I read a lot about photogs getting their work on many mid and high end sites like corbis, offset, getty, etc. through  a stock distributor.   Lets assume somebody has a large portfolio with a successful sales track record.  How would they get with one of these distributors?  The names of some of the distributors would be nice to know.   Google was not helpful.

You could go to Getty and Corbis, click on Advanced Search, you'll find a list of collections. Some are in-house collections, some are pointing to a supplier agency. Try and google for the names.

You could use Google images and search for very rare/specific/local topics and add "stock photo". You will be surprised how quickly you run out of the microstock images when you look for something very specific, and then you might get images from agencies that are specialized in your topic/region.

They all have different specializations and demands, they all have different ways to apply - some will ask for hundreds of images, some only a dozen, for some you might need to pick up the phone and call them asking for an email address to send your application to.

"Successful sales track record" won't be a help with the application in my opinion, especially if your success is in microstock. To apply today, you need a portfolio of images that are more than what you typically find on microstock. Actually I'd rather remove all images that are anywhere to be found on page 1 of any "most popular" searches in microstock from an application profile. And tons of sales of concept/tabletop images won't get you into any macrostock agencies. Look at what they promote and then show them those of your images that match their offer.

As the title says. Does a photoshopped person need a MR?

If I have a person, and rebuild his/her face, give him/her a hair cut, remove scars, moles, change the waist, arms, is it then still the same person?

Does that newly build person need a MR? Or is it like an illustration where I submit without MR as the new person, does not exist IRL.

#1: Do you really need to know if you would be legally required to have a model release signed; or would it be sufficient to restate the question as "will agencies ask me to provide a MR..."?

#2: If you make an illustration based on a real person, most agencies will ask you to provide a model release as well. Then again, if you provide a rendered image of a face, agencies will ask you to provide proof (e.g. in form of a Property Release and additional documentation) that you have built that face from scratch and not base it on a real person.

So, the answer to your question: Yes, most likely agencies will ask you to provide a release in any case, if there are any potentially recognizable parts of a specific real life person visible in your image.

Hello everyone! How can ı be contributor on Gettyimage?

1) Apply with them: http://contributors.gettyimages.com/article_public.aspx?article_id=2367

2) Become exclusive at iStock and submit your images to the Vetta collection.

3) Take part in their competitions: http://competitions.gettyimages.com/en/competitions
 

I am looking to start taking microstock photographs but have a 2006 Canon PowerShot A620 camera. I don't want to start taking pictures until I know they will be of acceptable quality to the various agencies. I am concerned about noise and artifacts. I have Photoshop Elements 12 if needed. Is this camera capable of taking pictures that will be accepted?

Frankly, I doubt that you can get too many useful images shot with that camera. Actually I'd say rather use your smart phone and upload to mobile collections...

But more worrying is your statement "I don't want to start taking pictures until I know..." - if you don't start taking pictures, you will never find out.

Quote from: cobalt on February 08, 2015, 03:54

no, the files that are on getty will also be available on eyeem. the files are exclusive to eyeem who then sends some of them to getty.

Are you sure? It was my understanding that the images are *not* exclusive in any way unless you have them sent to Getty.

Yes, that's how I read it: When you upload images to the EyeEm Market, they are not exclusive. If they get selected for the Getty collection and you accept, only then you accept them to be exclusive with EyeEm & Getty.

Actually, Google search relevance on images is often really, really poor as it pulls in words from a page which don't even relate to an image on the page.

I wasn't talking about images. I was talking about Google.

Once again an "exciting" announcement that leaves out a lot of the pertinent details. If it's a yearlong license for Google to make the images available for infinite use and we get paid $2 once, it svcks. If we get paid every time someone wants to use one of our images in a Google ad, like the Facebook/SS deal, woo yay.

I'm always suspicious when they leave out important details like that.

Why do you think there is anything "left out"? In my opinion it's quite clearly written: "Google licenses those images for the next 12 months, and the royalty is $2 per image."

It's just not what we would rather think as reasonable from a contributor's perspective: "Google's clients can license those images, and the royalty is $2 per use"

Anything else would surprise me. I think the words were wisely chosen to reflect what the deal is.

Istock's Exclusive � "frender": http://www.istockphoto.com/photo/tm-symbol-26816739
Shutterstock � "mstanley": http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-159334409/stock-photo-tm-trade-mark-symbol.html
Fotolia � "mstanley13": http://en.fotolia.com/id/64291379

Istock's Exclusive � "frender": http://www.istockphoto.com/photo/copyright-26816826
Shutterstock � "mstanley": http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-159344906/stock-photo-copyright-mark.html
Fotolia � "mstanley13": http://en.fotolia.com/id/64286413

All the images (also the others ones) are not identical. It's the very same motive but it's a different image - see the shadows below the circle, in the other images the other keys on the keyboard have a different name, the fringe on the price tag is different.

Also, "mstanley" has different (and more) images than frender.

If you ask me, I'd rather assume that "mstanley" is a copycat.

For the last 24 hours it looks like they are loading the iStock subs reports now, gray bars are filling up to the Christmas days now. PP reports only seem to go half the month so far, I expect the rest of the month to follow after subs are finished.

It never went straight from 1 to 31, it never was done within a few days, and it is still sooner than it ever was until about 6 months ago. So I don't see a point in making a judgment right now.

Those links came from another poster in the Envato forum thread about the changes they're making. It isn't as simple as just charging the VAT based on the country from which the buyer is shopping, you would also have to make the VAT payments (and file forms) to each of those countries. That's just insane and certainly (as a US seller) something that makes selling though your own site to anywhere in the EU a real headache.
...
It makes it clear why EU bureaucrats have a bad reputation....did anyone think through just how complicated this makes things?

I wonder how you charged VAT in the past if you are a US seller. Because factually you already had to do that - you know that, right? Those laws are in place since 2003, and they do not really change for non-EU businesses.

But here is a hint: The new rules (just like the old rules) only apply if you deliver electronic goods to consumers in EU countries. I assume that a large majority of image licensees are factually businesses and not consumers. If you are delivering your product to a business, the receiver is still responsible for the VAT administration.

Therefore, the main thing you need to do is to make sure that you are delivering only to businesses. You can do that by asking for their EU VAT registration number. Any VAT registered business in the EU does have one, so if they can provide it you have enough proof that you are delivering to a business and need not to worry.

ETA: Just in case you are planning to sell to consumers as well - for non-EU businesses there is a simplified process that allows you to apply for a special scheme in a country of your choice and make a simplified VAT accounting quarterly with that country only. It only gets complicated when you start selling for more than �10.000 into one other EU country annually. At that stage you should be able to afford a local tax accountant.

If I disable a file on iStock is it also disabled on Thinkstock and other partners? Do I need to do anything separately to disable the file on Thinkstock?

Thanks.

In theory, it should be removed from Thinkstock as well within a few days... there is nothing you can actually do yourself to make sure it happens.

In reality, the connector between the iStock system and the Getty system (which Thinkstock is based on) does not work reliable all the time. There is a certain chance that the image will not be removed automatically. In that case (I would wait at least a week) you would need to contact iStock contributor support.

I see the first green bars show up for November.

I have to admit that this is something iStock has significantly improved. Six months in a row it started within the first week of the new month.

(Okay, given the time they need to process and the growing amount of sales coming through those channels they need to start pretty early to be finished with all the sales before the end of month, of course  )

Has nobody mentioned this?  Do Getty insist on non-US residents getting an ITIN number?  A few sites have insisted on that, most of them have found a way around it.  If they insist on it, I think it will be time to remove my portfolio.  I'm against it on principle, why should I have to get an Individual Tax Identification Number for a country where I don't live and don't have to pay tax?  It looks like a load of unnecessary hassle and expense that other sites have managed to circumvent.

If they do insist on the ITIN number, I could pay the US tax but I'm not doing that, I would rather sell my work elsewhere.

No, they don't. And it's not that "some have found a way around it", the IRS has changed some requirements over the past few years. In 2009/2010 when lots of iStockers were invited to submit directly to Getty, it was mentioned very often that an ITIN was required to avoid withholding tax. When I got a Getty contract through Flickr in 2012, it was already moved to an electronic W8-BEN solution that does not ask for an American tax number. I don't have an ITIN, never had one but I still do not pay any withholding tax on any agency.

However, this does not apply to everyone. It depends on the specifics of the treaty between the US and your home country. Some people will be required to get an ITIN number, others do not need to. But that seems not to be a decision made by Getty/iStock but by the IRS based on the tax treaties. (for what it's worth, I am based in Germany, so that's all I can talk about in this regard)