pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Photoshelter is picking up steam  (Read 15421 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: May 03, 2008, 06:08 »
0
More and more people are reporting sales.  Yesterday a photographer reported in the forums that they sold two photos that brought in $5000.

72% of the first quarter sales were RM.



« Reply #1 on: May 03, 2008, 08:09 »
0
where is the link to that report ?

« Reply #2 on: May 03, 2008, 08:19 »
0
The information is in their forum.  You have to be an approved photo submitter in order to participate in the forum so I can't link it.     

They also have recently released a Q1 sales report in the forum which has some good information in it.





« Reply #3 on: May 03, 2008, 08:49 »
0
This is the first site I signed up with a couple of months ago. The photos I have there are exclusive by my choice and I like the fact that they take some of the more artistic shots that may not be perfect "stock" material. The editability and keywording of the images is excellent and the editors have good taste in the photos they have selected. I'm optimistic but don't expect to make a ton of money there any time soon. I'll keep uploading some of my best shots and see what happens.

jsnover

« Reply #4 on: May 03, 2008, 17:11 »
0
Perhaps I should go back and add to my small portfolio there. I uploaded last fall (and it was a very slow process to disambiguate the keywords, but they did a good job with available meanings) but thought I'd wait to add to it as it didn't appear anyone was making sales at that time.

They certainly seem to have folks actively working to drum up business, which is promising indeed.

« Reply #5 on: May 03, 2008, 18:27 »
0
Yes the keywording process is a little bit more work than most microstock sites I have worked with but hopefully it will help buyers find exactly what they are looking for by bringing back relevant search results.

I think it's pretty cool how they have like 6 direct sales agents.  They also have people reviewing photos that have a lot more experience than the people who sell $500 worth of photos and become reviewers.   The whole team's credentials and experience is pretty impressive.   Allen, the top dog, is proven winner in the business world.  Winners usually keep winning.

I wonder how they can swing giving back 70% to photographers and still stay in business.  They must have to pay their direct sales agents a commission also.   Some microstock sites are only paying back 20%.  I come to the conclusion that I'm either being ripped off by the microstock sites or their is more money available for purchasing photos with the higher end buyers.




 

« Reply #6 on: May 03, 2008, 23:29 »
0

I come to the conclusion that I'm either being ripped off by the microstock sites or their is more money available for purchasing photos with the higher end buyers.


Only you yourself can decide what your whotos are worth and where they should go. Microstock is merely a different business model that fills a need for lower budget users.  It is a volume game for the photographer. A hot photo may be downloaded 800 times and earn you $800 in this volume game over time. The same photo, if offered as Licensed and Rights managed, can earn you $1500 or more for one sale.

Please note that it is not proper business practice to ffer micro as Licensed on rights managed sites. It is unfortunate that some of the Rights Managed sites do not spell this out implicitly - they are so afraid to use the "M" word (microstock). I do believe Photoshelter has taken steps to clarify their kanguage since of of their contributors had photos listed as RM that were already selling on a half dozen RF micro sites.

Licensed is there for a reason, so that usage of an image can be tracked. Once it is out in the market as RF, it is up for grabs. That is why this "exclusive buyout" that Dreamstime offers is quite the joke, although it does happen. A buyer would be stupid to do an exclusive buy on an image that has already been DL'd 250 times.

If you are interested in earnings potential for an image, the price calculator at Alamy.com is open to use without logging in. Do a search on a subject you shoot. Pick any image as long as it is "L" not RF. Then use their price calculator on it. Choose different criteria when doing this, for instance, choose one use as "Front Cover" and another price as Inside Page. It will help give you an understanding of how RM pricing works. BTW, on Alamy,  the quality of the image you select won't matter. So don't worry if the image you select is trashy (unfortunately there is a lot of garbage on Alamy Alamy does not edit content, only technical quality)

I do micro mainly for my illustrations - but most of my photos go RM. I have 150+ RM on Photoshelter but just in a holding pattern there to see where things go with it.

The guy who sold the 2 for $5K on PSC is a seasoned pro already having a track record with major magazines.  Just wanted to discourage any rush of upload mania there because there will be disappointment in watching every day for sales. It does not happen that way in the RM world. It is not unusal for an image to be considered by a buyer for weeks, and if it does not fit in the final product, there is a chance of the image being returned.

Some of the above cited is why FeaturePics will ultimately fail - they don't knw how to market properly for RM, and many of the contributors there that are offering images for $10 or $14 as RM (what a joke), haven't a clue as to what it is all about. Offering RM, a bulk of their (FeatPics) income should be generated from it. But they have no idea as to how to manage RM models and do not actively market such content. One of the reasons I quit FP.

As for the higher end buyers - they are out there. And only on rare occasions do they go micro.

« Reply #7 on: May 04, 2008, 06:54 »
0

I come to the conclusion that I'm either being ripped off by the microstock sites or their is more money available for purchasing photos with the higher end buyers.


Only you yourself can decide what your whotos are worth and where they should go. Microstock is merely a different business model that fills a need for lower budget users.  It is a volume game for the photographer. A hot photo may be downloaded 800 times and earn you $800 in this volume game over time. The same photo, if offered as Licensed and Rights managed, can earn you $1500 or more for one sale.

Please note that it is not proper business practice to ffer micro as Licensed on rights managed sites. It is unfortunate that some of the Rights Managed sites do not spell this out implicitly - they are so afraid to use the "M" word (microstock). I do believe Photoshelter has taken steps to clarify their kanguage since of of their contributors had photos listed as RM that were already selling on a half dozen RF micro sites.

Licensed is there for a reason, so that usage of an image can be tracked. Once it is out in the market as RF, it is up for grabs. That is why this "exclusive buyout" that Dreamstime offers is quite the joke, although it does happen. A buyer would be stupid to do an exclusive buy on an image that has already been DL'd 250 times.

If you are interested in earnings potential for an image, the price calculator at Alamy.com is open to use without logging in. Do a search on a subject you shoot. Pick any image as long as it is "L" not RF. Then use their price calculator on it. Choose different criteria when doing this, for instance, choose one use as "Front Cover" and another price as Inside Page. It will help give you an understanding of how RM pricing works. BTW, on Alamy,  the quality of the image you select won't matter. So don't worry if the image you select is trashy (unfortunately there is a lot of garbage on Alamy Alamy does not edit content, only technical quality)

I do micro mainly for my illustrations - but most of my photos go RM. I have 150+ RM on Photoshelter but just in a holding pattern there to see where things go with it.

The guy who sold the 2 for $5K on PSC is a seasoned pro already having a track record with major magazines.  Just wanted to discourage any rush of upload mania there because there will be disappointment in watching every day for sales. It does not happen that way in the RM world. It is not unusal for an image to be considered by a buyer for weeks, and if it does not fit in the final product, there is a chance of the image being returned.

Some of the above cited is why FeaturePics will ultimately fail - they don't knw how to market properly for RM, and many of the contributors there that are offering images for $10 or $14 as RM (what a joke), haven't a clue as to what it is all about. Offering RM, a bulk of their (FeatPics) income should be generated from it. But they have no idea as to how to manage RM models and do not actively market such content. One of the reasons I quit FP.

As for the higher end buyers - they are out there. And only on rare occasions do they go micro.

How many people have photos that are selling 800 times?

« Reply #8 on: May 04, 2008, 12:27 »
0
It is not unusal for an image to be considered by a buyer for weeks, and if it does not fit in the final product, there is a chance of the image being returned.


Just wanted to highlight this point.

Last week I made a good rights managed sale to a designer.  He downloaded the comp from an agency this time last year.  It took his client a year to decide that they wanted to go ahead with the campaign.

« Reply #9 on: May 04, 2008, 13:03 »
0
How many people have photos that are selling 800 times?


I used the 800 as an arbitrary figure, and I did say HOT photo, not a puppy or kitty pic. Take a look at this image on DT. It presently has 345 DLs. Being that the image has good appeal and probably an excellent lifespan, it is likely it will receive many more good DLs in a relatively short period of time. However in the RM market, I see this photo with the potential to bring in much more.

http://www.dreamstime.com/beach-image112560

So how many people? Not many. But as you see it is not outside of the realm of possibility. It does indeed happen.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2008, 13:10 by snurder »

cphoto

  • CreativeShot.com
« Reply #10 on: May 04, 2008, 14:30 »
0
Photoshelter is extremely promising; they have great people in their team and they are doing an amazing jobs in finding new customers and promoting the site.

Just uploaded 200 over night :)  They had more than 100,000 approved images last month and already more than 16000 photographers...

« Reply #11 on: May 04, 2008, 14:43 »
0
I suspect they're missing out on alot of overseas photographers, because they have this strange system of keeping taxes from non-US citizens.  None of the other sites do it...

They look interesting, but I don't see why I should have to register with the US government to collect my full payment?

Contakt

    This user is banned.
« Reply #12 on: May 04, 2008, 15:57 »
0
More and more people are reporting sales.  Yesterday a photographer reported in the forums that they sold two photos that brought in $5000.

72% of the first quarter sales were RM.



And more and more "shady" characters are coming on here and registering and talking up a site that has actually sold SFA from my perspective.

Separating the hype from reality is almost a full-time job for some of us :)

« Reply #13 on: May 04, 2008, 16:29 »
0
Some of the above cited is why FeaturePics will ultimately fail - they don't knw how to market properly for RM, and many of the contributors there that are offering images for $10 or $14 as RM (what a joke), haven't a clue as to what it is all about.

The basic price you set at FP is for one of their cheapest use.  I set mine at US$24, and when you see the other usage prices look more reasonable. 

I see however two problems in their RM model:
- They show the cheapest price, so a casual buyer who does not know what this is about may pick it just because he sees the cheapest price (choosing from a group of suitable images, of course)
- If you set prices thinking of editorial uses, they look cheap in licenses for resale items.  I once suggested they should rethink this balance.

Regards,
Adelaide

« Reply #14 on: May 04, 2008, 19:11 »
0
More and more people are reporting sales.  Yesterday a photographer reported in the forums that they sold two photos that brought in $5000.

72% of the first quarter sales were RM.



And more and more "shady" characters are coming on here and registering and talking up a site that has actually sold SFA from my perspective.

Separating the hype from reality is almost a full-time job for some of us :)

Forgive me for supporting and talking up a site that is giving 70% back to its photographers.   

« Reply #15 on: May 04, 2008, 20:50 »
0
I hope they are picking up steam.  I've been contributing there for a couple of months, and while I've only got a few online, I really like the style of imagery they seem to focus on.

I see alot of complaints regarding the keywording system.  I actually don't mind it.  Doesn't seem to bad at all.

Contakt

    This user is banned.
« Reply #16 on: May 05, 2008, 03:25 »
0
More and more people are reporting sales.  Yesterday a photographer reported in the forums that they sold two photos that brought in $5000.

72% of the first quarter sales were RM.



And more and more "shady" characters are coming on here and registering and talking up a site that has actually sold SFA from my perspective.

Separating the hype from reality is almost a full-time job for some of us :)

Forgive me for supporting and talking up a site that is giving 70% back to its photographers.   

D'yknow that's what someone who is working for them would come back with but I kinda have you spotted already.

Sorry fella, that sorta unsupported hype might work on some but not on this guy.

« Reply #17 on: May 05, 2008, 03:40 »
0

How many people have photos that are selling 800 times?

I would venture it is pretty safe to say that everyone who is making over $2000/month doing microstock has a number of images which have sold 800x

grp_photo

« Reply #18 on: May 05, 2008, 05:19 »
0
SFA
what does this mean(Scottish Football Association?)
Quote

Separating the hype from reality is almost a full-time job for some of us :)
You speak of SS-Newbie or IS-woohay-threads? ;)

« Reply #19 on: May 05, 2008, 05:28 »
0
More and more people are reporting sales.  Yesterday a photographer reported in the forums that they sold two photos that brought in $5000.

72% of the first quarter sales were RM.



And more and more "shady" characters are coming on here and registering and talking up a site that has actually sold SFA from my perspective.

Separating the hype from reality is almost a full-time job for some of us :)

Forgive me for supporting and talking up a site that is giving 70% back to its photographers.   

D'yknow that's what someone who is working for them would come back with but I kinda have you spotted already.

Sorry fella, that sorta unsupported hype might work on some but not on this guy.

It's not hype.  It's what is right.  70% commission back to it's photographers at a fair price.  Images that are going to be used to make other people money are worth much more than $1.  Your standing behind the wrong team.  Good luck.

« Reply #20 on: May 05, 2008, 07:22 »
0
Quote
It's not hype.  It's what is right.  70% commission back to it's photographers at a fair price.

It is actually only 40% if you include the 30% taxes that they will withhold from non-US photographers if they are not registered with the US tax authority. This is totally ridiculous.

« Reply #21 on: May 05, 2008, 11:47 »
0
Do other sites like Getty and Corbis withhold money for non-us citizens?  I don't mind claiming money back but not if photoshelter is the only site that does this.

cphoto

  • CreativeShot.com
« Reply #22 on: May 05, 2008, 12:11 »
0
Wow Reviews are fast  :o

Submitted multiple small batches Friday, first one has been reviewed, 2 pictures are Editor Choice, sweet!

« Reply #23 on: May 05, 2008, 12:14 »
0
Do other sites like Getty and Corbis withhold money for non-us citizens?  I don't mind claiming money back but not if photoshelter is the only site that does this.

Photoshelter appear to be the only ones who do this, as far as I can see.  Sounds a bit scam-like to me.  Something about it isn't quite right.

« Reply #24 on: May 05, 2008, 12:26 »
0
...Sounds a bit scam-like to me.  Something about it isn't quite right.

totally agree.I haven't joined with them yet but it is disappointing to hear that.

cphoto

  • CreativeShot.com
« Reply #25 on: May 05, 2008, 12:57 »
0
Do other sites like Getty and Corbis withhold money for non-us citizens?  I don't mind claiming money back but not if photoshelter is the only site that does this.


Photoshelter appear to be the only ones who do this, as far as I can see.  Sounds a bit scam-like to me.  Something about it isn't quite right.


Well that's because they are the only one to follow US laws, LOL!!!

I really don't understand what the problem is here.  You make money, you have to pay taxes, end of story.  Photoshelter is a US based company and it falls under US laws.

30% is just the default tax rate if you don't take the time to fill out the IRS form.  As explained on their website, most countries have a Tax Treaty with US and the withholding rate is actually very low, 0 to 10% on average depending on which country you live in, see table at: http://www.ofii.org/docs/Withholding_Rates.pdf


« Last Edit: May 05, 2008, 12:59 by cphoto »

« Reply #26 on: May 05, 2008, 13:06 »
0
Because they are the only one to follow US laws, LOL!!!

I really don't understand what the problem is here.  You make money, you have to pay taxes, end of story.  Photoshelter is a US based company and it falls under US laws.

30% is just the default tax rate if you don;' take the time to fill out the IRS form.  As explained on their website, most countries have a Tax Treaty with US and the wthholding rate is actually very low, 0 to 10% on average depending on which country you live in, see table at: http://www.ofii.org/docs/Withholding_Rates.pdf


Well, that's all well and good.  But the form can take around 18 months to go through to US government and you can only put it through once you've sold a file there.  You have three months from the date of sale to claim the money back, so essentially for up to 15 months, you're being cheated out of money.

I phoned the accountant in the family, and he told me NOT to fill the form in and NOT to go with that company.  He said that the US shouldn't be keeping any of the money because as a contributor/freelance artist artist to the company and NOT an employee, I'm responsible for paying my own taxes in MY OWN country of residence.  He said that the US get their taxes from the 30% of the money that I'm not paid, and that in this situation, Photoshelter should NOT be withholding that money.

The Tax Treaty apparently should not apply in this situations, and is primarily designed for those working and living in the US under contract but having their primary residence somewhere else in the world.  Basically, if I went and working for Microsoft in the states on a temporary visa, I would pay 30% taxes on my pay each month to the US government, because that covers my temporary right to be there - my police, fire service, roads, other public services.  It's the US's way of making sure I'm paying for myself while I'm there.  If I was there for longer, then I would apply to the government to NOT pay that 30%, but to get a social security number or whatever you guys have, so that I could pay normal taxes.  It's like emergency tax.  It doesn't apply to those who aren't actually working in the US.  Therefore, because I am not residing in the US then I do not need to pay the 30% and I do not need to apply under the tax treaty.

DISCLAIMER: This is what my relative told me who is an accountant in London.  He says he's dealt with a similar situation before with a musician.

« Reply #27 on: May 05, 2008, 13:28 »
0
Seren is absolutely right.  As a non-US citizen NOT LIVING in the US you are not accountable to pay tax there. The company (Photoshelter in this case) is accountable for taxes on the income from the money they earn from us photographers (the commission that they take on each sale). I must, however, pay taxes on my income from stock in my own country of residence.  As long as they have this requirement I will not join them and I will encourage other non-US photographers to do the same and to make sure they get the message.

cphoto

  • CreativeShot.com
« Reply #28 on: May 05, 2008, 13:48 »
0
Well, that's all well and good.  But the form can take around 18 months to go through to US government

??  According to IRS it takes on average 4 to 6 weeks to get back an ITIN after submitting a W-7 form to IRS.  Not sure where you got this 18 months from?

A quick Google search shows that people gets their ITIN as quick as 3 weeks after submitting the form...

« Reply #29 on: May 05, 2008, 14:11 »
0
Well, that's all well and good.  But the form can take around 18 months to go through to US government

??  According to IRS it takes on average 4 to 6 weeks to get back an ITIN after submitting a W-7 form to IRS.  Not sure where you got this 18 months from?

A quick Google search shows that people gets their ITIN as quick as 3 weeks after submitting the form...

Perhaps he was talking about specific cases his company has dealt with in the past, where there has been a hold up or something.

Either way, I don't want the US government knowing personal information about me.  It's bad enough with these new entry requirements when you fly to the US now (have they actually implemented that form asking for the 42 bits of personal information?). 

« Reply #30 on: May 05, 2008, 15:13 »
0
Seren is absolutely right.  As a non-US citizen NOT LIVING in the US you are not accountable to pay tax there. The company (Photoshelter in this case) is accountable for taxes on the income from the money they earn from us photographers (the commission that they take on each sale). I must, however, pay taxes on my income from stock in my own country of residence.  As long as they have this requirement I will not join them and I will encourage other non-US photographers to do the same and to make sure they get the message.



Here's some stuff Allen at Photoshelter wrote about the tax situation.

Theres been a lot of talk about taxes on this forum, especially from our non-US-based photographers regarding the headache that the necessary paperwork is causing. Trust us, the tax reporting obligation creates an additional administrative burden on us and we dont like it either, but it is the law and in order to protect both PhotoShelter and you folks, we need to follow it.

Well try to make this as clear as you can make anything about taxes, and will work to continue to clarify the issue and make whatever changes or improvements that we can as we move forward. We didnt make this stuff up though. We have hired and consulted with tax attorneys and tax specialists who deal with this for a living and worked with them to this result. We knew this was going to be an issue with some folks, which is the reason that we put it up front. As several of the folks have noted on the forums, many of our competitors do the same thing, only you dont find out about it until you try to get paid.

Here are a few key concepts for non-US-based contributors:

First, because you are being paid by PhotoShelter, which is a U.S. Corporation, the income is deemed to be taxable in the U.S. Some folks dont seem to like this, but please remember one key thing: for tax purposes, you are not selling an image in the traditional sense. What you are receiving from PhotoShelter are the proceeds under a license agreement that must be treated as a royalty as required under tax law. U.S. Treasury Regulation 1.871-7(b) makes it clear that "items of fixed or determinable annual or periodical gains, profits, or income are also subject to [the 30% withholding tax], as, for instance, royalties, including royalties for the use of patents, copyrights, secret processes and formulas, and other like property." Payments from the licensing of stock photography fall squarely within the category of royalties described in the regulation. Because these payments need be characterized as royalties constituting "fixed and determinable, annual or periodic" income, PhotoShelter, Inc. is required under the Internal Revenue Code to serve as a withholding agent.

The instructions on Form W-8BEN outline a royalty as one of the applicable reporting classes. To many who have responded that you have sold images to U.S. magazines without going through this hassle, this is the key difference (i.e. a direct sale does not constitute a royalty). Also for those who dont like paying U.S. taxes (including Wesley Snipes), (please note that from what we can tell, and we cant speak for every country in the world) you can often claim a lower withholding rate (possibly 0%) on the Form W-8BEN if there is a tax treaty between your home country and the U.S., or alternatively, many countries allow you to take a credit for taxes in your own country where you are a resident for taxes paid in the U.S.

The issue that we had been waiting several months to receive clarification from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) was whether or not a letter is required to be submitted with the W-7 from PhotoShelter as justification for receiving an ITIN. Our take was that you dont need this letter and that this documentation is a requisite for what we interpret as more institutional forms of payment, i.e. banks, insurance companies, brokerage firms, etc. We contacted the IRS on multiple occasions and when we explained our position, they needed to do further research. We finally heard back from them and even though we think its a bit much, the IRS requires the following documentation:

For our international photographers, when you submit the W-7 to get an ITIN, you will need to provide evidence that you will be receiving a payment from a U.S. company in order to substantiate the requirement for an ITIN. To do so, you must have your first sale with PhotoShelter before making your application for an ITIN. When you have your first sale, we will make available to you on the My Sales tab of your profile page, a remittance advice with your name, address and account number to demonstrate your entitlement to receive these funds. In addition, as a preemptive matter and even though the IRS said we didnt need to, we are also going to provide a letter to further clarify this point. You can download this letter in the Tax Information section of the Payment Info tab of your profile. These documents, along with your evidence of residence should be submitted to the IRS in order to obtain an ITIN. Also, as several of you have pointed out, rather than send these documents to the U.S., the IRS does have offices in London, Paris and Frankfurt, which should help cut down on the turnaround time.

If you want to take advantage of the reduced withholding rates provided under a tax treaty upon your first sale, youll have to wait until you receive your ITIN and submit with your Form W-8BEN before you draw your funds, otherwise we will have to withhold taxes at a 30% rate.

Our intention was to avoid this process and enable it so that you could get the tax paperwork done upfront before you had a sale. But in practice, the IRS apparently doesnt want to set up an ITIN for a person unless they can demonstrate that they need one.

Filling out the paperwork is a process that takes a lot of time. Again, we want to make the process as easy for you as possible, but we have to comply with the tax laws and ultimately there is a notable benefit to folks like our photographers in the U.K. who once the proper documentation is received get their payment with $0 withheld. One of the respondents on the forum made a comment essentially saying do it once and get it over with. Remember that you dont need to go through this every time you make a sale; just the one time to get it set up to take advantage of the reduced rates. We are sorry that this process is unavoidable and realize that getting passports and other records notarized is difficult, but we are committed to assisting you in completing the process as quickly as is reasonably possible.

We've developed a few pages in the Learning Center to provide additional information, which we suggest you read:

For US Persons: http://psc.photoshelter.com/mem/learn/payment/tax
For non-US: http://psc.photoshelter.com/mem/learn/payment/tax_intl

Allen





« Reply #31 on: May 05, 2008, 15:54 »
0
Thank you for the comprehensive explanation Allen. In view of this apparent unavoidable hassle I will pass on Photoshelter for the time being and stick to the dozen or so other sites where I get monthly payments without any such requirements. It is already difficult to keep up with preparing and submitting new images and I am definitely not going to add unnecessary paperwork and governmental bureaucracy to my workload if I can avoid it.   

Contakt

    This user is banned.
« Reply #32 on: May 05, 2008, 16:25 »
0
Took a while, but finally Mr. Shady admits to being a representative of Photoshelter.com.

While "some" might appreciate you rewriting the USA tax code in its entirety, I think it would be much more honest of you to say who you are when it involves inflated earnings spin. Because that's all it is!

Lately there's been a succession of dot.com millionaires coming on MSG with off-the-wall earnings and they're barely out of their PJ's.

That's the type of hype I was referring to and well done to you too Seren for coming back and unmasking what is potentially one of the largest scams being perpetrated on European photographers under the guise of US tax law.

This is a huge gray area and the reason why SS and IS don't even go near it. The fact that PS is domiciled in the US is of no relevance to me whatsoever but the fact that you think you can justify withholding 30% of my earnings is the reason why I'm deleting my portfolio there for starters.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2008, 16:35 by Contakt »

cphoto

  • CreativeShot.com
« Reply #33 on: May 05, 2008, 16:46 »
0
Again this is not unusual and that's the law.

You just have to fill out a form (10minutes of your time), send it to the IRS and the withholding rate will most likely be 0%.

Getty Images has the exact same process, BTW, and I'm sure that Getty attorneys know what they are doing ;)

From Istock forum, a contributor just accepted with Getty:

We are very pleased that we are able to offer you a
contract with Getty Images. Before we can send you an agreement, we
must get some basic information from you. We have attached a
contributor contact sheet and a tax form for you to fill out and return
to me.

If you are a US tax resident please
complete the attached blank W-9 form. We will not be able to complete
setting up your contract without a properly completed W-9 tax form.
 
If you are a tax resident of a country other than the United States
please review the attached tax document for detailed tax form
instructions. You may return your contact sheet to us without a W-8BEN
(if you need time to apply for a U.S. tax identification number or
choose not to apply for one) but please be aware that we are required
by U.S. tax laws to apply 30% withholding tax on any royalty payments
until we receive a properly completed W-8BEN with a U.S. taxpayer
identification number.

« Reply #34 on: May 06, 2008, 01:02 »
0
media magnet also has this same tax setup

grp_photo

« Reply #35 on: May 06, 2008, 01:30 »
0
Took a while, but finally Mr. Shady admits to being a representative of Photoshelter.com.

You are aware that he just quoted Allen from photoshelter?
I don't care much about photoshelter but i hardly understand your extreme resentments maybe you can enlighten me despite the tax-thing i can't see anything wrong with them it's a very positive approach in my opinion. Actually I guess they did reject you or your work, you shouldn't take this too personal imho.

cphoto

  • CreativeShot.com
« Reply #36 on: May 06, 2008, 01:33 »
0
Took a while, but finally Mr. Shady admits to being a representative of Photoshelter.com.

While "some" might appreciate you rewriting the USA tax code in its entirety, I think it would be much more honest of you to say who you are when it involves inflated earnings spin. Because that's all it is!

Lately there's been a succession of dot.com millionaires coming on MSG with off-the-wall earnings and they're barely out of their PJ's.

That's the type of hype I was referring to and well done to you too Seren for coming back and unmasking what is potentially one of the largest scams being perpetrated on European photographers under the guise of US tax law.

This is a huge gray area and the reason why SS and IS don't even go near it. The fact that PS is domiciled in the US is of no relevance to me whatsoever but the fact that you think you can justify withholding 30% of my earnings is the reason why I'm deleting my portfolio there for starters.

Just saw your work over there, very nice! 
If you would have the opportunity to work for Getty Images would you just tell them "no, sorry, but I won't fill out this stupid tax form because I live in Ireland" ? ;)  C'mon Mr White...
« Last Edit: May 06, 2008, 01:35 by cphoto »

« Reply #37 on: May 06, 2008, 01:51 »
0
Perhaps it's different for the Getty spec shooters, because an acquaintance of mine from when I was an assistant in a studio never had to register with the US government.  Perhaps they pay their spec shooters something other than "royalties".

Whatever.  I think I'll support the British agencies for now. 

« Reply #38 on: May 06, 2008, 02:35 »
0
I don't have many photos with them but If I ever get a sale there, I will do the forms.  As long as I can get all the money and pay tax in the UK, I don't mind.

« Reply #39 on: May 06, 2008, 02:42 »
0
Could it be that most micros avoid paying U.S taxes simply by using a foreign shell company for their businesses?

Isn't iStock still canadian (but owned by U.S. company Gettyimages), StockXpert operated by the ungarian HAAP (which is owned by U.S company Jupiterimages), Dreamstime operated from Romania and Snapvillage based in Ireland?

Don't think that Photoshelter or Gettyimages got anything wrong regarding taxation of contributor royalties. It's more the practices of the micros that look a little shady.


Contakt

    This user is banned.
« Reply #40 on: May 06, 2008, 04:39 »
0

Just saw your work over there, very nice! 
If you would have the opportunity to work for Getty Images would you just tell them "no, sorry, but I won't fill out this stupid tax form because I live in Ireland" ? ;)  C'mon Mr White...

Thankyou CP for your kind words. I already submit to Getty now go try and find me on there  ;D

That aside, all this controversy prompted me to take a closer look at Photoshelter and the reason why I've come out so vocally against Mr. Shady.

As it stands, I don't believe PS is making the type of money he is waxing lyrical about. Initially the site showed much promise and after several months what we have now is a collection of snapshot style images that look more like they belong in someone's personal portfolio than on any commercial site.

90% of the images on PS are simply not going to sell and it is for that reason the IRS won't be in the slightest bit interested in this site no more than myself.

« Last Edit: May 06, 2008, 05:28 by Contakt »

« Reply #41 on: May 06, 2008, 11:33 »
0

Just saw your work over there, very nice! 
If you would have the opportunity to work for Getty Images would you just tell them "no, sorry, but I won't fill out this stupid tax form because I live in Ireland" ? ;)  C'mon Mr White...

Thankyou CP for your kind words. I already submit to Getty now go try and find me on there  ;D

That aside, all this controversy prompted me to take a closer look at Photoshelter and the reason why I've come out so vocally against Mr. Shady.

As it stands, I don't believe PS is making the type of money he is waxing lyrical about. Initially the site showed much promise and after several months what we have now is a collection of snapshot style images that look more like they belong in someone's personal portfolio than on any commercial site.

90% of the images on PS are simply not going to sell and it is for that reason the IRS won't be in the slightest bit interested in this site no more than myself.



Do you pay the $50 fee per photo to have them listed at Getty?

I don't work for Photoshelter.


« Reply #42 on: May 07, 2008, 12:10 »
0
And another sale reported again today. 



Contakt

    This user is banned.
« Reply #43 on: May 07, 2008, 12:20 »
0
And another sale reported again today. 




Wow that's 3 sales almost in a row, I'd better upload my whole portfolio quick in case you get a fourth  ???

« Reply #44 on: May 08, 2008, 21:15 »
0
Well I guess we can make it 4 now because here's one found in use.

http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/capital/2008/05/08/the-last-clinton-election?addComment=true

« Reply #45 on: June 25, 2008, 22:52 »
0
It says "Photoshelter" but not "Photoshelter Collection"... How do I know which site it came from?

I haven't seen a single sale reported in any of the major professional forums over the web in several months.  There are many praises about PS, many questions... there used to be a hype... Now the most common phrase I see is "No sales yet".  There is ONE sale reported here by the photographer who took the pic, all the rest is vaporware.

In the end I wont be submitting any info to the US government at all...I dont like the idea at all.

If all those micros and even Alamy pay me all my money in full and I deal with my taxes in my country I dont see why I should deal with a cumbersome and absurd keywording process to then have to shell out 30% of my earnings to the US government for nothing in return. 


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
2116 Views
Last post March 10, 2007, 10:41
by PenelopeB
1 Replies
1880 Views
Last post June 23, 2008, 05:13
by nicemonkey
14 Replies
4421 Views
Last post November 03, 2008, 00:52
by RacePhoto
DLs are picking up!

Started by lagereek « 1 2  All » iStockPhoto.com

41 Replies
10607 Views
Last post December 25, 2008, 19:20
by lathspell
FT, is picking up!!

Started by lagereek « 1 2  All » Adobe Stock

27 Replies
4407 Views
Last post September 15, 2011, 15:53
by OM

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results