Author Topic: How many of you have other job beside stocks? (Read 24174 times)

seawhisper · « **on:** January 10, 2016, 03:21 »

Just wondering. Recently woke up, drinking my coffee thinking about keywording my photos but it seems I'm not yet awaken.

As for me I'm a project manager in "real life" - it doesn't leave much time for stock photography or anything at all to be honest.

But I started stocks when I was theatre photographer so they got a bit abandoned lately. Now I somehow went back but it doesn't look too bright.

Still almost all the time I had some other job beside stocks.
How about you guys?

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #1 on:** January 10, 2016, 03:56 »

I am 100% producing images for stock

MarcvsTvllivs · « **Reply #2 on:** January 10, 2016, 04:08 »

I have a job. I started doing stock as a student when I had lots of time; these days I hardly shoot and upload even more rarely.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #3 on:** January 10, 2016, 10:13 »

I always wonder why non-US people pluralize "stock" and "microstock".

LesPalenik · « **Reply #4 on:** January 10, 2016, 11:03 »

I trade stocks occasionally. Beats microstock.

ShadySue · « **Reply #5 on:** January 10, 2016, 12:18 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on January 10, 2016, 10:13

I always wonder why non-US people pluralize "stock" and "microstock".

I've always wondered why USians singularise 'maths'.

Shelma1 · « **Reply #6 on:** January 10, 2016, 13:00 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 10, 2016, 12:18

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on January 10, 2016, 10:13
I always wonder why non-US people pluralize "stock" and "microstock".
I've always wondered why USians singularise 'maths'.

Lol. I thought my ex-bf was making a charming mistake when he said "maths," (he's French), but then I heard Brits saying "maths" and realized it wasn't a mistake at all; he learned to speak English in Europe, so he was absolutely right. I was glad I didn't try to correct him.

NandoPhoto · « **Reply #7 on:** January 10, 2016, 13:10 »

Stock is a side income to me, but very welcome, even though I don't make that much. I teach photography at a private school and shoot corporate events and headshots aside from that.

LesHoward · « **Reply #8 on:** January 10, 2016, 14:30 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 10, 2016, 12:18

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on January 10, 2016, 10:13
I always wonder why non-US people pluralize "stock" and "microstock".
I've always wondered why USians singularise 'maths'.

Chuckle - I am Canadian (if that makes a difference) and I have a BSc in Mathematics. For me, 'math' is a short form of the word 'mathematics'. I've always wondered why anyone would feel the need to pluralize a word that was already plural.

pkphotos · « **Reply #9 on:** January 10, 2016, 14:37 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on January 10, 2016, 10:13

I always wonder why non-US people pluralize "stock" and "microstock".

I always wonder why Americans always say 'erbs' instead of 'herbs'. At what point did the Mexican influence filter through enough for the H to become silent?

Zero Talent · « **Reply #10 on:** January 10, 2016, 14:45 »

Or some, not all, from US pronouncing "internet", "international", etc with a silent "t" => "inernet", "inernational"

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Shelma1 · « **Reply #11 on:** January 10, 2016, 14:59 »

Quote from: pkphotos on January 10, 2016, 14:37

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on January 10, 2016, 10:13
I always wonder why non-US people pluralize "stock" and "microstock".

I always wonder why Americans always say 'erbs' instead of 'herbs'. At what point did the Mexican influence filter through enough for the H to become silent?

Actually, I think the silent "h" comes from the French. They owned a nice chunk of the country for a while there. What I don't get is why we use both the French "coriandre" and the Spanish "cilantro" to describe different parts of the same plant. I only recently realized coriander seeds grew into cilantro plants.

seawhisper · « **Reply #12 on:** January 10, 2016, 15:45 »

Hehe how does it happen that always when you have a topic in forum it always wonders off some other sometimes very exotic subjects?

I used stocks instead of stock as for one stock (website) - few stock websites = few stocks.

marthamarks · « **Reply #13 on:** January 10, 2016, 16:58 »

Quote from: seawhisper on January 10, 2016, 15:45

Hehe how does it happen that always when you have a topic in forum it always wonders off some other sometimes very exotic subjects?

Very good point! Who knows why it happens, but it does.

Quote from: seawhisper on January 10, 2016, 15:45

I used stocks instead of stock as for one stock (website) - few stock websites = few stocks.

That was a reasonable assumption on your part. Unfortunately, a flawed one.

Here in the US (the only version of English that I feel qualified to discuss), "stock" in this context is a shortcut for stock photography, whether it's available on a single website or many. One stock site, two stock sites, etc. (One might also refer to a family's stock of homemade jelly, for example, or to a good stock of paper towels found on a store's shelves.)

We use "stocks" to refer to the investments in corporations that someone can buy and hold or sell for profit (or loss).

I just Googled "stocks" to find an example for you, and this popped up from just a few hours ago: "U.S. stocks had their worst start to the year of all time, with all the major indexes posting ..."

Hope this helps!

LesPalenik · « **Reply #14 on:** January 10, 2016, 17:34 »

Yes, this past week the (investment) stocks fared much worse than microstock.
In microstock, the accumulated profit can't get any smaller (could be, because it is so small to start with).

seawhisper · « **Reply #15 on:** January 10, 2016, 18:12 »

Quote from: marthamarks on January 10, 2016, 16:58

Quote from: seawhisper on January 10, 2016, 15:45
Hehe how does it happen that always when you have a topic in forum it always wonders off some other sometimes very exotic subjects?

Very good point! Who knows why it happens, but it does.

Quote from: seawhisper on January 10, 2016, 15:45
I used stocks instead of stock as for one stock (website) - few stock websites = few stocks.

That was a reasonable assumption on your part. Unfortunately, a flawed one.

Here in the US (the only version of English that I feel qualified to discuss), "stock" in this context is a shortcut for stock photography, whether it's available on a single website or many. One stock site, two stock sites, etc. (One might also refer to a family's stock of homemade jelly, for example, or to a good stock of paper towels found on a store's shelves.)

We use "stocks" to refer to the investments in corporations that someone can buy and hold or sell for profit (or loss).

I just Googled "stocks" to find an example for you, and this popped up from just a few hours ago: "U.S. stocks had their worst start to the year of all time, with all the major indexes posting ..."

Hope this helps!

True, thanks!

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #16 on:** January 10, 2016, 18:21 »

I think that's going to be my goal from now on. Drive posts off topic. We've already covered every microstock topic at least a dozen times to the point where the off topic responses are more interesting.

marthamarks · « **Reply #17 on:** January 10, 2016, 18:38 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on January 10, 2016, 18:21

I think that's going to be my goal from now on. Drive posts off topic. We've already covered every microstock topic at least a dozen times to the point where the off topic responses are more interesting.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #18 on:** January 10, 2016, 19:10 »

Lol, sorry. It just always bugged me.

Ides · « **Reply #19 on:** January 10, 2016, 19:39 »

I'm 100% stock.

pkphotos · « **Reply #20 on:** January 10, 2016, 20:00 »

I'm 100% stock but need to figure out a way to double and triple my income. The problem is it takes time to get things done.

Ides · « **Reply #21 on:** January 10, 2016, 20:11 »

Quote from: pkphotos on January 10, 2016, 20:00

I'm 100% stock but need to figure out a way to double and triple my income. The problem is it takes time to get things done.

Same problem here

wordplanet · « **Reply #22 on:** January 10, 2016, 20:21 »

I enjoyed the off topic discussion - I'm often wracking my brain for the British English version of some words when I'm keywording.

On topic, I primarily work as a freelance writer and assignment photographer. Stock photography is a small, though growing, part of what I do. In the past year, I have shown a lot more of my work in galleries and spent much more time on fine art than in the past, but writing and photography assignments are my main income sources.

cathyslife · « **Reply #23 on:** January 10, 2016, 20:44 »

I have been in graphic design forever, but was always involved with photography in some fashion in relation to that work...buying stock photography, doing product photography, assisting others on product photo shoots, etc. It had been a hobby for me, so i extended the interest into microstock, but i would never want to do it on a full time basis.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #24 on:** January 10, 2016, 21:10 »

Quote from: Zero Talent on January 10, 2016, 14:45

Or some, not all, from US pronouncing "internet", "international", etc with a silent "t" => "inernet", "inernational"
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

yes, i noticed that too; the ppl from the States (*US that is).. say aluminum and not aluminIUM
and would of ..and not would HAVE , and wa*er instead of WAT-TER *water.

it all goes down to sheer laziness ( * like my lax of caps , heheh..) as latinos from say mexico will say domicans are lazy because they drop certain consonant in their spanish pronunciation.
(no offence to dominicans, as even dominicans themselves admit it)

marthamarks · « **Reply #25 on:** January 10, 2016, 21:19 »

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on January 10, 2016, 21:10

yes, i noticed that too; the ppl from the States (*US that is).. say aluminum and not aluminIUM
and would of ..and not would HAVE , and wa*er instead of WAT-TER *water.

I will take some exception to that. The "English" wa*er and would of… you're quoting is only heard among a certain kind of "ppl" in the US. Generally not well educated. Please don't assume every American says wa*er and would of…

As for "aluminum," yep, you're right. Most of us say it that way, including me. Adding an extra syllable to emphasize the *i* in "ium" at the end sounds British to me.

But remember, many of us Americans also pronounce the name "American" as "Amur'can," so we're equal-opportunity language slobs.

sgoodwin4813 · « **Reply #26 on:** January 11, 2016, 00:07 »

And we've had at least one President pronounce "nuclear" as "nucular" - drove me crazy (along with almost everything else that one did!)

marthamarks · « **Reply #27 on:** January 11, 2016, 00:14 »

Quote from: sgoodwin4813 on January 11, 2016, 00:07

And we've had at least one President pronounce "nuclear" as "nucular" - drove me crazy (along with almost everything else that one did!)

Ditto here!

MarcvsTvllivs · « **Reply #28 on:** January 11, 2016, 02:52 »

Quote from: marthamarks on January 10, 2016, 21:19

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on January 10, 2016, 21:10
yes, i noticed that too; the ppl from the States (*US that is).. say aluminum and not aluminIUM
and would of ..and not would HAVE , and wa*er instead of WAT-TER *water.

I will take some exception to that. The "English" wa*er and would of… you're quoting is only heard among a certain kind of "ppl" in the US. Generally not well educated. Please don't assume every American says wa*er and would of…

As for "aluminum," yep, you're right. Most of us say it that way, including me. Adding an extra syllable to emphasize the *i* in "ium" at the end sounds British to me.

But remember, many of us Americans also pronounce the name "American" as "Amur'can," so we're equal-opportunity language slobs.

Let's not forget that a certain kind of Brits say wa*er, too. Just that it sounds more like woah*ah.

Chichikov · « **Reply #29 on:** January 11, 2016, 02:58 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on January 10, 2016, 10:13

I always wonder why non-US people pluralize "stock" and "microstock".

I always wonder why US people think to be truth bearers…

Shelma1 · « **Reply #30 on:** January 11, 2016, 04:49 »

Ha ha. I had an Australian friend yell at me that the last letter of the alphabet is "ZED," not "ZEE!" He was really pissed about it. "Pissed" being American for "angry."

Zero Talent · « **Reply #31 on:** January 11, 2016, 08:32 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on January 11, 2016, 04:49

Ha ha. I had an Australian friend yell at me that the last letter of the alphabet is "ZED," not "ZEE!" He was really pissed about it. "Pissed" being American for "angry."

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Pixart · « **Reply #32 on:** January 11, 2016, 10:18 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on January 11, 2016, 04:49

Ha ha. I had an Australian friend yell at me that the last letter of the alphabet is "ZED," not "ZEE!" He was really pissed about it. "Pissed" being American for "angry."

You have to admit, Zed is a much cooler word to say than Zee.... For example, the coolness of driving an old Zed-28 vs a Zee-28.

LesHoward · « **Reply #33 on:** January 11, 2016, 14:00 »

Most Canadians also pronounce 'z' as 'zed' but many of us are comfortable using either pronunciation because of the strong influence of our American neighbors. Still, there are a lot of snobs who insist on correcting us when we say 'zee'.

I was taught in school (grade 4 or so in the 1950's) that the contraction for 'would have' is 'would've'. Unfortunately it sounds very much like 'would of' and since our school systems now feel it is more important to teach gender identity in that grade, our current students miss out on learning English so they didn't learn the difference.

This also explains why so few people - including most teachers - know the difference between arithmetic and mathematics.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #34 on:** January 11, 2016, 14:05 »

Quote from: Zero Talent on January 11, 2016, 08:32

Quote from: Shelma1 on January 11, 2016, 04:49
Ha ha. I had an Australian friend yell at me that the last letter of the alphabet is "ZED," not "ZEE!" He was really pissed about it. "Pissed" being American for "angry."

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Haitch? "Zed's dead, baby, Zed's dead." Butch

http://education.jlab.org/itselemental/ele013.html

ah-LOO-men-em just like it's spelled.

Now somebody explain why mathematics is maths and not math? What's the importance?

ShadySue · « **Reply #35 on:** January 11, 2016, 14:09 »

Quote from: MarcvsTvllivs on January 11, 2016, 02:52

Quote from: marthamarks on January 10, 2016, 21:19

But remember, many of us Americans also pronounce the name "American" as "Amur'can," so we're equal-opportunity language slobs.

Let's not forget that a certain kind of Brits say wa*er, too. Just that it sounds more like woah*ah.

The glottal stop is an integral part of the Glasgow accent, sounding like waw-uh NOT wawuh, but to me the generic American pronunciation is wadda(r). It's just a accent, nothing to lose sleep over.

Digital66 · « **Reply #36 on:** January 11, 2016, 14:46 »

WOW! Never thought there were so many specialists in linguistics working as stock photographers!

cascoly · « **Reply #37 on:** January 11, 2016, 15:28 »

Quote from: sgoodwin4813 on January 11, 2016, 00:07

And we've had at least one President pronounce "nuclear" as "nucular" - drove me crazy (along with almost everything else that one did!)

unfortunately that is slowly becoming acceptable

then there's the lbj 'tarred merkins'

off-offtopic -i'm retired but spend time on ms, and selling on amazon/ebay - the latter are more hassle & less fun but generate about equivalent income

Difydave · « **Reply #38 on:** January 11, 2016, 15:43 »

I must excape from reading this thread, as I have a sangwidge and an expresso waiting.

Lana · « **Reply #39 on:** January 11, 2016, 15:57 »

I've got a degree in linguistics

and I want stock or stocks to become my full-time income

say in a year

DallasP · « **Reply #40 on:** January 11, 2016, 17:35 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on January 10, 2016, 18:21

I think that's going to be my goal from now on. Drive posts off topic. We've already covered every microstock topic at least a dozen times to the point where the off topic responses are more interesting.

Sounds like someone already has their new years resolutions in place.

DallasP · « **Reply #41 on:** January 11, 2016, 17:41 »

and don't forget mow-tan ... Mountain

fivedmarkthree · « **Reply #42 on:** January 11, 2016, 17:55 »

and of course some places in the US we like to move letters around for the fun of it, such as.... "I have an idear for a ca". Translation: "I have an idea for a car"

Zero Talent · « **Reply #43 on:** January 11, 2016, 18:17 »

Quote from: sgoodwin4813 on January 11, 2016, 00:07

And we've had at least one President pronounce "nuclear" as "nucular" - drove me crazy (along with almost everything else that one did!)

Same president who used to say "terr" instead of "terror"?

Elenathewise · « **Reply #44 on:** January 11, 2016, 18:20 »

I am a full-time stock photographer. Although I have a degree in physics and math...s?

Actually quit a well-paid job to do this full-time.

marthamarks · « **Reply #45 on:** January 11, 2016, 18:43 »

Quote from: Zero Talent on January 11, 2016, 18:17

Quote from: sgoodwin4813 on January 11, 2016, 00:07
And we've had at least one President pronounce "nuclear" as "nucular" - drove me crazy (along with almost everything else that one did!)

Same president who used to say "terr" instead of "terror"?

Yep. That's him.

Zero Talent · « **Reply #46 on:** January 11, 2016, 19:25 »

Quote from: marthamarks on January 11, 2016, 18:43

Quote from: Zero Talent on January 11, 2016, 18:17
Quote from: sgoodwin4813 on January 11, 2016, 00:07
And we've had at least one President pronounce "nuclear" as "nucular" - drove me crazy (along with almost everything else that one did!)

Same president who used to say "terr" instead of "terror"?

Yep. That's him.

https://youtu.be/hORaebYWDwk

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

marthamarks · « **Reply #47 on:** January 11, 2016, 23:55 »

Quote from: Zero Talent on January 11, 2016, 19:25

Quote from: marthamarks on January 11, 2016, 18:43
Quote from: Zero Talent on January 11, 2016, 18:17
Quote from: sgoodwin4813 on January 11, 2016, 00:07
And we've had at least one President pronounce "nuclear" as "nucular" - drove me crazy (along with almost everything else that one did!)

Same president who used to say "terr" instead of "terror"?

Yep. That's him.
https://youtu.be/hORaebYWDwk

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

That's a good one, and so is this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Be6tunbRcs8

Koufax73 · « **Reply #48 on:** January 12, 2016, 02:11 »

Sorry to drive off your very funny and noble language dispute... I'm a journalist.
If you like music, maybe you'll like to read to some of what I write: http://issuu.com/qdmonf/docs/traks_002_single_page

seawhisper · « **Reply #49 on:** January 12, 2016, 03:06 »

Well I do admit I love the direction this topic is going in.

Still I do not agree that every topic has been covered so there's no need for discussion. Even if it was there are new people, and things change blah blah.

(Also I'm quite ingenious on asking things I really really need to know, when I do have much more important are painfully boring things to do. )

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #50 on:** January 13, 2016, 08:59 »

Quote from: DallasP on January 11, 2016, 17:35

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on January 10, 2016, 18:21
I think that's going to be my goal from now on. Drive posts off topic. We've already covered every microstock topic at least a dozen times to the point where the off topic responses are more interesting.

Sounds like someone already has their new years resolutions in place.

New Years Resolutions? C'mon, who ever keeps New Years resolutions?

kingjon · « **Reply #51 on:** January 13, 2016, 12:24 »

I'm a retired microstocker (was a hobbyist - I quit a couple of years ago as the drop in revenue was too steep to justify the work). Chemist and Industrial Hygienist now specializing in emergency response (hazmat).

Still reading the forum by habit but I must say it all seems a bit depressing.

I hope things improve for you guys.

John

Lana · « **Reply #52 on:** January 13, 2016, 12:39 »

Quote from: kingjon on January 13, 2016, 12:24

I'm a retired microstocker (was a hobbyist - I quit a couple of years ago as the drop in revenue was too steep to justify the work).

John, did you delete all your microstock accounts though or your work is still there?

kingjon · « **Reply #53 on:** January 13, 2016, 12:55 »

no point in deleting - still get a few payouts per year mainly from SS and IS. I just have about 400 images online. I had seen microstock as a way to supplement my income once I retired but I am still 10 years out from retirement and don't see microstock as "sustainable" now and even less in the future. In 10 years, the collections will be in the hundreds of million of images and my "exposure" would be a tiny fraction even if I could work on this full time. So I'm looking to invest in real estate instead :-)

John

Benozaur · « **Reply #54 on:** January 13, 2016, 13:34 »

I'm a compositor (not composer) and do digital special effects for film and TV, supervise shoots on location with an eye on potential problems for post-production. I do stock footage as a hobby.

Dog-maDe-sign · « **Reply #55 on:** January 18, 2016, 07:30 »

Microstock is "only" my third job.

PixelBytes · « **Reply #56 on:** January 18, 2016, 14:36 »

Photography is my only job, and the majority of that has bee microstock the past few years. But I am looking to branch back into other areas soon out of necessity.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: How many of you have other job beside stocks? (Read 24174 times)

Justanotherphotographer

marthamarks

marthamarks

marthamarks

marthamarks

Chichikov

marthamarks

marthamarks

Benozaur

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors