MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Roadrunner
26
« on: June 11, 2011, 10:25 »
I had some unusual activity the past week with 20 sales over the past 5 days. That is realy unusual for me, because I only have a little over 300 images there. Actually I usually get a payout about twice a year, but I can't complain due to having a small portfolio.
You superior photogs should see things pick up too. I think two of my sales were under the new plan.
Good luck guys and dolls!
Roadrunner
27
« on: June 11, 2011, 10:17 »
The Lord must have blessed me this week. I actually got 15 sales within a two hour period for $.50 each and two others today - one at $2.70 and one at $1.50. That much activity for me is very unusual as I have just over 300 images there.
So you sharp shooters with thousands of images should see some interesting activity soon.
28
« on: May 30, 2011, 11:49 »
I grabbed it too; great deal. Allsa - check out this tutorial; there are many more on u-tube that will give you an idea of what to expect.
I found these short videos helpful.
29
« on: May 18, 2011, 13:18 »
Thanks Anita! Together with what was previously sted I think I can work with it now. Changes sometimes takes getting used to.
30
« on: May 17, 2011, 13:35 »
The only thing in the gray box with my uploaded keywords was "Delete X" in red. Maybe I should have just processed them again. By clicking on "All", all the images were selected and can be pushed through.
Guess I just didn't realize I only had to do that since I didn't add any keywords. Only thing is, I was told that there were 10 images with errors. Only errors I could determine was that none of the key words had a comma after/between them.
Do you folks see commas in the gray box with the keywords?
I understand what you are saying csproductions, and thanks! Did you have to retype the words or were you able to just push them forward? BW - Can we edit the keywords in the gray box or do we have to delete a misspelled word, then retype it below?
Aslo thatns for your feedback heywoody!
31
« on: May 17, 2011, 11:09 »
I just used the new editor when pushing through my uploaded images.
The keywords were picked up and appeared in a gray box. You are able to type in a new keyword or two under the visible keywords appearing in the gray box. At first everthing seemed cool. When I pushed the images forward for review, I was told that all images had errors - I had to enter at least 7 keywords. All of the keywords appearing in the box had to be retyped or copied from my IPTC section of my files and pasted under the grayed box. Apparently the uploaded keyword wer rejected, because the commas were dropped.
Did anyone else have this problem? How do you get the keywords appearing in the gray box to work or get accepted?
Thanks for any help! Roadrunner
32
« on: May 14, 2011, 07:39 »
Sorry - my post ended up in the wrong place - so I deleted the text.
33
« on: February 16, 2011, 11:34 »
Unfortunately IRS is not going to get involved with ACCURACY. It is easier for the agents to assume that the total business Income is the AGGREGATE of all 1099's submitted. This is based on thgeir training - "All income is taxable unless otherwise provided for." This is in accordance with IRC. Section 61 A. A $20,000 lump sumn payout will show up on the Currency Transaction Report reviewed by their Special Enforcement Agents. On the other hand, if you receive 20 payouts from agencies of $1,000 each, and they issue 1099s, then all that income should be reported according to IRS. If Pay Pal issues a 1099 for the same $20,000, I doubt if IRS will deduct any of the other other 1099s from that amount.
Just make sure you attach a schedule showing the Income that is taxable based on the individual 1099s issued by each MS site and how the Pay Pal 1099 was a duplicate issue. I am sad to tell you that hte Officials at the top of the IRS and the Treasury are incompetent. Did you know that the Goverment can not account for 25% of its income? Also bear in mind who calls the shots - Charley Rangle and others.
At any rate your accountant should be aware of the duplication in reporting income by the source of the income as well as PAay Pal, Bingo! Do you think the Banks will also be issuing 1099s for the deposits people make in addition to the Interest earned? To me PAY Pal is a form of banking service!
34
« on: February 04, 2011, 11:39 »
Thanks for the feedback Race Photo! I was beginning to think it was just me. I too feel that the micro stock market is reaching the oversaturated point. Alamy will take our work. At least they take a greater percentage than the fussy ones.
Now I am not saying sites should lower their standards; I am saying that even we who suffer rejections for "Overfiltered", "Focus is not where it should be" (Even if it is an object taking up 70% of the area) etc. still do our best. Some of us just can't please Fot or IS no matter how hard we try. There are some that have images rejected by those sites, but they get accepted on SS, BS and DT. Not only that they sell well. So to me it is just a matter of finding a place where we see fruit. Not all seed brings forth fruit; perhaps the ground isn't fit for that particular seed.
It was good reading your thoughts. You helped me see that I am on the right track. I need only find my place where I can see some fruit.
Bless you all!
35
« on: February 03, 2011, 12:46 »
Race Photo - You got it right. That is what I am beginning to ponder. Is it worth it? To the few that pull in 80% of the nugets of gold, the answer is yes. To old Roadrunner it isn't a way to waste my time. I understand the quality idea, the need to be creative and such, but when I consider the increase for the seed planted, it isn't looking like a place to concetrate my efforts. Im glad I married a woman that has a rich husband.  So I no longer try to upload to six sites. Three are enough. The other three are for tose truly blessed with special gifts/talent to meet the needs of the extremely fussy ones. I understand my place; I'm not able to stay woith you better photogs. That is why I can't see writing to 100 people to get all kinds of releases. Especially since I really do not need the money - Thank God for that! To those that need it; I wish them the best. THough I am blessed to see that on occasion someone can use what I have to offer. Even thouth you top guns grab the lions share - which you deserve because of your talent and dedication. To me - you folks shoulld get more than $.50 and even less on some sites. Surprisingly I received a $28 commission for a single download last week on Shutterstock. I never thought there was such a thing. Until then, the most I ever received on that site was $1.88. Most ofen I get $.25. But I do get more than on the sites I stoped uploading to. May God bless you all!
36
« on: February 02, 2011, 14:01 »
Old Roadrunner is a bit confused. I like very simple illustrations so that my old brain cam comprehend things. Based on all your input, I thought about an image that was submitted and accepted by all but one site.
Here is the general description: Lady bowling wearing a sportshirt, slacks, throwing a bowling ball on a bowling alley with the ball return and bowling pins visable.
I submitted the image with a model release only.
I failed to secure property releases for the sportshirt, slacks, bowling ball, bowling pins, hardwood alley and the ball return - all of which were manufacture and have a copyright/patent.
So I figuring we can only thake nudes if we want to deal with Model Releases only. Am I getting close to the understanding? No wonder old Roadrunner can't figure out what to shoot anymore.
37
« on: January 31, 2011, 14:36 »
I wish I were as smart as many of you seem to be. With me it is just a matter of expending energy for cash. When I see certain sites want PERFECTION, uniqueness and exclusivity, and then pay the contributor $.50 or less per sale, I think it is insulting and not worth my time.
I have boiled my targeted sites down to three. Now I spend much less time and haven't lost anything. Before I spend over $4,000 for a camera to earn less than $.50, I forget about it.
Just my two cents. Like I said, you folks are much smarter than me, but I have to consider whether the return is worth the effort.
I do senior portraits for the younguns at the church for free, and I end up making more money than I would get from stock. They feel led to give me what they can afford and what they think it is worth. I do that work as a labor of love. Funny ting is, I know the sites would reject them for some reason or other. Yet when they show me the prints they get from the disc I give them, I can't find a flaw anywhere? Do you think the print is less able to magnify flaws when compared to 100% views on a monitor? The prints do look better to me than what I see on my monitor.
At any react - Good Luck!
39
« on: November 23, 2010, 16:49 »
Consider who is in charge - Gathers and Rangle, two frauds!
To cover your buts, printout the monthly Transactions for funds receivedd from Pay Pal showing the sites making the deposit into your account. This is what you should report for income tax purposes. Considering you are on a cash basis rather than accrual basis.
If you are audited, you can show that there was a duplicate filing of a 1099 (Pay Pal as well as each site.). No agent can refute that. If he/she tries; just appeal the decision to the Appelatte Division. the Appeals officer will see things clearly. If the Revenue Agent ever drags his heels after you supply information, call the IRS and ask to speak to the Problem Resolution Officer (PRO) in your Area. The Pro will move things more quickly to resolve an issue; especially if you have tried to get something accomplished with a couple of call to the Examination Division. Just don't panic or loose your temper.
Seems to me that this is going to work something like a Currency Transaction Report. IRS will probably use it in their Special Enforcement Group to compare Reported Income to what shows up in a Transaction Report of some sort. I wouldn't loose any sleep over it.
Sleep tight! Roadrunner
40
« on: October 26, 2010, 09:42 »
The only thing I don't like about HDR is that it creates a lot of noise - even though I process it as close to normal as I can get. I have to shrink most images to under 4 MP and use Topaz Noise reduction. If I cut it to 4MP for stock, it usually gets rejected for "Blurry". So I use HDR for my personal use or occasionally when doing a job for our church.
It is fun though.
41
« on: September 30, 2010, 10:49 »
That's interesting. I have never had a resubmitted image accepted at iStock. They usually rejected my images for "Overfiltered". So I resubmitted with no processing except to convert to JPG. Then it was rejected for artifacts. I corected them and resubmitted - then rejected again for "Overfiltered". Now my images are rejected for "lighting" and "Color not correct". Before I shoot, I use the ExpoDisc. Since I use good glass (Nikkor Lenses f/2.  and a Nikon D-300, I just don't understand why I can't seem to get anything accepted. After 2 years with iStock getting 95% rejections, I finally gave up uploading to them. It would be very difficult for me to catch up to taht Yuri fellowat that rate!  Now I'm concetrating on two micro sites and Alamy. With Alamy I have a 90% acceptance rate. So I guess that makes me an inferior photographer.
42
« on: September 10, 2010, 11:49 »
I might be wrong, but it looks as though you are also wrestling with "Overfiltered" images. Tha is easy to fix, just stop Overfiltering.
43
« on: September 09, 2010, 13:23 »
Dang! Just when I thought I was getting close to increasing my acceptance rate to 25%. Well now I can just concentrate on four cites and not worry about 80% of my uploads being rejected for "OVETRFILTERED".  This will be a real timesaver for me.
44
« on: August 05, 2010, 12:24 »
Thanks for all your feedback guys and gals! Things keep changing so fast this old bird has to keep flapping his wings.
Smithore - I did check where you directed me. I saw that there were 11 file names.
Now they seem to allow more uploads per week, but can we push through more than 5 a day? I think there used to be a limit like that somewhere?
45
« on: August 05, 2010, 11:18 »
When I try to upload files to DT, my uploader indicates that the files are being sent, but DT doesnt show them in the Ufinished Bin. Apparently the aren't being received. Has anyone else experienced this recently (8/6/2010).
46
« on: August 05, 2010, 11:13 »
I seem to be able to load only 1 image a day. If I try to upload a second image, I see the bars showing the file is being uploaded. It doesnt go to step three - entering description and keyword page. Is anyone else having this problem? When I check my files - only the one I pushed through worked
47
« on: August 04, 2010, 13:40 »
It's them - I got error message page also. Could be they are performing a major overhaul or they were hacked into.
48
« on: May 21, 2010, 11:00 »
Based on some of the responses, I see why I have to concentrate on only three sites.
I am convinced some of us just aren't worthy of acceptance on some sites. The Canon 5D MKII seems to be the only camera acceptable to one of the big boys. No matter what I do - 90% or more gets rejected at a particular site. 123RF and FT are fussy, but not that tough. Perhaps I should forget the Canon site as I am already locked into Nikon due to the lenses I have. Of course if I try a Nikon D3s it might get something accepted. I can't justify that kind of cash layout for microstock. Especially since my biggest problem is choosing not to work with professional models and multiple lighting equipment.
So whether they call it overfiltered, composition, harsh lighting, no commercial value or too many, doesn't matter in some cases. All of those can be valid reasons, but not all reviewers have the same vision, and some sites dictate policy that can bias the decisions.
I'll primarily concentrate on the three sites that seem to like my work, and that actually sell my images even if they come from the lowly held Nikon.
Just keep plugging and don't wory about those that reject you. Continue to work with those that appreciate your effforts. Be thankful for your success no matter where it lies!
49
« on: May 01, 2010, 10:45 »
Old Roadrunnere is probably the least of the photogs on any site, and I'm retired to a meager pension. I'm 73 and still successful at uploading to BigStock. I admit it took this old brain at least 5 minutes to figure it out. Like Lisa, I have had no problems.  Just take a deep breath and calm down. After you log in, click on "My Account" up top. Seems the choises for finding Earnings etc. will be listed on the left column. I upload to all sites using FTP and Windows Explorer 7. We do have to be extra careful when adding metadata before pushing through though. Sometimes I think they change things just so they can claim they are innovative. Often making changes just for the sake of change can be a disaster! Sor of like Washington D.C. Ya know what I mean. Hang in there; you will make it.
50
« on: February 12, 2010, 10:06 »
I'm thinkin about getting my bride a new camera, and am wondering if anyone out there has any experience with the Canon SX20 IS? I am wondering if the 720P HD video function is adequate for video stock clips? I can't afford the D5 Mark II for a kick around camera. This puppy goes for about $359 US.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|