Alamy: should I bother?

JumboBeef

JumboBeef

Suspended / Banned
Messages
978
Edit My Images
Yes
After reading a lot about Alamy, I was wondering if I should have a go myself.

Anyone out there sold pictures through them, if so, how many and for how much?

I've got some unique pictures because of how I shoot them (see avatar) and I'm always happy to receive more money for any I take (arn't we all?) but I don't want to waste my time faffing about and uploading pictures if it only increases my income by 27p per month.

Cheers :thumbs:
 
I scanned four trannies and sent them in, and three were rejected as being "soft or lacking in focus" or some such. Without wanting to brag, I've had a lot of pictures published and exhibited and I can recognise a picture that may not be entirely sharp because its not meant to be sharp !!

If I had known better I would have chosen four rather dull digital images that were sharp from front to back and they would probably been accepted.

My guess is that Alamy's QC people have been brought up in the digital age and trained to look at images at 100% without taking into account the content.

Course, I could be wrong .....
 
I've found the same.

Images perfectly sharp on the subject have been rejected - I can only assume because I've used a relatively shallow DOF and other parts are intentionally blurred.

I won't say Alamy are wrong - they know what sells to their clients - but I don't think I'll be upload anything more....
 
I havent had a problem with Alamy, At first the QC process was a drag but now its never an issue. My images are accepted 100%, maybe I am doing something wrong :shrug:

As for money, I dont make a living from it but it pays well enough.
 
I joined Alamy some months ago but every time I went to upload an "enlarged" image I was not happy with it. At the shot size it could be sharp but upsized ... not what I would normally be happy to submit. However this morning I decided to go ahead anyway and within a couple of hours had notification that all four test images had been accepted and I could start uploading (in spite of the site saying that that it could be 25 days before I heard anything).

I will now be shooting to increase my portfolio there and see what happens
 
There are so many variables for selling, royalty free, licensed etc etc that its hard to say how many I sell per 100. I know that it takes a huge stock of images before you really make anything. At the moment we have cut back the number of images on Alamy but we will be building it back up over the next few weeks. Hopefully have about 400-500 images on before the end of next month.
 
realistically you probably need 5000 or more to make an income. Whats more you need to tap a market-advertising is quite sellable. Its about marketing again
 
Kerioak said:
I joined Alamy some months ago but every time I went to upload an "enlarged" image I was not happy with it. At the shot size it could be sharp but upsized ... not what I would normally be happy to submit. However this morning I decided to go ahead anyway and within a couple of hours had notification that all four test images had been accepted and I could start uploading (in spite of the site saying that that it could be 25 days before I heard anything).

I will now be shooting to increase my portfolio there and see what happens
Click to expand...

Congratulations!

They turned around mine pretty quick too! I'm not going to have a chance to resubmit until August now, hopefully I'll have some dull but sharp pictures that will get through!
 
What you have to reliase to Alamy, is that it is one of the few major Macro stock agencies that has no editorial staff. All agencies will inspect your images at 100%. Do you really expect a slightly soft image will not be noticed my a client? If they do let those kind of images on, you would just get a refunded sale, creating more work for the account guys.

Before you start compalining about Alamy QC, try applying to Corbis or Getty.
 
I think it is great that their QC is strict, I had set it as my goal for the summer, to get my images upto the required level to be accepted on Alamy, obviously my next goal will be to do that reliably!
 
Ive almost tried a few times but get so confused about whether to choose royalty free, unlicensed or what, that I've given up.

I know what they all mean... but dont know what to choose. :shrug:
 
From this week's BJP:
Furore over cut price Alamy. Alamy has started selling images for 60p sparking a furious protest from contributors.
It's a limited use scheme intended for those on social networking, teachers, academics. So they have restricted use licences. Contributors have accused Alamy of launching a micro stock pricing system. By the time Alamy gets it's cut the contributor ends up with 30p.
There is an opt out for existing contributors but new contributor would be expected to comply with Alamy's pricing structure.
James West, Alamy's CEO has apologised unreservedly to those who feel they have been mislead, "It's not my intention and not the Alamy way of doing things"
 
FranchiseJuan said:
. Do you really expect a slightly soft image will not be noticed my a client?
Click to expand...

Yes, but there's soft and soft! An image could be soft for technical reasons, eg out of focus or camera shake, or the subject matter itself could be soft ( a misty morning, for example); or part of it could be soft due to a long lens being used to isolate the subject matter, which is sharp, from the background or foreground, which might not be.

In my (limited) experience the QC people at Alamy did not distinguish between soft and soft! Or soft, for that matter.:)
 
With over 38000 images submitted to Alamy and only around 100 rejections of which all passed on resubmission, I can say its defiantly down to what you send them in the first place.
If your workflow and QC is good you will not have a problem. A good RAW file is a must, and don't start cropping images as that ultimately results in soft images if using a small sensor size, from all the uprezing you will have to do to make the size.

Alamy is one of the easiest agency's to get images into apart from the microstock site which just about take anything.
 
mho said:
With over 38000 images submitted to Alamy and only around 100 rejections of which all passed on resubmission
Click to expand...

This has been discussed quite often on the Alamy forums as well. I have had images rejected for interpolation artifacts, and I imediately resubmited the same batch of images, and they all passed. It can be down to who inspects your images.
 
Depends what camera you shoot with too. If the camera doesn't produce a high enough resolution - say 4000px + on longest side then you'll have a hard job upsizing them without introducing artifacts or 'softness'. Alamy know what sells - they know a good picture technically too - and so do their clients - if your images don't make it then you're not good enough. Get over it - and get better! Pictures can can shallow DOF and pass - no problem.
 
Can I ask what sharpening people do? I use the Adobe Camera Raw default settings for RAW sharpening and then either a high pass sharpen or a very slight unsharp mask at the end before saving.

I'd appreciate if any regular contributors to Alamy could give some advice on their processing technique from RAW to the final JPEG.
 
I think we have had 19 replys with no one answering the original question and saying
for example

"i have XXX number photos on Alamy they have been there fox XXX months and I typically make £XXX per month but have made as much as £XXX in one month."

i cant help with examples - i have never uploaded any of mine for stock, but I'm sure someone here can give some clear examples of the money you can make.


30p is rubbish if you only sell once, but if you have 1000 photos that sell once per month it starts to add up
 
StuD said:
Can I ask what sharpening people do? I use the Adobe Camera Raw default settings for RAW sharpening and then either a high pass sharpen or a very slight unsharp mask at the end before saving.

I'd appreciate if any regular contributors to Alamy could give some advice on their processing technique from RAW to the final JPEG.
Click to expand...

Alamy specifies NO sharpening! (But complained that my images were soft :bang: )
 
OK, I can see you're looking for something other than non-commital answers. This probably won't help you much but my experience is this...

I signed up for iStock (because they inspect every image) last year, really just as an experiment to improve my photography. One thing you can be sure of with stock QC people is that they WILL tell you if your picture sucks, which if your skin is thick enough is way better feedback than 50 people telling you your image is "nice" on a tog forum.
I got approved with my second batch and made a sale within a week. I only have 87 shots on there but have learned more about the quality of my images in a year than in the entire rest of my life in photography. I currently sell one or two shots a day and even though the amount you recieve is laughably small it has bought me a body upgrade already.

Having attained a pretty consistent 100% QC standard, I signed up for Alamy a couple of months ago adding a few images each week. I've only got 57 images with them and have yet to sell anything.

I've learned a lot since starting this experiment, some of it you might not like to hear. But here are my thoughts;

Stock is not photography! There is often little art in stock, customers are looking for a message. Stock is more a discipline of marketing than photography, something born out in the terminology. I have taken some pictures I'm really proud of and they will never sell as stock. I've recorded good images which I feel absolutely nothing for that sell day in, day out.
I found it became an obsession, that I was constantly looking for anything I could shoot to sell and that became detrimental to my hobby. I also spent more time thinking about how to meet licensing requirements than getting a great shot. It can be quite soul-less actually.
If you have access to good models who will work for nothing, have lots of spare time to photograph subjects which maybe don't inspire you much, have a high boredom threshold then you can make it work but expect to put in a lot of effort. It would be nice to make a living from it but realistically....

Feel free to have a look...
http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography-search-results.asp?qt=stuart+hickling&ns=1&nu=0&lic=6&lic=1
http://www.istockphoto.com/spannerdude
 
spannerdude

great post - and for what it's worth your photos look up to the mark (i like the webber shot - I'm just a petrol head!)
i think what you have described is not so much stock photography but commercial or professional photography in general, taking shots that are drull to please the client...

this is the same with art, music and fashion - this is the stuff that pays the bills and is different to the stuff you pin on the wall at 60" x 40" as this is the stuff that makes you do it...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top