Author Topic: Alamy vs microstock (Read 32563 times)

Chicago · « **on:** February 10, 2012, 12:10 »

Hi everyone. It was recently suggested on this forum for me to use Alamy for my father in law's older quality walkaround portfolio. I understand that site is great for stuff like that but will it sell? ANd if stuff does sell there, why do microstock at all considering the much lower payouts you get? i suppose you might be getting more sales, but isn't one $100 sale worth it over 100 .20 sales? And think about the time invested in your portfolio just to make pennies. I am not a great photographer, so i have no idea if i can succeed in MS, but it seems like almost any decent shot has a chance on Alamy. Please tell me where i'm wrong and THANKS. Roger

sharpshot · « **Reply #1 on:** February 10, 2012, 14:32 »

The average microstock sale is much higher than $0.20. I have had more $28 extended license sales than I have had alamy sales this month. Alamy commissions aren't always higher than microstock. My one sale so far this month is for around $20 commission.

I do like alamy but it averages out at around $1 per image per year and some people can do better than that per month with all the microstock sites. I'm using alamy because I don't want to rely too heavily on my microstock earnings, they accept photos that the microstock sites are no longer interested in and I like being able to photograph and sell whatever I want. They have a great commission and seem to be a site that has a lot of respect for their contributors.

StanRohrer · « **Reply #2 on:** February 10, 2012, 16:21 »

Quote from: sharpshot on February 10, 2012, 14:32

The average microstock sale is much higher than $0.20. I have had more $28 extended license sales than I have had alamy sales this month. Alamy commissions aren't always higher than microstock. My one sale so far this month is for around $20 commission.

I do like alamy but it averages out at around $1 per image per year and some people can do better than that per month with all the microstock sites. I'm using alamy because I don't want to rely too heavily on my microstock earnings, they accept photos that the microstock sites are no longer interested in and I like being able to photograph and sell whatever I want. They have a great commission and seem to be a site that has a lot of respect for their contributors.

Nailed the answer!

microstockphoto.co.uk · « **Reply #3 on:** February 10, 2012, 16:37 »

Quote from: sharpshot on February 10, 2012, 14:32

...seem to be a site that has a lot of respect for their contributors.

I'm just starting to upload my port now on Alamy but I already have the same impression, that they respect contributors.

What may seem like a weird rule at first - accepting or rejecting a whole batch based on a sample - is actually great at forcing us to choose only our best pictures.

And I especially like the fact that they judge photos on technical quality only, not on presumed "commercial value" (the silliest of all possible reasons).

Seems like a good way of creating a great collection.

Mantis · « **Reply #4 on:** February 10, 2012, 20:58 »

Quote from: microstockphoto.co.uk on February 10, 2012, 16:37

Quote from: sharpshot on February 10, 2012, 14:32
...seem to be a site that has a lot of respect for their contributors.

I'm just starting to upload my port now on Alamy but I already have the same impression, that they respect contributors.

What may seem like a weird rule at first - accepting or rejecting a whole batch based on a sample - is actually great at forcing us to choose only our best pictures.

And I especially like the fact that they judge photos on technical quality only, not on presumed "commercial value" (the silliest of all possible reasons).

Seems like a good way of creating a great collection.

Sorry to burst everyone's bubble but you all seem to be correlating respect with acceptance. If you got 100% rejection rate would you be saying the same thing? No. You'd be saying that they don't respect or appreciate good photography. The fact is that Alamy has very relaxed acceptance criteria and they do not inspect every image, only a sampling of them. That "respect" is a behavioral response due to the way they inspect. Sorry, but this is my honest opinion. Your respect comments would surely change if they adopted IS or SS standards.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #5 on:** February 11, 2012, 00:33 »

Acceptance ratios are not the point, it's about fair dealing and communication. SS is also pretty respectful, despite the higher rejection rate.

sharpshot · « **Reply #6 on:** February 11, 2012, 02:34 »

Quote from: Mantis on February 10, 2012, 20:58

..That "respect" is a behavioral response due to the way they inspect. Sorry, but this is my honest opinion. Your respect comments would surely change if they adopted IS or SS standards.

The inspections are only a very small part of it. They pay 60% commission for most sales. They often listen to discussions in their forum and make changes based on contributors comments. The latest example is the reduction in payout level. If they make changes, they have good communications, they don't try to disguise bad news or patronise people. They let their contributors sell wherever they like, complete non-exclusivity, as long as they don't mix RF and RM licenses. Do other sites have a corporate social responsibility page and give over 89% of their profits to medical research? http://www.alamy.com/corporate-social-responsibility.asp

There's lots more but that will do for now.

Mantis · « **Reply #7 on:** February 11, 2012, 08:39 »

Quote from: sharpshot on February 11, 2012, 02:34

Quote from: Mantis on February 10, 2012, 20:58
..That "respect" is a behavioral response due to the way they inspect. Sorry, but this is my honest opinion. Your respect comments would surely change if they adopted IS or SS standards.

The inspections are only a very small part of it. They pay 60% commission for most sales. They often listen to discussions in their forum and make changes based on contributors comments. The latest example is the reduction in payout level. If they make changes, they have good communications, they don't try to disguise bad news or patronise people. They let their contributors sell wherever they like, complete non-exclusivity, as long as they don't mix RF and RM licenses. Do other sites have a corporate social responsibility page and give over 89% of their profits to medical research? http://www.alamy.com/corporate-social-responsibility.asp

There's lots more but that will do for now.

Understood. I guess what I am trying to suggest is the the single most emotional factor in stock is the acceptance or rejection of one's images, followed by sales. Your point of clear, honest communication is good, though. And it does indeed mean something to me, just not as much as getting marketable images online and selling.

Ed · « **Reply #8 on:** February 11, 2012, 11:59 »

Quote from: Chicago on February 10, 2012, 12:10

Hi everyone. It was recently suggested on this forum for me to use Alamy for my father in law's older quality walkaround portfolio. I understand that site is great for stuff like that but will it sell? ANd if stuff does sell there, why do microstock at all considering the much lower payouts you get? i suppose you might be getting more sales, but isn't one $100 sale worth it over 100 .20 sales? And think about the time invested in your portfolio just to make pennies. I am not a great photographer, so i have no idea if i can succeed in MS, but it seems like almost any decent shot has a chance on Alamy. Please tell me where i'm wrong and THANKS. Roger

Going to your original question....I think Alamy is the right choice in that an older portfolio would suggest film scans. It's difficult to get film scans accepted at many of the micros. It's easier at Alamy - that's not to say that the images are of poorer quality, it's just that the micros will interpret grain on the film scans incorrectly. Alamy has many "archival" type images...Here is an example...

It's a picture of an image taken in 1953 of the Queen greeting Sir Edmind Hillary. This image would NEVER get accepted at the micros and quite frankly, it's not microstock material. This image may get you (or may not) get a handful of downloads - 5 or 10 at most. At Alamy, this image will fetch much more, and the type of buyer that is looking for an image like this, is more likely to look to a library such as Alamy to find the image as opposed to Shutterstock.

Will your Father In Law's images sell at Alamy? If they are keyworded and caption correctly, then probably with time.

Chicago · « **Reply #9 on:** February 13, 2012, 10:58 »

Thanks for all the great answers. As a follow up, do i need to create separate accounts at alamy for my work and my father in laws? And how hard is the initial submission to alamy? What kind of work of MINE should i send in to get accepted quickly. Again, thanks for all the fish..er, help and this is a great forum filled with great folks. ROGER

lucidology · « **Reply #10 on:** July 13, 2012, 22:25 »

Quote from: Ed on February 11, 2012, 11:59

It's a picture of an image taken in 1953 of the Queen greeting Sir Edmind Hillary.

Great shot of a Masonic handshake

Lagereek · « **Reply #11 on:** July 14, 2012, 00:36 »

I am a bit surprised actually, some of the comments regarding acceptance and rejections. The main reason why the stock market is bursting with millions and millions of totally irrelevant material, badly executed material, etc, etc, is that the majority of agencies have NOT, adopted the SS, standards of reviewing.
Five years back, good relevant material would always float to the top, right? today its got to the point where good, relevant material, can just fade away into oblivion and never ever sell at all. Is that a good thing? no, its terrible and totally derrogative to commercial photography on the whole.

Just flick through most agencies and you see pictures that wouldnt even get inside the first door at a trad agency, yet at Alamy, it does, I find that extraordinary and perhaps one of the reasons why Alamy is not selling very well at all.

The biggest enemy to serious stock-photography, any photography for that matter is this horrid attitude that everything should get accepted. Theres a place for second rate material: the dustbin.

If all agencies had adopted a far more tougher attitude towards acceptance, we would be in a totally differant position today. Easier for buyers to find good material, more sales, much less spamming and we would not have to compete aginst millions of weekend snappers, wannabees and God knows, that just dump their lousy material on the doorsteps of an agency, happy to get a payout of a few bucks.

sharpshot · « **Reply #12 on:** July 14, 2012, 01:14 »

The search should bring the best images to the top. I prefer that to reviewers making the decision. Don't know how many times one of my best selling images has been rejected on another site by a reviewer. It's going to get more difficult to get new images near the top of the search, that's much harder with SS now as well. They could give new images an advantage in the search but then most of us would probably complain about that, as we would lose earnings to new contributors that are uploading lots.

Lagereek · « **Reply #13 on:** July 14, 2012, 01:38 »

Quote from: sharpshot on July 14, 2012, 01:14

The search should bring the best images to the top. I prefer that to reviewers making the decision. Don't know how many times one of my best selling images has been rejected on another site by a reviewer. It's going to get more difficult to get new images near the top of the search, that's much harder with SS now as well. They could give new images an advantage in the search but then most of us would probably complain about that, as we would lose earnings to new contributors that are uploading lots.

Yeah right, the search should bring forward the best images? sure, ha, ha, ha,

, like at IS? where first pages are cluttered with the most basic, naive material and is there only because some little P/S, exclusive has taken them.

The reviewers should be educated to accept good commercial stuff and just dump any old rubbish. The entire mess of this industry, starts with the reviewers decisions, simple as that.

bunhill · « **Reply #14 on:** July 14, 2012, 02:33 »

Quote from: Chicago on February 13, 2012, 10:58

do i need to create separate accounts at alamy for my work and my father in laws?

Under a single account you can create multiple pseudonyms for different work.

sharpshot · « **Reply #15 on:** July 14, 2012, 03:05 »

Quote from: Lagereek on July 14, 2012, 01:38

Quote from: sharpshot on July 14, 2012, 01:14
The search should bring the best images to the top. I prefer that to reviewers making the decision. Don't know how many times one of my best selling images has been rejected on another site by a reviewer. It's going to get more difficult to get new images near the top of the search, that's much harder with SS now as well. They could give new images an advantage in the search but then most of us would probably complain about that, as we would lose earnings to new contributors that are uploading lots.

Yeah right, the search should bring forward the best images? sure, ha, ha, ha, , like at IS? where first pages are cluttered with the most basic, naive material and is there only because some little P/S, exclusive has taken them.

The reviewers should be educated to accept good commercial stuff and just dump any old rubbish. The entire mess of this industry, starts with the reviewers decisions, simple as that.

Perhaps I should of said that if the search isn't screwed up, it should bring the best images to the top.

How are we ever going to get educated reviewers that are capable of accepting only good commercial stuff and dumping the rubbish? They're very low paid. What do you get if you pay peanuts

Pay them more and we would end up footing the bill with yet more commission cuts. And I don't think that the best reviewer in the world is going to know if some images are going to make money or not. After doing this for 6 years, I'm still sometimes surprised how much what I consider now to be a rubbish photo makes. One of mine that would probably be rejected by the micros now just sold on alamy for $200.

ShadySue · « **Reply #16 on:** July 14, 2012, 03:46 »

Quote from: Chicago on February 13, 2012, 10:58

Thanks for all the great answers. As a follow up, do i need to create separate accounts at alamy for my work and my father in laws? And how hard is the initial submission to alamy? What kind of work of MINE should i send in to get accepted quickly. Again, thanks for all the fish..er, help and this is a great forum filled with great folks. ROGER

I don't know about the two accounts thing, you'd need to ask them. The initial submission is easy compared to iStock, so long as your images are technically sound. If your f-i-l's images are slides, they'll probably need a lot of cleaning up.
There's an archival submission route, where (after initial acceptance) the standards make allowance for the age of the image, which most of the micros never would.

I'd modify your expectations as to money gained per sale at Alamy. Some sales are about as low as micro sales, or even lower. But sometimes you get a nice surprise, and not always with the photos you expect. The low sales are often, not always, from the newspaper scheme, which you can opt out of. Some people have said to opt out, if the papers want your picture, they'll pay for it. However, I've seen it suggested a couple of times that the newspapers in the scheme only get fed opted-in pics - but I'm not 100% sure that's correct. Not all newspapers are in that scheme. I've had at least one sale to a UK newspaper at a 'low average' price rather than rock bottom.

I'm guessing your f-i-l's photos aren't model/property released. There's a confusing thing in the instructions for contributors at Alamy that these must be 'marked as editorial'. But for some reason, they have repeatedly refused to give one single button 'editorial' though it's been asked for many times. What you do is when they ask 'does this image need a model release, you tick 'no' if you haven't got one; then the same for a property release. Then it's the responsibility of the buyer, and that is clear on the info to potential buyers.

Good luck!

Poncke · « **Reply #17 on:** July 14, 2012, 05:54 »

All photos technically in order will be accepted. All photos offered on Micros need to be sold as RF on Alamy. You cant sell photos as RF elsewhere as RM on Alamy. All photos without model releases, even for a bodypart, and property releases needs to be offered as RM.

And Alamy does indeed accept photos if there is grain which is part of the photo, etc. No anal micro rejections.

Lagereek · « **Reply #18 on:** July 16, 2012, 03:58 »

Well, they seem to accept just about everything. Im not sure if that a good or bad thingy?

wut · « **Reply #19 on:** July 16, 2012, 04:48 »

Quote from: Lagereek on July 14, 2012, 00:36

I am a bit surprised actually, some of the comments regarding acceptance and rejections. The main reason why the stock market is bursting with millions and millions of totally irrelevant material, badly executed material, etc, etc, is that the majority of agencies have NOT, adopted the SS, standards of reviewing.
Five years back, good relevant material would always float to the top, right? today its got to the point where good, relevant material, can just fade away into oblivion and never ever sell at all. Is that a good thing? no, its terrible and totally derrogative to commercial photography on the whole.

Just flick through most agencies and you see pictures that wouldnt even get inside the first door at a trad agency, yet at Alamy, it does, I find that extraordinary and perhaps one of the reasons why Alamy is not selling very well at all.

The biggest enemy to serious stock-photography, any photography for that matter is this horrid attitude that everything should get accepted. Theres a place for second rate material: the dustbin.

If all agencies had adopted a far more tougher attitude towards acceptance, we would be in a totally differant position today. Easier for buyers to find good material, more sales, much less spamming and we would not have to compete aginst millions of weekend snappers, wannabees and God knows, that just dump their lousy material on the doorsteps of an agency, happy to get a payout of a few bucks.

WOW! That is one of the best, most sensible posts I've ever read here.

antistock · « **Reply #20 on:** July 16, 2012, 07:59 »

Quote from: Lagereek on July 14, 2012, 00:36

I am a bit surprised actually, some of the comments regarding acceptance and rejections. The main reason why the stock market is bursting with millions and millions of totally irrelevant material, badly executed material, etc, etc, is that the majority of agencies have NOT, adopted the SS, standards of reviewing.
Five years back, good relevant material would always float to the top, right? today its got to the point where good, relevant material, can just fade away into oblivion and never ever sell at all. Is that a good thing? no, its terrible and totally derrogative to commercial photography on the whole.

Just flick through most agencies and you see pictures that wouldnt even get inside the first door at a trad agency, yet at Alamy, it does, I find that extraordinary and perhaps one of the reasons why Alamy is not selling very well at all.

The biggest enemy to serious stock-photography, any photography for that matter is this horrid attitude that everything should get accepted. Theres a place for second rate material: the dustbin.

If all agencies had adopted a far more tougher attitude towards acceptance, we would be in a totally differant position today. Easier for buyers to find good material, more sales, much less spamming and we would not have to compete aginst millions of weekend snappers, wannabees and God knows, that just dump their lousy material on the doorsteps of an agency, happy to get a payout of a few bucks.

i blame keywording for the actual mess.

how can you rank 10000 images with the same or almost the same keywords ?
you start weighting in the rank the number of views and zooms, the age of the photo, and then .. WHAT ?

i mean for some photos there's simply not enough words to diversify every image !

if i make a photo of a handshake there's not 1 billion to way to keyword ! not at all ..

and what about keyword spamming ?

acceptance : yes, but i'm convinced in the long term the newbies will simply give up by themselves when they realize they can take
the occasional good snapshot and have in on sale on an agency but that it takes at least 5-6000 images on sale to make a living or trying to.

their expensive hobby will not go on forever, i've many friends who after years of trying to get into photography, music, and art finally gave up
and sold all the gear.

besides, i'm not scared by newbies with 50 or 100 pics on sale.
i'm quick at producing new images, i've a working and scalable workflow, and i'm here to stay, as far as i'm concerned newbies can just pi-ss off.

antistock · « **Reply #21 on:** July 16, 2012, 08:08 »

Quote from: Poncke on July 14, 2012, 05:54

All photos technically in order will be accepted. All photos offered on Micros need to be sold as RF on Alamy. You cant sell photos as RF elsewhere as RM on Alamy. All photos without model releases, even for a bodypart, and property releases needs to be offered as RM.

And Alamy does indeed accept photos if there is grain which is part of the photo, etc. No anal micro rejections.

there's a big difference between film noise and digital noise !

digital noise is made by the CCD when pushed over its bounds ... its designed to produce noiseless images in certain light conditions, anything else will come out too dark, noisy and grainy and the software will add noise to "patch" the no-light areas.

once you shoot in iso 3200 or 6400 your image is as bad as something resized 3-400% ... and what about the colors looking like sh-it, they cant look realistic as 1 pixel is good and the other 3 are made by interpolation !

so, there are very good reason some agencies are snotty against digital noise but are ok with grainy images scanned from film, film grain looks always good, the issue with film is it's no match with the sharpness of the modern DSLR unless you shoot on film medium format.

Poncke · « **Reply #22 on:** July 16, 2012, 17:50 »

Quote from: antistock on July 16, 2012, 07:59

, as far as i'm concerned newbies can just pi-ss off.

I was planning on staying... even more motivated now. You have a lot of hate in you. Smoke a joint, relax, take a holiday, get your head cleared up, come back, change your username to Prostock and put on that big smile of yours.

Poncke · « **Reply #23 on:** July 16, 2012, 17:54 »

Quote from: antistock on July 16, 2012, 08:08

Quote from: Poncke on July 14, 2012, 05:54
All photos technically in order will be accepted. All photos offered on Micros need to be sold as RF on Alamy. You cant sell photos as RF elsewhere as RM on Alamy. All photos without model releases, even for a bodypart, and property releases needs to be offered as RM.

And Alamy does indeed accept photos if there is grain which is part of the photo, etc. No anal micro rejections.

there's a big difference between film noise and digital noise !

digital noise is made by the CCD when pushed over its bounds ... its designed to produce noiseless images in certain light conditions, anything else will come out too dark, noisy and grainy and the software will add noise to "patch" the no-light areas.

once you shoot in iso 3200 or 6400 your image is as bad as something resized 3-400% ... and what about the colors looking like sh-it, they cant look realistic as 1 pixel is good and the other 3 are made by interpolation !

so, there are very good reason some agencies are snotty against digital noise but are ok with grainy images scanned from film, film grain looks always good, the issue with film is it's no match with the sharpness of the modern DSLR unless you shoot on film medium format.

Where did I claim there wasnt a difference !! Thanks for the lesson, but nothing I didnt know already.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #24 on:** July 16, 2012, 17:57 »

Quote from: Poncke on July 16, 2012, 17:50

Quote from: antistock on July 16, 2012, 07:59
, as far as i'm concerned newbies can just pi-ss off.

I was planning on staying... even more motivated now. You have a lot of hate in you. Smoke a joint, relax, take a holiday, get your head cleared up, come back, change your username to Prostock and put on that big smile of yours.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Alamy vs microstock (Read 32563 times)

Chicago

sharpshot

StanRohrer

microstockphoto.co.uk

Mantis

BaldricksTrousers

sharpshot

Mantis

Ed

Chicago

lucidology

Lagereek

sharpshot

Lagereek

bunhill

sharpshot

ShadySue

Poncke

Lagereek

wut

antistock

antistock

Poncke

Poncke

luissantos84

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors