Author Topic: what's the difference between Macro and Micro with Alamy? (Read 8372 times)

captain · « **on:** October 24, 2012, 00:24 »

Really confused what's the difference between Macro and Micro here? If I upload a photo to SS/DT/IS as micro,can I still upload this same photo to Alamy as Macro?

secondly,normally,when you upload the photo to Alamy,which license you choosed: RM,RF or RM-E?

leaf · « **Reply #1 on:** October 24, 2012, 04:31 »

yes, you are allowed to upload the image to Alamy. All images on the microstock stock are licensed as RF (Royalty Free) so the image MUST be set as RF on Alamy as well. RM (rights managed) means you have control of where and when the images you license are used. Selling as RF you don't have that control.

Alamy is a traditional agency.. but the lines are beginning to be very blurred.. and really perhaps there are not lines. Different sites sell images at different prices with different licenses and offer different buyer support. Price comparison is tougher than it first appears.

beau_nash · « **Reply #2 on:** October 24, 2012, 05:21 »

The only thing to remember is that Alamy is strict on people in images. So if you've got a blurred background figure or a bodypart that doesn't require a release on a microstock site and licensed under RF, you can't put that image on Alamy because any part of any person, no matter how blurred or small, requires it to be RM. And you can't have the same image RM on Alamy and RF elsewhere as far as Alamy's rules are concerned.

Poncke · « **Reply #3 on:** October 24, 2012, 12:55 »

Quote from: captain on October 24, 2012, 00:24

Really confused what's the difference between Macro and Micro here? If I upload a photo to SS/DT/IS as micro,can I still upload this same photo to Alamy as Macro?

secondly,normally,when you upload the photo to Alamy,which license you choosed: RM,RF or RM-E?

All images that you sell as RF can only be sold on Alamy as RF. If you dont have releases for the people or ANY property, you need to set the licence as RM. But if you do that, the image cant be sold elsewhere as RF.

stockastic · « **Reply #4 on:** October 24, 2012, 12:58 »

[del]

captain · « **Reply #5 on:** October 24, 2012, 20:13 »

Quote from: Poncke on October 24, 2012, 12:55

Quote from: captain on October 24, 2012, 00:24
Really confused what's the difference between Macro and Micro here? If I upload a photo to SS/DT/IS as micro,can I still upload this same photo to Alamy as Macro?

secondly,normally,when you upload the photo to Alamy,which license you choosed: RM,RF or RM-E?

All images that you sell as RF can only be sold on Alamy as RF. If you dont have releases for the people or ANY property, you need to set the licence as RM. But if you do that, the image cant be sold elsewhere as RF.

hI thanks for your reply.Does it mean if NO property release or Model release,the photo can be defined as RM,like editorial in SS/DT?

ShadySue · « **Reply #6 on:** October 25, 2012, 05:32 »

Quote from: captain on October 24, 2012, 20:13

Quote from: Poncke on October 24, 2012, 12:55
Quote from: captain on October 24, 2012, 00:24
Really confused what's the difference between Macro and Micro here? If I upload a photo to SS/DT/IS as micro,can I still upload this same photo to Alamy as Macro?

secondly,normally,when you upload the photo to Alamy,which license you choosed: RM,RF or RM-E?

All images that you sell as RF can only be sold on Alamy as RF. If you dont have releases for the people or ANY property, you need to set the licence as RM. But if you do that, the image cant be sold elsewhere as RF.

hI thanks for your reply.Does it mean if NO property release or Model release,the photo can be defined as RM,like editorial in SS/DT?

If you tick that you need an MR or a PR, but that you don't have one, the photo is automatically set as RM by the system.
(However, note that released images can be licensed as RM. RM does not necessarily equate to editorial, though unreleased images are also RM).
It is then up to the buyer to decide if they need releases for their particular use and is their responsibility to use files accordingly (that's clearly stated in the EULA).
You can set restrictions, but it's a fiddle and most people, including me, set them wrongly. Contributors have been asking for one Editorial button for years (before I joined, for sure), but I think because the onus is clearly on the buyers, they have never done this.
In fact, the micros are being over-cautious because in general they shoulder the responsibility. There is, at least in the UK, something called 'incidental use' whereby a recognisable brand which is not the main focus of an image, can be used in a commercial context. So the possibility that you might 'just' be able to discern YKK on the zipper on someone's clothes if zoomed in is not an actual issue in the UK.
By having a blanket ban, they prevent the possiblity that someone will crop and enlarge 'a small copyrighted thing' in the image and use that as the basis of their design. And it stops any subjectivity of what is or isn't 'incidental use'.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #7 on:** October 26, 2012, 20:11 »

Quote from: captain on October 24, 2012, 20:13

hI thanks for your reply.Does it mean if NO property release or Model release,the photo can be defined as RM,like editorial in SS/DT?

Sorry game over, you have stepped on a land mine. No more asking questions that have no answer... until tomorrow.

Alamy licenses Editorial RM, Microstock sites license Editorial RF. You can't license the same image in two places, with different license types.

So if it's on any Microstock site RF, you can't put it on Alamy Editorial. And logic would dictate if you have it on Alamy RM, you can't add it to any Microstock site RF! So pick one or the other for your placement of each editorial image. And to be legitimate taking two of the same shot, five seconds apart, doesn't make it a different shot. It's just a variation.

After that it gets even more complicated.

Easy answer, don't put the same subjects and shots from the same session or event, on both Alamy and Microstock.