Author Topic: Alamy and microstock sites (Read 7318 times)

cla78 · « **on:** September 18, 2009, 11:33 »

Hi,sorry for my english.
I have a question. I sell many photo on microstock sites and I'd like try to subscribe on Alamy.
Can I sell on Alamy the same photo that I have on microstock sites or Alamy want the exclusivity?
Thanks

gostwyck · « **Reply #1 on:** September 18, 2009, 11:40 »

Yes you can, Alamy does not require exclusivity.

cla78 · « **Reply #2 on:** September 18, 2009, 14:12 »

Ok...thank you!

madelaide · « **Reply #3 on:** September 18, 2009, 16:18 »

You can, but many - myself included - believe it is more correct to have a different portfolio in micro and macrostock sites.

Eco · « **Reply #4 on:** September 19, 2009, 00:32 »

Quote from: madelaide on September 18, 2009, 16:18

You can, but many - myself included - believe it is more correct to have a different portfolio in micro and macrostock sites.

Except that the difference between "micro" and "macro", especially on Alamy, is eroding fast. Last month I had 5 "novelty use" sales on Alamy for which I earned 50 cents each after commission. There is still good sales there (I also had one last month of $315 - my commission $189), but they are becoming the exception rather than the rule. Read the Alamy forums and you will see that many contributors report sales with royalties that compare more and more with micro than with traditional macro. Considering the terms of the licensing agreement you should compare sales on Alamy with EL sales on the micros.

In my opinion the big advantage of Alamy over the micros is the fact that you can sell your images there as Royalty Managed (Licensed) images, which is best for editorial images.

sharpshot · « **Reply #5 on:** September 19, 2009, 02:08 »

I have a separate portfolio there, nearly all of mine are RM, so the buyers know they are not on the microstock sites. I have seriously thought about putting my microstock portfolio on alamy but I haven't done it yet. I am amazed they still allow it, as some of their buyers must be checking the micros to see if they could get the same image much cheaper.

Adeptris · « **Reply #6 on:** September 19, 2009, 02:31 »

If you look at the Alamy trading statement you will see that over 80% of sales are Rights Managed and Editorial use, that will mean that any Commercial RF images that might also be on a microstock sites will be in a very low percentage of the sales, there is nothing in the rules to stop you uploading a micro portfolio, but the sales might be few and far between, and there is the $250 payout point to consider.

Alamy do share all the search data, so it is easy to do your research as to what is selling and target your content, then upload RM, the scatter gun option might work for a photographer with a few thousand images.

David

ShadySue · « **Reply #7 on:** September 19, 2009, 04:18 »

Quote from: Adeptris on September 19, 2009, 02:31

Alamy do share all the search data, so it is easy to do your research as to what is selling and target your content, then upload RM, the scatter gun option might work for a photographer with a few thousand images.
David

As I understood it, the search data which is shared isn't quite 'all', but is taken from the searching of their top buyers. I have no idea what the difference between these two figures would be.

Off-thread, one of the things I notice from my own Alamy stats is how often buyers are looking through well over a thousand images to make their choices. Granted, that's partly because of the poor keywording/search engine (no DA, no CSV) throwing up irrelevant images. But it's still intriguing considering how contributers on iStock firmly believe (and for all I know, may be right) that if the best match doesn't put their image on the first page, they are heavily losing sales.

Example: this week, I had two sessions searching on 'Celtic' (no other keywords used). I have two photos relevant to Celtic football club, several Celtic crosses and several featuring celtic knotwork/designs. Without defining 'celtic' further, all these images came up for celtic, and between the two sessions, over 14000 images were viewed. Unbelievable - did the searcher - apparently one of Alamy's top buyers - not know how to refine their search? Or were they really looking at all possibilities for the word 'celtic'?

Adeptris · « **Reply #8 on:** September 19, 2009, 05:50 »

Quote from: ShadySue on September 19, 2009, 04:18

<...
>...
As I understood it, the search data which is shared isn't quite 'all', but is taken from the searching of their top buyers. I have no idea what the difference between these two figures would be.

Off-thread, one of the things I notice from my own Alamy stats is how often buyers are looking through well over a thousand images to make their choices. Granted, that's partly because of the poor keywording/search engine (no DA, no CSV) throwing up irrelevant images. But it's still intriguing considering how contributers on iStock firmly believe (and for all I know, may be right) that if the best match doesn't put their image on the first page, they are heavily losing sales.

Example: this week, I had two sessions searching on 'Celtic' (no other keywords used). I have two photos relevant to Celtic football club, several Celtic crosses and several featuring celtic knotwork/designs. Without defining 'celtic' further, all these images came up for celtic, and between the two sessions, over 14000 images were viewed. Unbelievable - did the searcher - apparently one of Alamy's top buyers - not know how to refine their search? Or were they really looking at all possibilities for the word 'celtic'?

I downloaded 6 months of buyers search data, and the average search was two pages 240 images viewed and one in a hundred zoomed, it may have been an intern or researcher looking for a number of images for an editors lightbox, they would have the time to go through 14000 images, and might not know how to refine a search.

I blogged about keywording for Alamy and keyword placement here

David

Terry · « **Reply #9 on:** January 08, 2014, 11:22 »

alamy is a microstock website. They still do RM but can sell your RM pictures for as low as 10$ giving you a cheap excuse why this happened.

Most contributors are not making money with alamy, only a tiny tiny minority does. And all contributors are making less and less every month and year as alamy squeeze their photographers by reducing their commissions, giving supposedly very high discounts to clients (this is what they pretend but maybe they just screw you).

Maybe it was a good company in 2007, but it is not the case anymore.

Ron · « **Reply #10 on:** January 08, 2014, 11:24 »

Old thread alert. 4 years old.

lisafx · « **Reply #11 on:** January 08, 2014, 11:44 »

Quote from: Ron on January 08, 2014, 11:24

Old thread alert. 4 years old.

Thank you Ron, I can't believe I read through most of this old chestnut before noticing your post warning of an old thread.

Well, I am glad at least that there aren't people starting new threads about this STILL.