Rights question re. Alamy

I'm curious what the thought process is when choosing the rights assigned in Alamy or other stock agencies. I've chosen royalty free because honestly, I'd be tickled to make a few sales and think the odds might be better with more general and broader rights assigned to the sale. What does everyone else think? Am I misunderstanding or missing something important regarding the license for my photos?

There are FAQs on Alamy's site that will answer all your questions.

AZAlphaDog wrote in post #14697332
There are FAQs on Alamy's site that will answer all your questions.

Well, I read that and it just brought up another question for me. Initially, I just want to choose the rights that will give me the best opportunity for making a few sales, which I thought would be RF. If I end up making some sales, increasing the size of my inventory and gaining some confidence, at that point I thought I'd go Rights Managed. Maybe I'm confused and my thinking is backwards.

The question I have is that the FAQs suggest that the price on a RF image is set by the contributor. I'm not sure I understand this at all. Is it one set price regardless of how or why the buyer wants to use the image? When I was managing my initial images, I saw nowhere about establishing a price and I wouldn't really know where to begin to generate sales without discouraging buyers who didn't want to pay big money for some small usage.

This is why I'm asking, I'm new to all of this and I'm curious what most sellers do on these stock photography sites and what a reasonable charge would be for a RF sale.

Royalty free prices are determined by the size of the image used, where the images is used, i.e. an image used on product packaging will cost more than an image used one time, very small in a magazine.

The odds that you will have an image that is so unique that an image buyer would want to pay you thousands of dollars, or even hundreds of dollars for are very, very low.

As far as I know Alamy sets the prices for image usage, you don't set the pricing (The option to set the price if "you sell your copyright" to an image is available on some sites, but I don't think Alamy has that feature)

I believe that unless something is editorial (rights managed) or very unique and can be exclusive to only one image buyer (again rights managed) everything else should be set as royalty free. That's just my opinion.

Thanks, that's what I thought but I was thrown for a loop when I read that the contributor sets pricing if RF is chosen. Ok, I think I did the right thing by choosing RF and I appreciate your response.

Sorry for all of the dumb questions (I know, there's no such thing) but I just got my initial test batch through and I'm planning what I want to do next. I know that in general, to use or sell images of recognizable people you must have a release. Do you need one on Alamy if just the person's back is showing or if he's not recognizable for some other reason? If so, what do you do when manageing your images, just click "1" for "are there people in this photo" and "no" for "do you have a release"? Will they let it through under those circumstances?

In those cases when you click NO for the model release the image will automatically be set to rights managed (editorial) but if the images is not truly editorial and intended to be use as an editorial image you shouldn't upload it.

Most people don't understand what an actual editorial image is and when and how it can be used.

Editorial images (images without a signed commercial model release) can only be used to report the news, educate or inform the general public. They can not be used to sell a product or service.

Just because you don't have a signed commercial model release doesn't mean an image is a good candidate for editorial stock sales.

That's interesting. Let me explain the specific case that I'm asking about. We have an Amish community in my area. As a rule, they don't like to be photographed and I simply don't photograph them to avoid making them uncomfortable. Furthermore, they'd never sign a release if asked. However, I took a photo the other day of an Amish man driving down the road with his two-horse team pulling a wagon. He was standing on the wagon and driving down a dirt road through the trees with the sun coming down. It was really a striking image and he never knew I was there. Considering the fact that he's completely unrecognizable, I really don't understand why a release would be required but I guess the rules are the rules.

I can't say for sure, but from your explanation the image sounds like it would be a good stock image and under the right circumstances might even pass as a good royalty free image.

Some images with people that don't have a model release can be used as stock but it can be a very fine line between "yes" and "no" on the royalty free vs. editorial licensing issue.

Can you size the image and post it here?

The image could sit on Alamy's site for a long time before someone figures out is has been incorrectly labeled as royalty free when it should really be labeled as rights managed (editorial).

Here's the image. I'm not sure how good the image is technically but I like it other than two things. First of all, he apparently heard or sensed a car and pulled off to the extreme right side of the road. Secondly, he's hauling some modern building materials in boxes rather than "Amish" stuff like feed sacks or raw logs. Anyway, here it is.

Yea, sorry but it's not that good of an image.

If he was down at the end of a long road and all silhouetted by the setting sun with beams of sunlight . . .

Sorry, it's just kinda a snapshot, but . . .

I have plenty of snapshots in my library on Alamy, just make sure you mark it as rights managed and fill in the "editorial" box under the restrictions tab.

AZAlphaDog wrote in post #14698067
Yea, sorry but it's not that good of an image.

If he was down at the end of a long road and all silhouetted by the setting sun with beams of sunlight . . .

Sorry, it's just kinda a snapshot, but . . .

I have plenty of snapshots in my library on Alamy, just make sure you mark it as rights managed and fill in the "editorial" box under the restrictions tab.

Oh, agreed, there's nothing truly artistic or sensational about it. For me it's just rather unique because most people have zero contact or knowledge of the Amish and because they don't care to be photographed so you don't see this much, other than in the tourist areas around Lancaster, Pennsylvania.

Thanks for the input.

Alamy has a contributor forum. Definitely worth the time to browse through. Just about every question on here regarding their site has been asked and answered in their forums a few times over, but unfortunately it looks like they removed a lot of the older posts. Either way, still a very active forum.. might help you out w/ future questions.

ChrisRabior wrote in post #14699785
Alamy has a contributor forum. Definitely worth the time to browse through. Just about every question on here regarding their site has been asked and answered in their forums a few times over, but unfortunately it looks like they removed a lot of the older posts. Either way, still a very active forum.. might help you out w/ future questions.

Thanks Chris, I'll check it out.