I thought about it.....briefly....then got bored even thinking about it...
Then got a sale (ok - better than nothing) for $5 of which I get $2 so not feeling very keen.....!

I think the ideal situation is for people who have another source of income that leaves them a lot of spare times (teachers for example).
Especially if shooting photo/video is your hobby and you enjoy it in your spare time, even better if you have already a few thousands of images sitting in your computer.
Microstock can give you a complementary income while having fun

Please cut the dig at teachers. I don't know where you are, but here it is a mega job with all the admin, meetings and trendy new ideas. Thanks.

Quote from: McNcM on February 09, 2017, 19:21

Map is too small, it should be on the first page (on the top of it, not somewhere on the bottom).

Modern programming languages and frameworks allow to easily create responsive websites with movable page parts. It is simple to allow users to drag a map (or "top earners" or whatever) to the top of the page and rearrange all other parts as they wish. But this applies only for those website where developers care about the users.

But they haven't done this.....

Actually the world map is much better...its vectorial now, just zoom with ctrl+ or command+ if you want it bigger.
Plus the pics don't disappear anymore and that was really annoying 

Seems that just zooms the whole page.
Or am I missing something?

The more I see that new page the less I like it. All this dross being shoved LARGE in my face - profile, other pics, lifetime earnings etc - but what I want is not obvious or not there.

Seems related to that Windows version where you have to wade through zillions of (presumably affiliated) icon boxes for games, social media you don't have/want, programmes you've never heard of and news feeds from the US etc to finally locate (if you are lucky) your document/saved photo.

Herrumph!

And at FT/Adobe for 5 pics I'd be likely to get about $1.25 in total at my pathetic royalty rate.

Yesterday it felt like I had travelled back in time....

Old and new photos being sold.
A smattering of OODs.
A smallish SOD.
A steady trickle of dls all day.
Nothing spectacular really - indeed, fairly normal up till about 18/24 months ago - but - ah - the memories!

Reminded me why this used to be such fun - and it wasn't because it gave me the opportunity to spend hours on end in my cold back bedroom taking and editing pics of mundane things.....for next to nothing!

Herrrumph!

Just realized.....discoverability as an idea has been borrowed from 500px! Not that that changes anything...just mulling......

Isn't Alamy up against the same wall as all the others - expected return on an image is so low that it just doesn't pay to spend time jumping through any more keyword hoops?  Well maybe this new system could be a way to rise above the mob, by making the effort to meet new keyword guidelines - but first one would have to be darn sure it works

But on the other hand, when images are approved they go on sale automatically, you don't HAVE to do any further keywording once basic EXIF is transferred. Unless, of course, you think that discoverability matters....what a pickle.....

Suggest real name for sites you will be proud of later - and other names for el cheapo. That way, if ever you make it up market, your name is only linked to the posher ones. And probably better work.

I did a little experimenting, plus looking at which of my images supposedly have "good" discoverability versus "poor" and you need at least 40 of 50 keywords to get the good rating.

I have lots of images with over 30 keywords (some because Alamy used to split multi-word keywords up) and tried adding a category, or location, or information to the caption to see if it would make an image "good" and those seemed to make no difference.

I hope that their notion of good vs. poor doesn't affect search position because if you have the important keywords for an image, that's more important than getting the numbers up.

41 keywords (relevant - just!), 100 supertags and all relevant boxes ticked - still poor discoverability. Just 47 of my 2000 or so images rate as 'good'.

I just hope discoverability does not mean what it sounds like it means ie the chances of a buyer discovering an image and then - hopefully - buying it. If it does, then we're doomed, I say.........doomed.....lost in the swamp of undiscoverable and forgotten images........jolly dee.......

all my images seem to have the same MEDIUM level of 'discoverability' whether they have been fully processed (number of people, releases etc) or not.
What a pig's ear.

Some of us need to,sadly, not least due to feeble results from other sites.
We can't all do snazzy illustrations etc.

New format.
Is it truly awful or is it just me?
Images on sale number are inconsistent from one page to another.
96 images are flagged as on sale but with poor dicoverability - looks like mainly the ones I haven't yet sent through to go on sale. 
But best of all ZERO images of my 2000-ish port ie NO images ie NOT A SINGLE PHOTO is flagged as on sale and optimized!
No longer surprised it's been such a grim month on AL!