I requested a payment (Moneybookers) 1 Jan and received the money 4 Jan. The delay may be limited to PayPal payments only.   

You can, but many - myself included - believe it is more correct to have a different portfolio in micro and macrostock sites.

Except that the difference between "micro" and "macro", especially on Alamy, is eroding fast. Last month I had 5 "novelty use" sales on Alamy for which I earned 50 cents each after commission. There is still good sales there (I also had one last month of $315 - my commission $189), but they are becoming the exception rather than the rule. Read the Alamy forums and you will see that many contributors report sales with royalties that compare more and more with micro than with traditional macro. Considering the terms of the licensing agreement you should compare sales on Alamy with EL sales on the micros.

In my opinion the big advantage of Alamy over the micros is the fact that you can sell your images there as Royalty Managed (Licensed) images, which is best for editorial images.

Just check today and noticed that three of my lion images were locked by DT for being flagged for the keywords "panthera" and "cat".  The scientific name of a lion is Panthera leo.  According to Wikipedia: �Panthera is a genus of the family Felidae (the cats), which contains four well-known living species: the Tiger, the Lion, the Jaguar, and the Leopard. ...�

 Did not know that the word "cat" is reserved for domesticated cats only. Seems like some of the reviewers who must judge the validity of the flagged keywords are as clueless as these flaggers.

Now it is clear why SV was a failure. Corbis wanted it to be a failure to proof a point. Lets hope Veer will not be subjected to the same ignorance.

A bit more on Payoneer: they offer a Veer branded prepaid debit-Mastercard that may be a good option for those for whom PayPal is not. Your royalties are loaded onto the card - which can then be extracted at nearly any ATM or used in a retail transaction online or in person. It's a pretty cool setup - we're really impressed with them so far!

- Brian

Thank you for the quick answer Brian. I will have I closer look at Payoneer as a payment option.

Veer still needs to fix some errors in their upload procedure. FTP does not recognize my password and I was unable to use FTP.

The web form uploader does not work with Firefox and I had to revert back to IE. Then, after spending a frustrating day trying to upload my 10 images I discovered that the upload system will not upload images where I have used Irfanview to add the IPTC data. After upload during the "processing" stage the system just return an error (Unknown error). I had to edit all my images using PixVue to re-enter all my keywords and after this the files uploaded with no problems.

My biggest disappointment came when I browsed through the site and discover the only two payment options currently offered are PayPal and Payoneer. No Moneybookers? This was the reason I deleted all my images on SV. I could not get payment of my earning. Seems to be SV all over again.  I hope this is just temporary or I will have to delete my mages once again. 

Interesting to note that most of the persons that defends SS has failed to mention that the "childish and amateurish ranting" of non-US photographers has already lead to the admission of SS of two important "mistakes" in their initial message about the tax issue. One being the issue of the validity of the letter that they send to members to attach to form W-7, and secondly the admittance that the 30% withholding only applies to income from sales to US customers. Furthermore, it seems that SS is now considering several other (important) questions that is not yet answered/clarified.

Imagine everyone just accepting the original SS notice and proceeded with the instructions as originally given.  While it is unfair to blame SS for complience to the US tax laws it is clear that they did not do their homework adequetly before dropping this bomb on their loyal submitters.  In the end this breach of confidence can only harm SS.  

I also find it difficult to accept that SS and many fellow photographers can be so insensitive and unsympathetic to those photographers in non-treaty countries that will lose 30% of their SS income (and still pay taxes on the remaining income in their own countries). Microstock is already paying pittance and to lose 30% of your income due to irrational laws is a shame.  If and when stock sites accept co-responibility for this mess you can be assured it will only come as a results of pressure from the "childish and amateurish ranting" of those that care to speak out.

My problem is not views or sales. I have plenty of both. My problem is getting paid. Apparently now they have a problem with Moneybookers payments. I have a pending payment for 2 weeks now. I am really get sick and tired of stock sites that have problems with payments. 

Yes, f5.6 is rather slow for wildlife, but faster lenses at this focal length means a big jump in cost.

The faster 300 f4 L IS is a very good lens that works well with the 1.4x TC. The next level of fast lenses such as the 300 f2.8, 400 f2.8 or 500 f4 all cost serious $$.  If funds are limited I rather have a slow 300 mm lens than no 300 mm lens at all. Of course 300 mm is still rather short for most wildlife, especially birds. Here at our camera club many of our members that cannot afford the big Canon glass use the Sigma 50-500 f4-6.3 lens with quite acceptable results.

Madelaide

There is two IS versions of this lens (three actually if you include the DO version): the original 75-300 IS and the newer 70-300 IS. As Talanis correctly remarked, all the 75-300 lenses, even the original IS version, should best be avoided. You will be very disappointed with their optical quality.

The never 70-300 IS is something totally different though. Optically it is comparable with my 100-400 IS L lens, but with slower focussing (no ring-USM focussing motor) and a lower built quality (no weather sealing). It is more expensive than the cheap 75-300 versions, but you get what you paid for. The DO version (also with IS) is also not too bad, but it is the most expensive of them all.

I generally dislike Sigma lenses, but if on a budget the Sigma 70-300 APO lens is likely optically the best for the price, but without IS. 

I find the decision of iStock to sell its content on photos.com and JU very strange. Why risk the reputation of IS with something that can only be perceived as lowering the value of its exclusive contents?

As a non-exclusive I will definitely opt out of this deal. I am contributing to StockXpert and my images are already on photos.com and JU. The big difference is that I have downsized my images for sites that offer subscriptions, while IS have my highest resolution images. I will definitely not allow my high res images on $0.30 subscription sites.

If Getty would like to utilize the potential of the newly acquired photos.com and JU, why not develop StockXpert further for this exact purpose. Open StockXpert (and thus photos.com and JU) to IS exclusive photographers, but keep it separate from IS. I don't know how they are going to avoid duplicates from IS and StockXpert. I also don't know how they are going to incorporate the unconventional keywording of IS with the more conventional keywording of photos.com and JU.

   

Not sure if I will be able to join, but for nature and wildlife I can offer help and advice on where to go what to do. I know the area pretty well.

Right now I am busy packing for Sunday I am leaving for a 2 week photographic trip to neighbouring Namibia. Now there is an amazing country with some of the best opportunities for nature photography anywhere in the world. I am very exited because it will be my first long trip with my new 4x4 truck that I have equipped with everything required to live out in the wilds where there is no facilities.