|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - ravens
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 16
51
« on: January 21, 2022, 07:27 »
...I'll be back in touch next week to share more detail of what has happened ...
It's nearly the end of "next week" now - Thursday evening on the US West Coast and very early Friday morning in the UK. I looked in the Alamy forums and don't see any update (other than the previously locked threads have been mostly unlocked).
Even if the update is to give a new date for an update, something from Alamy would be appreciated.
>>>>"I'll be back in touch next week to share more detail of what has happened with this flurry of sales through the Chinese distribution channel. " Yes. Looking forward to that update from Alamy.
52
« on: January 12, 2022, 00:19 »
A whole load of BS.
James Allworth says "we want to make sure we are operating in an ethical and inclusive way" in his earlier post, but they pay 4 cents for a photo to contributors.
So on Alamy they think that as long as they participate in this hypocritical woke crap, it is okay to pay ridiculous prices, offer no explanations, silence photographers, and practice censorship on their forums.
53
« on: January 12, 2022, 00:03 »
I got a usual pap response from my e-mail asking about them and if there was a way to avoid sales that low...
"... but sometimes these prices look small when compared with similar licenses in the UK & US."
This is the funny part. The prices do not only look small, they ARE small.
54
« on: January 11, 2022, 05:46 »
I'm happy with Adobe in 2021, and 2022 has started well, too. Thank you!
55
« on: January 05, 2022, 23:46 »
Veer? (another closed agency)
56
« on: November 20, 2021, 05:55 »
There are equal opportunities for anyone included minorities of any kind to be contributor. There are equal opportunities to sell images. There are equal opportunities to be successful as contributor. No one cares about ethnicity or sex or anything, just about images. But YOU are creating unequal opportunities. Right now. Good work Alamy!
Exactly!
57
« on: November 19, 2021, 03:55 »
Hi All,
Hopefully I can add some clarity here.
Firstly, this survey is 100% optional and anonymous. We will end up with % numbers against the survey questions with no identifiable information next to the answers. The data itself is not accessible other than to view results as a summary and there is absolutely zero chance of us "selling this data on" (as has been suggested in this thread).
Picture buyers in the publishing world are increasingly interested in this type of information, and when I say interested, I'm not talking about us "tapping into" some kind of trend.
We have face to face meetings with world leading publishers who ask us specific questions about where the images on Alamy come from and who takes them. They are keen to source images from a diverse mix of providers that demonstrate equal opportunities and ethical dealings. This subject has become increasingly common in our client meetings over recent times and we felt that we did not have the right level of information to inform them, but also closer to home, we want to make sure we are operating in an ethical and inclusive way.
That is the reason as to why this has been sent. The format, wording and distribution method we've chosen has been reviewed at all levels within the business and signed off by the in-house legal team within PA Media.
I hope this clears up any confusion around the survey, if you have any specific questions then please feel free to email [email protected] and the Contributor Releations team will be happy to help.
Many thanks,
James Allsworth
Head of Content
Thanks for replying. So the questionnaire was sent out with the CUSTOMERS in mind. You say you're not tapping into a trend, but that's exactly what Alamy has been doing. Maybe, as others pointed out, customers should know about Alamy cutting contributor royalties, removing the 50/50 cut, licensing Rights Managed work for perpetual use, paying us microstock prices. How ethical, diverse and inclusive is that? Alamy is not a traditional work environment (eg not an office, factory, store). Alamy is a web based agency where we contributors upload our images for licensing. You do have the information on who your contributors are, where they are from, and how to pay them and that should be enough. No need to ask personal sensitive data as it's irrelevant in the process of selling stock. If ever sensitive data such as race, gender, gender identity, and blah blah, is asked, it should benefit the person in question some way, NOT the company. So how would this serve us contributors? If I come up with a star combination (great race-gender-sexuality-disability-politics combo), will you pay me more or will you accept images of lower quality? If you won't, I have given out information in vain just for Alamy and customers to goggle. My information may be lost or stolen and all over dark web next week (you never told us how this information is stored and protected). And I'm submitting my work from another country from the privacy of my home, it doesn't really matter to anyone who I am as long as I just submit good pictures. Passing this data onto customers is not acceptable as it means using sensitive personal data in an advertorial way. Maybe your legal team relies on the "100% optional" thing but I highly doubt you have checked if asking sensitive personal data is legal in every country where your contributors come from. If this survey has been discussed twice on Alamy forum, and you have removed the thread twice, that should tell you something. This trending diversity & inclusive thing only creates more discrimination. That never works.
58
« on: November 18, 2021, 05:58 »
My guess is that Alamy has lost direction.
They cut contributor royalties, gave up unique content, began licensing RM content for perpetual use at microstock prices.
Then they realized that this is the dead end. What to do?
They decided to renew their brand to give it the weird lifestyle stocksy-ish look.
But the image base looked too normal. Too many ordinary pics of normal people, houses, gardens, animals.
But wait! Even if images look normal, contributors can be strange and different. Alamy decided to become the stock agency with the weirdest contributors in the market and start selling images with the help of contributor stories.
Alamy came up with the plan to ask about private information from their contributors. Such as race, sex, sexual preferences, identification, disabilities, etc. They will choose the winning combinations (the more unusual, the better of course) and promote the photography of those contributors. Their images will determine the future style of Alamy. The rest of contributors who submit normal, saleable, non-lifestyle, not-activist photography will not be promoted, displayed, they will drop off Gold level to oblivion forever. They will sell less and less, as customers will look for useful images elsewhere.
Nothing of course changes the fact that a private company asking sensitive personal information is not legal - from a citizen of an EU member country anyway. I am surprised that more of you won't address this issue?
59
« on: November 16, 2021, 04:31 »
I did not receive this. This kind of data collection, especially by a private company, is forbidden in France.
Don't give away your personal datas to private companies, they will resell them to whoever needs personal datas to build their business. Don't feed the beast.
Exactly. I too was thinking that this can't be legal. The data they are asking is personal sensitive information. "Data relating to religion, politics, health, etc. is considered sensitive under the EUs data protection law and gets special protection." https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/reform/rules-business-and-organisations/legal-grounds-processing-data/sensitive-data_en"Sensitive personal data is protected under EU law and can only be processed by organisations if specific safeguards are in place." https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/reform/rules-business-and-organisations/legal-grounds-processing-data/sensitive-data/under-what-conditions-can-my-company-organisation-process-sensitive-data_enSure, they are an UK company, but I am a citizen of an EU country. They may get away if we give them this information voluntarily, but such personal data is no way relevant in the business of selling and distributing stock photos. They have no business asking any of this. No way it would be acceptable to use sensitive personal information in any advertorial or marketing purpose. How are they going to use this information? How is it stored and for how long? How it protected? Who has access to it? The email was vague about it, they said they will "share it". It would be interesting to get some answers from Alamy.
60
« on: November 15, 2021, 10:23 »
Had a look at "Alamy Demographic Survey" which arrived a few days ago.
They want to know the ethnic group, sexuality, gender identity, disability etc. of their contributors.
W-T-F is this?
Any thoughts?
61
« on: October 30, 2021, 02:49 »
Agree with previous posters. Even Alamy's own Marketing dept couldn't do better.
Just adding that "Alamy contributor payout is the highest in the industry with contributors receiving 40%"
is incorrect.
Can think of two agencies that return 50% for non-exclusive content.
62
« on: October 28, 2021, 05:10 »
I've had a few of customer contacts over the years.
Ask yourself, why is the customer REALLY contacting you? Not because you're a top photographer and they love your work, but, because they want something. In this case, they want to put your editorial image in commercial use, they want you to take the risk, and they probably expect to get the image at the same low stock price. Maybe even lower, when they purchase it directly from you.
I would inform them that I don't sell directly, but only thorough stock agencies, and that the agencies will be happy to help with any questions.
63
« on: October 12, 2021, 07:23 »
Even if images are placed under Rights Managed, Alamy is allowing lots of freedom to the buyer. Wonder if these "In perpetuity" licenses mean Alamy is going to ditch Rights Managed altogether?
64
« on: October 03, 2021, 11:14 »
The bump in price was to help contributors through Covid, I guess Covid is officially over?
No, Covid is not over. Dreamstime is now handing out free subscriptions to non-profit organizations as Covid relief and they do have to cover the lost $$ somehow. This is why contributors now are paid less.
65
« on: September 30, 2021, 11:40 »
Why we are back at 0.35:
"Good imagery is decisive for delivering images with impact and for this reason, we are handing out free subscriptions to non-profit organizations in need of visuals during the Covid-19 pandemic"
66
« on: September 02, 2021, 12:18 »
For 8 cents I would say no and forget it. But it is up to you. Just remember 10k of images is a huge amount and when they'll have the files you lose control of them.
Why would they purchase the images directly from you and not a stock agency? An agency would sell at a very low bulk price and this deal might yield this company other benefits.
67
« on: August 01, 2021, 01:57 »
Depends on your content and style.
I can only speak of photos. If you have 10K RF images already available elsewhere, with metadata, descriptions, etc, then why not?
Dreamstime is extremely easy to upload, reviews are fast, and I don't think they're that bad as a seller. They're not like Adobe in selling volume, but decent enough.
68
« on: July 04, 2021, 08:08 »
My point is that many "buyers" will just be satisfied with free, instead of paying for something else.
So instead of driving additional sales (as this new business model is expecting), it will rather prevent regular sales to be made.
Yes, we get $5, for a photo, but that will kill sales and the earnings for other contributors with a similar subject. The losses will exceed $5, because nothing beats free.
We don't shoot ourselves in the foot, indeed (because we get $5).
We rather shoot each other in the feet (because we will both lose more than $5, when we compete against each other with free vs paid)
Agreed. Did not participate in this offer. My personal policy is and will be: no free images.
69
« on: June 28, 2021, 01:29 »
Thank you for your replies. Yes, they are not that "visible", that's why I was curious of any contributor experience of this agency. Like, what type of content do they accept, what type of content do they sell (and do they sell), what are contributor earnings, are there any hidden traps, etc.
A lot of agencies are after "lifestyle" - technically low quality photos of people representing minorities making weird faces and poses. I was hoping to find an agency that is NOT into that nonsense, but I guess that's impossible right now.
70
« on: June 19, 2021, 05:04 »
Does anybody have any information whatsoever about Tetra Images?
71
« on: May 30, 2021, 02:02 »
Does anybody know Tetra Images? Any experience with them? They seem to be selling RF.
72
« on: May 22, 2021, 10:34 »
They are slashing our royalties AND are ready to license our images any way they want, even grant them free.
This must be the most exciting news ever.
What are contributors doing to resist this? Is there a plan of action?
Have you read the forum over there?
Has a plan of action ever worked before?
Well, the last time Alamy did introduce the 50/50 deal, when contributors complained about new contract and the payment cut. That is when action was actually helpful. Their official response was just full of explanations and excuses. Where is the Stock Coalition now?
73
« on: May 21, 2021, 04:51 »
They are slashing our royalties AND are ready to license our images any way they want, even grant them free.
This must be the most exciting news ever.
What are contributors doing to resist this? Is there a plan of action?
74
« on: May 21, 2021, 04:41 »
https://www.microstockgroup.com/microstock-services/lost-copyright-with-affiliates-agefotostockeasyfotostock/
I had the same idea, starting uploading to agefoto, but I just read this thread from January this year.
So, the three years clausel I remember when I was interested in agefoto first time, but that was one of the reasons why I concentrated on other things first.
And when you read about the experiences of that contributor, I get afraid about agefoto.
I even were thinking about starting upload only my best images first and sign as premium, might be exclusive - after Adobe and Alamys new announcement maybe an alternative, but that experiences in that thread shocked me again.
I guess, there is no agency left in this world, we could trust and treat their contributors well anymore. Well, only pond5 might be, but even after got forced from many sides to put more concentrating on photos as well, they denied. So, really no agency left! Dreamstime? Ah, they will be the next with a new exciting announcement, believe me.
Looking at the above thread, it does state the photographer's name under "Fotograf". It does state the agency name where contributor's name usually appears, but I think this is pretty much standard where partner agencies are concerned. I would not worry about that.
75
« on: May 18, 2021, 05:41 »
Meanwhile, although on the distribution page, it says you can't opt out til April, you actually can, they have apparently extended the ability to opt out for three months.
Can you tell me where to find that option? I've searched anywhere, but can't find it. Never bothered me all that much before, but with yet another commissionc ut I'd like to opt out.
https://www.alamy.com/distribution-terms.aspx
For me this page says, "you can opt out again in April" .
The entire contract is unbelievable. Alamy has no liability of anything and the contributor is liable of everything. They (and their distributors) can use our images free for marketing, etc. (11.5 and 15.1)
Indeed it says you can opt out again in April, but apparently they have extended it by three months and in fact we can opt out now. You can't believe what they say!
It's moot with the new clauses anyway., which allow them to sell license however they want, without restrictions.
Thanks, ShadySue - yes, opt out is indeed possible.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 16
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
