 23244 times)

dbajurin · « **on:** July 08, 2008, 12:46 »

I am new to alamy so I have some basic question I can't find on alamy site. Can I sell RF image on Alamy witch is allready selling on other microstock sites?

As I see Alamy's RF is normal Full RF and its is similar to various EL-RF on other sites. So I think it is ok. What do you think?

Thanks!

stokfoto · « **Reply #1 on:** July 08, 2008, 12:54 »

answer to you question is yes since there is no restriction on that.

but personally I would just upload the files that aren't on micros

a- if the buyer find outs they could have bought to same file a lot cheaper perhaps they wouldn't buy from you again

b-I think especially with newly developing technologies it il be a lot easier for buyer to search for the same image on the internet (ie tineeye)

but it's entirely up to you.

dbajurin · « **Reply #2 on:** July 08, 2008, 12:59 »

Thanks!

Perry · « **Reply #3 on:** July 08, 2008, 13:54 »

I think selling same images at such different price points is stupid and immoral.

dbajurin · « **Reply #4 on:** July 08, 2008, 14:20 »

It is the same price or similar.

Alamy Full RF = (almost) Dreamstime EL-RF

Alamy Full RF LESS or EQUAL Istock EL (unlimited seat + more print + everything you get at Alamy)

That is why I am asking. If you buy at Istock or DT image cost could be higher than Alamy.

ichiro17 · « **Reply #5 on:** July 08, 2008, 14:22 »

I don't see any reason not to post them on Alamy. If the prices in the end would be the same for similar licenses, then I say go for it. I think I might to the same as well.

grp_photo · « **Reply #6 on:** July 08, 2008, 14:36 »

Quote from: dbajurin on July 08, 2008, 14:20

It is the same price or similar.

Alamy Full RF = (almost) Dreamstime EL-RF

Alamy Full RF LESS or EQUAL Istock EL (unlimited seat + more print + everything you get at Alamy)

That is why I am asking. If you buy at Istock or DT image cost could be higher than Alamy.

that is dumb and not true.

dbajurin · « **Reply #7 on:** July 08, 2008, 14:44 »

If it isn't true can you explain to me.
Thanks.

dbajurin · « **Reply #8 on:** July 08, 2008, 14:48 »

Just to point as I see this. This is Istock prices:

Extended License Options      Images & Illustrations
Unlimited Reproduction / Print Runs     100 credits
Multi-Seat License:
unlimited users      50 credits

So for one image it is 150 credits cc 150$. At Alamy cost is 95,58$ for the same rights and same size. Can you explain to me how can be 95,58$ more than 150$???

Perry · « **Reply #9 on:** July 08, 2008, 14:53 »

Please, do remember to calculate the photographer's share too.

I also think that an EL is mostly a curiosity, it's the regular licences that should be the thing to compare.

dbajurin · « **Reply #10 on:** July 08, 2008, 15:00 »

I don't agree with you perry because we are selling rights so we must compare price of equal rights.

It is very confused to me. Everybody said that Alamy is much expensive than microstock but when you compare rights what you get is cheaper Alamy prices.

PS: This prices I found on Istock and Alamy are for the buyers and photographer's share depending on your Istock canister level. So I think this is not important. I am looking from the buyer's point of view.

Adeptris · « **Reply #11 on:** July 09, 2008, 10:42 »

Quote from: dbajurin on July 08, 2008, 15:00

PS: This prices I found on Istock and Alamy are for the buyers and photographer's share depending on your Istock canister level. So I think this is not important. I am looking from the buyer's point of view.

The Photographers % is a lot higher on Alamy so it is important, what others are trying to say is that an Alamy buyer that spends $150+ on an Image would be unhappy if one of thier children or staff downloaded the same image for $1.00-$5.00 and put it in a presentation.

Some buyers have had rebates for this very scenario and that just creates bad will between Alamy and it's clients, I was on Microstock, but have never had the same image on both Micro and Alamy at the same time, but I have had a $150 sale of a former micro image, also unlike the instant sale of the micro's, Alamy clients are mainly account holders and may have up to 90 days to pay, and you get paid when and if Alamy do, so you may have a sale reported today, and a couple of months later if is seen on a micro and a rebate is issued.

75% of Alamy Sales are Editorial and only 25% Advertising so the type of images are different although some cross both Media, think about this also if you want good Sales.

David

vphoto · « **Reply #12 on:** July 09, 2008, 11:09 »

What is an Editorial image? It seems I have a very vague idea only.

tan510jomast · « **Reply #13 on:** July 09, 2008, 11:13 »

Quote from: vphoto on July 09, 2008, 11:09

What is an Editorial image? It seems I have a very vague idea only.

an Editorial is something reportage, like newsworthy topics.
eg. nowadays the world cup, olympics, obama and clinton,etc...

one important note : you cannot edit your editorial photos.
that would be like distorting news.
in other words, you cannot erase a face, or add a horse,etc...

editorials also get precedence over creative, since time is of the essence.
they usually get reviewed faster. in fact, DT even has an option for you to email them to say this is urgent, and they will review the editorial
almost overnight if it is.

vphoto · « **Reply #14 on:** July 09, 2008, 11:17 »

no model released needed, right ?

cascoly · « **Reply #15 on:** July 09, 2008, 16:48 »

that's only part of 'editorial' - it also includes generic images, crowds, city views, traffic, etc where it's difficult to remove all faces or trademarks

steve

vphoto · « **Reply #16 on:** July 09, 2008, 17:07 »

I made a search on Alamy "Philadelphia". I see some images marked as L and some as RF. Where are editorial images ?

epixx · « **Reply #17 on:** July 09, 2008, 18:44 »

Quote from: vphoto on July 09, 2008, 17:07

I made a search on Alamy "Philadelphia". I see some images marked as L and some as RF. Where are editorial images ?

Editorial images are usually L, but not always. If the photo contains faces, property or logos without a release, it has to be L, and as has been mentioned already: no editing of editorial photos, except adjustments of curves etc. There's a separate tick-box for that on Alamy ("Has this photo been manipulated?" or something along those lines).

vphoto · « **Reply #18 on:** July 09, 2008, 18:53 »

thanks epixx!. I am trying to find for myself a different avenue, other than food images. It has to be either editorial images or some creative PS stuff. But I can't read PS manuals, I tried several times; a torture ... Now I got, thanks to this thread, a better idea of editorial images. I have canon 40D and it is bulky to carry around. Of course, I have to decide eventually.

madelaide · « **Reply #19 on:** July 09, 2008, 21:53 »

Quote from: vphoto on July 09, 2008, 11:17

no model released needed, right ?

Hmm, yes, but the image has to be of editorial use. A photo of an anonymous woman smiling and talking at the phone is not editorial. A photo of that same woman among other runners in a marathon is.

Regards,
Adelaide

vphoto · « **Reply #20 on:** July 09, 2008, 22:04 »

thanks, madelaide. I did not grasp the difference before.

madelaide · « **Reply #21 on:** July 10, 2008, 19:12 »

vphoto,

I have seen discussions about this in other sites. Not rarely people set as editorial an image just because he doesn't have a MR (and that was unacceptable to me when I saw amateur nude pics sold as editorial).

There are some grey areas on this however. I, for one, would never sell people image as RF, at least not images of ordinary people. For instance, I have photos of kids in a refugee camp in Botswana. It would be ok to sell them for an article on refugees, but not on child abuse or infant AIDS. This kind of separation is only possible with RM.

Regards,
Adelaide

HermanM · « **Reply #22 on:** July 10, 2008, 22:21 »

Editorial is not necessarily a newsworthy image, so some manipulation can be allowed in some cases (if the image is newsworthy then no manipulation should be done, but not all editorial images are newsworthy).

About posting the same images here or there it is a common question and the common answer is that common sense says it is not a good idea. Despite you can compare rights vs prices at Alamy RF prices do vary according to size in a way that a full resolution image could earn more money than the same image at a micro even with a full extended licence. Also there is the importance that buyers have to trust Alamy (or traditional sites) about their libraries. It will be a disservice to Alamy, to other photographers and to yourself (if you take this as a serious business in the long run) to submit the same images, more now that technology allows to screen the web for the presence of images at some webpages and very soon buyers will use those tools to seek if an image has been sold many many times, where and, with this infor, at which prices. So they will find out and you will get a lot of return sales and will affect everybody by hurting Alamy´s trust in the eyes of buyers.

Micro images should stay micro, even images with the "micro look" will do better at micros than at Alamy. Explore the website and see what is offered, it is very different of what you see at micros.

sharpshot · « **Reply #23 on:** July 11, 2008, 00:49 »

I am sticking to not uploading microstock photos to alamy for now. I wish they would open up a microstock site and put all the images that are also on the micros in it. The big traditional agencies all have microstock sites now, so perhaps alamy will do this in the future.

The thought of losing sales and potential future customers concerns me. I also wonder why buyers would bother looking for RF on alamy if it was flooded with microstock images?

I don't get the similar prices argument, as EL sales are a very small percentage of our sales on the microstock sites.

Adeptris · « **Reply #24 on:** July 11, 2008, 01:43 »

Quote from: HermanM on July 10, 2008, 22:21

Editorial is not necessarily a newsworthy image, so some manipulation can be allowed in some cases (if the image is newsworthy then no manipulation should be done, but not all editorial images are newsworthy).

Understanding what an Editorial Image is hard to start with, get the quality Sunday papers and look at the supplements articles not advertisments, some images do cross both Editorial and Advertising, you may have an image of a local area, if the paper is running an article about that area they will look for a generic local shot, if the article is about the Health Service then a micro stock style image of a drug might work but a better shot might be required one that tells the story empty beds, an airconditioning vent, a bucket with a mop, any hospital style people in a natural pose, not cheesy smiley etc:

So editorial does not mean only shots with people, but shots that can tell a story with a single picture.

On the subject of finding ex-micro images online, some will be found but a lot of micro images are not used on the internet, I have only found one of my ex-micro images using Google Images online, TinEye found none, now the reason would be simple, my images may well have been used for flyers, presentations, course work etc:, and these will never reach the internet.

Use TinEye to search for an image that has been downloaded several thousand times and you will find less that 100 online, so if your ex-micro image has only a few downloads because it is more suited to the macro's or is not a micro style image, providing it is ex-micro upload it, one of my ex-micro images sold RF for $150 of which I will get half.

David

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: RF - Alamy and others (Read 23244 times)

dbajurin

stokfoto

dbajurin

Perry

dbajurin

ichiro17

grp_photo

dbajurin

dbajurin

Perry

dbajurin

Adeptris

vphoto

tan510jomast

vphoto

cascoly

vphoto

epixx

vphoto

madelaide

vphoto

madelaide

HermanM

sharpshot

Adeptris

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors