| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/29/2005 09:13:28 AM · #201 |
Going back a bit. to the people that have submitted...did you put together 2-3 of a series or related? or just 10 you thought would work well? The point I guess would be, for them to know what area you "work" in.
|
|
|
|
07/29/2005 09:45:30 AM · #202 |
I don't think they are concerned about what subject area or style you work in - certainly they don't give any impression of taking that into account with their initial or subsequent QCs.
Their main priority with QC seems to me to be the quality of the image rather than the content/ style/ theme.
I happened to send a series that were all travel related as they were taken on one trip.
|
|
|
|
07/29/2005 11:13:04 AM · #203 |
Kavey,
Yeah, I know what you mean about images getting rejected for seemingly "weird" reasons on istock, it's happened to me too. So maybe your explanation of the different acceptance rates between the two is the correct one. Interesting. I wonder if anyone who has experience with some of the other micro sites (shutterstock, dreamstime, etc.) would have a similar comparisson to Alamy. Hmmm....
I still wish us all luck with Alamy! I gotta start working on my 3rd disk now! :-)
|
|
|
|
07/29/2005 11:33:55 AM · #204 |
Most of the microsites are similarly random - I've had different pictures rejected by all of them; often the very ones that go on to sell on the other microsites.
They tend to be very cyclical anyway; at the moment dreamstime seems to be the most fussy; shutterstock tends to be more flexible, istockphoto and the others are somewhere inbetween (actually no, gimmestock will take anything but they're just starting out!).
Interestingly dreamstime, despite (or because of?) being fussier is my current top earner! |
|
|
|
07/29/2005 11:37:11 AM · #205 |
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
Grr my submission is still status 'Processing'. How long have people's submissions been at that status?
I would hope it'd only take several minutes to review the pics. It's been most of the day. |
First received on 22nd June, finished processing on 14th of July. 22 days.
Second received 19th of July, finished on 28th of July. Only 9 days.
I guess their processing speed varies somewhat. |
|
|
|
07/29/2005 01:36:40 PM · #206 |
Accepted submissions:
Kavey = Kavita Favelle
Ganders = Pete Favelle
Leaf = Tyler Olson
DSWebb = Doug Webb
JodieCoston = Jodie Coston
nsbca7 = M. A. Battilana
PaulMdx = Paul Maddox :-D
Let me know if I've missed anyone.
(Search for full name on //www.alamy.com for galleries.)
|
|
|
|
08/03/2005 01:11:00 PM · #207 |
Just curious about a few things.
Apparently Genuine Fractals and pxlSmartScale have now changed hands and are being sold by onOne Software.
1. I was considering the purchase of Genuine Fractals and would like to know who is using either one of these products and what your thoughts are on these packages?
I emailed the Tech Support and asked what the difference was in the two packages and this was the reply I got back:
Quote:
Greetings,
Basically it'll come down to bit depth and to a certain degree content. Genuine Fractals can work with 16-bit images and SmartScale currently does not. The other difference is that Genuine Fractals is known to work a little bit better with organic shapes and colors while SmartScale tends to be better with graphics and objects with a hard line. Both products can co-exist in Photoshop so you may just want to get both trial versions and see which one is better for you.
Regards,
onOne Software Technical Support
15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy
Suite 190
Portland, OR 97224
onOne Software
End Quote:
2. Also curious as to who uses Photoshop CS/CS2 for upscaling their images? I will be upgrading my Photoshop CS to Photoshop CS2 withing the next few days.
3. I know this maybe two questions in one but can anyone shed some light on what you are using to manage/archiving all your images?
Do you simply use Photoshop and maintain your stock images in separate directories?
Is anyone using iView or Extensis Portolio?
I was using Archive Creator for backups because I like the HTML index it created on my hard drive and CD's. But when I ordered the latest uprgade (V3.04) I got a little mad when it would not work with my Dual Layer DVD drive and it burned 4 nice DVD coasters so I aksed for a refund. Apparently they say the Beta version 3.05b does work with DUal Layer drives. :)
|
|
|
|
08/03/2005 01:20:46 PM · #208 |
Alamy has just published a statement of earnings. Click here to see.
What they did not publish was thier gross earnings or how much was paid out to individual photographers. Those are the numbers that would have interested me.
|
|
|
|
08/03/2005 03:05:14 PM · #209 |
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
Accepted submissions:
|
ya forgot me! :P i still need to get in there and keyword, but i'm going to be sending another disk of images to them in just a few days (assuming i can breathe life back into my computer).
as i stated below, i just resized my QC images using the Bicubic Sharper algorithm in PSCS.
FWIW, i've bought a ginormous ton of stock images in my day and i have NEVER encountered a site that lets you preview the images at 100%. that includes getty, veer, photodisc, and picturequest among others. the potential for image theft is just too great. i don't know that anyone does it, but i think someone (maybe veer?) recently implemented some kind of flash viewer that lets you zoom into the photo somewhat.
i would also assume that the first batch of photos takes longer because they are analyzed more. that's why they have to be labeled differently on the disc and the package sent. subsequent submissions are probably just casually reviewed, as the photog has "proven" him or herself at that point. that's the reason for doing the QC submission in the first place. |
|
|
|
08/03/2005 03:41:28 PM · #210 |
Sorry Mucky. I will update below with hyperlinks when I'm back at home.
With regards to 100% views.. I notice on Alamy you can specify focal points to allow more zoomed in views. Is that not at 100%? 100% would be pretty useless, judging by the size of their minimum requirements alone!
Message edited by author 2005-08-07 11:31:19.
|
|
|
|
08/03/2005 03:45:46 PM · #211 |
RHoldenSr,
I have used resize pro from //www.fredmiranda.com to upsize images from within photoshop CS2 for Alamy. I've upsized 55 images so far with it and they've accepted every one. It is much cheaper than genuine fractals. Just to let you know my experience...
nsbca,
As for the Alamy info they just published, they left out the one thing that I most wanted to see too... How many total images have they sold so far this year? (And last year?) I mean, if they have a library of 3 million images, but only sell 1,000 images a year, then there's not much chance of any one image selling...
muckpond,
As for viewing at 100%, my only experience is with istockphoto. They let you zoom all the way in to 100%, but only over a small portion of the image. As well as putting a faint watermark on the preview... But you can at least see the image "up close and personal" if you want before buying. I sure like the way they let you see how many times your image has been VIEWED by potential buyers also... I have no idea if anyone has even LOOKED at my stuff on Alamy yet... :-(
Doug |
|
|
|
08/03/2005 03:47:49 PM · #212 |
PaulMdx,
I tried setting up one of those "focal points" on an image of mine when I first got accepted to Alamy, so that someone COULD see it at 100% (I presume...). But, it didn't seem to work. So I don't know if that feature just isn't implemented yet, or if maybe I was just doing something wrong...
Doug
|
|
|
|
08/03/2005 04:11:54 PM · #213 |
I downloaded the demo for GF and I already have the Fred Miranda Resize Pro. I will have to compare the quality for both and see what does the best job.
Originally posted by dswebb:
RHoldenSr,
I have used resize pro from //www.fredmiranda.com to upsize images from within photoshop CS2 for Alamy. I've upsized 55 images so far with it and they've accepted every one. It is much cheaper than genuine fractals. Just to let you know my experience...
|
|
|
|
|
08/03/2005 04:32:10 PM · #214 |
RHoldenSr,
I would be MOST interested in your comparisson of GF and RP. Let us know how you think they do "against each other." Thanks.
Doug
|
|
|
|
08/03/2005 04:36:00 PM · #215 |
How much do you make per month on alamy? (general question to all of you reading this thread)
|
|
|
|
08/03/2005 05:25:54 PM · #216 |
As I've said before, on my part, nothing at all. I don't have many pics up, they haven't been up for that long, and they are not the kind of images that I'd expect to be bought often - they are travel and wildlife images rather than generic product/ concept/ people stock images.
Jodie Coston sells regularly - she shoots wonderful stock photography, has a huge Alamy portfolio that she continuously adds to and works very hard at what is a proper job to her.
The rest of us on this thread, are, I believe, in the same boat - new members with no sales yet.
|
|
|
|
08/03/2005 06:52:03 PM · #217 |
Thanks to this thread, I tried it too. Submitted a few weeks ago.
I'm in. Just found that all of the images I submitted on my original disk are added to the catalog on Alamy.
Each photo has the options to set pseudonyms, categories, keywords, attributes, license, license details, and focus points.
It could take a LONG time to set all of these for just the photos I've got up there, let alone the 100 or so I have to submit still. Anyone have any positive or negative experience using these options? Will my sales go through the roof by setting focus points? Any insight is appreciated.
|
|
|
|
08/03/2005 07:33:02 PM · #218 |
Is it possible to upload photos online? I know you must be approved via CD/DVD, but once you're approved, can you add photos online? Or do you have to continue shipping CD/DVDs?
|
|
|
|
08/03/2005 07:42:39 PM · #219 |
As far as I know they only accept mailed in disks.
|
|
|
|
08/07/2005 09:31:32 AM · #220 |
Originally posted by terje:
Is it possible to upload photos online? I know you must be approved via CD/DVD, but once you're approved, can you add photos online? Or do you have to continue shipping CD/DVDs? |
You will always have to ship cds/dvds. Considering the massive minimum filesize, uploading would simply not be practical.
Originally posted by digitalknight:
Each photo has the options to set pseudonyms, categories, keywords, attributes, license, license details, and focus points. |
I just spent a good half hour poking around with the categories, only to realise there is apparently no means of searching by category. I'd leave those alone unless you find out it does actually apply. Similarly with attributes - doesn't seem to be searchable in any way.
The focal points thing doesn't seem to do anything, yet - perhaps it will be implemented in the future. I'm not sure why you'd bother with pseudonyms, but that shouldn't take a long time to set up.
It's a good thing the keywords can all be filled out on the same page, or that would take ages - as it is, it's not such a painful process. Just annoying you can't fill in descriptions on the same page. |
|
|
|
08/07/2005 11:17:54 AM · #221 |
What I like least is that you can't batch file the keywords. When you have 20 images of a duck they would all get the same duck keywords, but you have to file each one individually.
|
|
|
|
08/07/2005 11:30:46 AM · #222 |
Accepted submissions:
Kavey = Kavita Favelle
Ganders = Pete Favelle
Leaf = Tyler Olson
DSWebb = Doug Webb
JodieCoston = Jodie Coston
nsbca7 = M. A. Battilana
PaulMdx = Paul Maddox
Muckpond = Rob Elliott
Digitalknight = Doug Havens
Let me know if I've missed anyone.
(Search for full name on //www.alamy.com for galleries.)
Message edited by author 2005-08-07 11:32:42.
|
|
|
|
08/07/2005 06:19:12 PM · #223 |
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
Let me know if I've missed anyone. |
You're still missing me :) |
|
|
|
08/07/2005 09:15:07 PM · #224 |
Originally posted by riot:
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
Let me know if I've missed anyone. |
You're still missing me :) |
Out of curiosity....
With image ACBP3E, what possible stock use do you thing it has?
The reason I ask, is that you've not got a model release, and there are no details in the description as to the event/protest/dates etc..
To use such an image without model release it'd have to be editorial, and without details of the protest that would be a bit hard, of have I missed something about the process along the way?
You've got three people in there who are potentially recognisable..
On the other hand, ACBP4F would be usable for any protest article.. :-). Cool photo.
Cheers, Me.
|
|
|
|
08/07/2005 09:31:11 PM · #225 |
Originally posted by KiwiChris:
Originally posted by riot:
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
Let me know if I've missed anyone. |
You're still missing me :) |
Out of curiosity....
With image ACBP3E, what possible stock use do you thing it has?
The reason I ask, is that you've not got a model release, and there are no details in the description as to the event/protest/dates etc..
To use such an image without model release it'd have to be editorial, and without details of the protest that would be a bit hard, of have I missed something about the process along the way?
You've got three people in there who are potentially recognisable..
On the other hand, ACBP4F would be usable for any protest article.. :-). Cool photo.
Cheers, Me. |
A little hard to be out gathering model releases in the middle of a protest, don't you think? There are plenty of "editorial" uses for an image that have nothing to do with strick reportage. Get a copy of The National Lampoon or Maxxim if you need an example.
By the way Riot, I love the "No Entry" image.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 07:22:01 PM EDT.
