|
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 - Diana Herrmann
1
« on: April 10, 2024, 08:54 »
No, it is income and not what is considered royalties. You will need to pay self employment tax.
Depends. True if it's active and makes the majority of your income. If it's passive, then it's Schedule E, no self employment tax.
At least that's what my CPA said.
you need a 2nd opinion! or a new CPA - do they understand that royalty-free doesnt mean you're receiving royalties?
Maybe I need a new CPA, but I haven't had any issues so far at least. They told me that since I'm not actively pursing this, it is considered passive income, and royalties are reported on Sch E.
I have created all of my stock assets before moving to the US, so I haven't engaged in any stock production on American Soil (tm). Why would I pay self-employment tax?
Anyway I can ask again, or ask another CPA, but it doesn't seem that it would make sense to go on Sch C in my case. Your cases may be different.
Passive income is the IRS definition, not if you are working or not. Money from Microstock is commissions, you are an independent contractor and self employed. https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i1040scIf you are inactive and the money is from a hobby, you aren't in business and can't take deductions.
2
« on: March 19, 2024, 03:49 »
I just did a test with some photos (using Stocksubmitter to submit them to Dreamstime.) They were editorial images and I selected the top editorial checkbox within Stocksubmitter. When they were submitted to DT, I checked the page where images were held for review and noted that these particular photos all had an editorial license. So this confirms that the top editorial checkbox is the one to select in Stocksubmitter (not the bottom one.)
What happens when you check the bottom box?
3
« on: March 05, 2024, 06:14 »
Dall-E is ending the free credits next month.
4
« on: February 26, 2024, 09:36 »
./..
SS has diversified into other areas. They don't rely on just Microstock for earnings and income. Some day, the whole Microstock division could go away, and it wouldn't matter to the overall profits of the corporation. They won't care about our earnings or what we do as artists.
I know people here care and we're at the mercy of the agencies, but if the customers go to Adobe, and SS has much more profitable business gains in AI, news, or whatever else they own and do, they won't care about a division that's losing money. If it's too expensive to operate and unprofitable, they could shut down stock photos, as a cost cutting, expense reduction, initiative. ...
too many of the anti-SS crowd are quick to take recent numbers totally out of context w/o bothering to do their research
and declaring SS dead -- look at the actual numbers, after a surge during the covid era (during which they were also declaring SS dead) its performance has reverted to the mean and their actual change over 5 years has been -2% - not a great investment stock, but also not a disastrous decline
by comparison tho, Adobe had a similar burst during covid, similar decline but then has returned to its earlier high. Getty had 20% drop in 2022 and remained flat since.
It's hard to draw conculsions since Adobe is not just a microstock agency, but SS can declare "I'm not dead yet!"
Shutterstock is not just a Microstock agency. They have greatly diversified into other areas.
I wasn't referring to their investment stock, that's a different area. I'm looking at Stock Photos and Microstock, which for contributors has lost, and for SS their income from the same has dropped. Shutterstock, the Microstock division, (the part we care about) is dying.
The corporation and investment stock is doing fine.
but i was refencing the OP and topic name was SS is dead - not SS as a microstock agency is dead, and the numbers shows that's not true. there's also little to show the ms side is dying - artist income is down for some (eg, for me, SS is down 10-20% over last 2 years but still doubles my income from AS), but SS continues to, make money in ms
The OP asked about SS sales and income for microstock, not the corporation. Enterprise Value/EBITDA 10.95 27.28 23.80 42.58 68.18 2022 on right current on left. That's what dying looks like. We can all see that our sales and income is down 20% or more in the last year. Mine is down 40%
5
« on: February 26, 2024, 09:20 »
Hi there!
Do you think it's worth starting your 123rf adventure in 2024? I'm a fairly successful contributor on Adobe Stock where my monthly revenue is between $2,000 and $3,000 and my portfolio is 35k images. I'm wondering if it's worth putting my entire portfolio on 123rf and to start uploading there on a regular basis?
I also noticed that they offer PREMIUM or PREMIUM+PLUS sales - which option is better according to your experience?
No
6
« on: February 07, 2024, 20:16 »
If not happy be mature, stop complainning and quit the place.
As soon as you give me a good alternative how to earn my livelihood I will do that. So far no one was able to and who would quit their job without having an alternative?
We share the same goal, earn a livelihood. And I revised my expectations significantly downwards.
Realize that you kill yourself your own future (and other's) using AI. See you in a near future with more complaints, since I've got ideas about what this leads to, since AI will be soon autonomic. Of course, one could argue that if you don't do it yourself, others will do (Only sheep expect others to act like sheep too) However, I remain convinced that I made the right choice not to provide ANY AI generated fake photo IMAGE (Because yes, they are not photographs, even though the platforms sell them as such).
My portfolios are in no way polluted by these images and they will perhaps be spared during the big clean-up (who will come in his time, whether by deleting certain contributor accounts or by the eviction of their images by algorithms, which will lead to the same), since for me, a photograph is a subject (often living), a real place, an existing moment, even the memory of an event, the transmission for the future, the reflection of the organic, a skill resulting from long training, a subtle and sensitive testimony, unsuspected creativity, a personal visual interpretation of reality, but also imperfection, accident, unpredictable, and therefore charm.
Is this really the tool you want to use to secure your future?
I was under the impression this was a thread about Shutterstock and I am pretty sure I specifically talked about my Shutterstock earnings. Shutterstock does not even accept AI images.
So what in the world are you talking about...?
Omg, it's so low level here.
In any case, you did not respond to my message with anything intelligent, that would have surprised me.
Reread the topic, where is written "Adobe Stock" too... yes, the impression -you were under- was fake, as fake as the images you make the machines make by using AI.
Forget, have a lovely day, explore your keyboard typing your prompts, I will continue to enjoy exploring and promoting reality by using my eyes. 
You just don't make any sense.
Just ignore this guy. It's the same pattern again and again. He ridicule people, then when get a harsh response, he plays a victim. There are a few others here with the same pattern. I ignore all of them. It's a waste of time. They don't add anything valuable to the conversation and never started a valuable conversation. Pathetic. I only deal with the vast majority of sane people with good manner.
How do you answer and quote someone you have on ignore if you can't see them?
7
« on: February 02, 2024, 16:15 »
I had a look at the mage page.
In the terms of service it says that everything created is public domain.
Not sure if that is ideal.
Everything created is public domain because AI can't be copyrighted. A machine is not a human mind.
not true - the basic law hasn't changed so images are copyrighted by their creators (humans using tools) and there are cases i n several jurisdictions pending - even there, a decision on one US circuit does not apply to others. and EU and th er countries may have differing standards.
AI gen is not a 'machine' but software , the same as PS or others. the mind doesn't creates ideas, but it takes a tool/machine whether pencil or camera or computer to create the expression of that idea which is automatically grantved copyright
US copyright office disagrees with you, and contradicts itself, but China says they are protected. The EU doesn't know what they think. There's no unity to the union. When the supreme court decides we'll know.
8
« on: February 02, 2024, 16:06 »
What I found interesting was 3 downloads for $971 dollars. What kind of licenses are those? It's not like someone came and downloaded a set of images, or 20 like images or something. Three for $971! I want one of those buyers.
I guess those are Premium images, 1 = $250
Not sure who classifies them as Premium
You had a batch of $250 downloads and don't think that's suspicious? Most people never get one. The credit card cheats just randomly picked your account for all their fake purchases at premium prices, when a single or sub would have gone unnoticed. Do you have an enemy who would do this to kill your business, because the whole story is just too obvious.
9
« on: February 02, 2024, 15:59 »
How's your video sales on SS compared to pre-video sub January 2020? Is it like 1/4 of January 2020?
January, 2020 was literally 10x higher than January, 2024.
184 sales in January, 2020 vs 95 last month, so I don't think the subscriptions was the ultimate culprit.
Wow. Thanks for the info. That pretty much cancels a possibility of me enabling video sales on Shutterstock. My video sale went down immediately after the video sub intro by 1/2 and now top producer like you're making 1/10? Not worth it and probably negatively affect my Pond5 sales.
You don't have any video on SS? Pond5 is owned by SS that's the end of them.
11
« on: January 03, 2024, 08:44 »
I like them, lovely colors and drama.
There might be some issues with details, like does the basket of a ballon and the end of the balloon really look like this?
I would downsize the favorites and resubmit.
But a hint to the real problem could be really helpful.
Adobe says in advice about AI images, do not make them larger than 6-8MP.
12
« on: September 24, 2023, 11:23 »
NASA Report, Officials stressed the panel found no evidence that UAPs had extraterrestrial origin.
Now mummies from space. Don't ruin the childish fantasy with made up stories. This is total nonsense.
As you apparently have nothing constructive or interesting to contribute, you wasted a fantastic opportunity to remain silent.
You have no understanding of scientific method or how real science works. You can pretend your make believe UFO fantasy is real, and live in denial. You can ignore and ridicule anything that doesn't fit your blind closed minded belief. The truth is out there and not what you rant on about for 20 pages. Repeating the lies won't make them true. Attacking others here is not answering questions or looking at the facts. You are deflecting and avoiding. Your religion is a cult belief, aliens from space.
13
« on: August 17, 2023, 06:07 »
One thing for certain in my experience is that it has never ever gone down like this before. Especially with what I know is coming.
What is coming? When?
14
« on: July 25, 2023, 08:46 »
My SS earnings used to be 15x higher than now, and they just keep nosediving from month to month. Once a good earner, now abomination. Seems like it will join mid-tier agencies soon. Inexcusable.
During this same time, my Adobe Stock earnings has been growing, and Istock has been consistent.
I'm considering to start treating SS like the other mid-tier agencies and completely stop uploading there.
According to the earnings rating, Adobe is double SS.
15
« on: July 25, 2023, 08:41 »
What do the aliens look like? We have all kinds of reports and claims, people have seen them and believe they have been abducted. What do aliens look like in their descriptions. That's a pretty basic and simple question? Is there any group consensus or collective way to describe the alien appearance?
What do UFOs look like. I mean, I can describe an airplane, boat or a car, can someone describe what the aliens travel in? No I don't expect anyone to understand the propulsion systems, just some nice basic data to build from?
There are all kind of photos and claims. Darn near everyone now carries a camera/phone that can take photos or video. I would expect we'd have more and better images, than in the old days.
After the disclosure or the official first contact, you should be able to buy an encyclopedia of aliens with illustrations. If you survive the ontological shock.
For now, the field is so muddied with hoaxes and disinformation, that for the average person it is difficult to figure out what is true.
Listen to serious and credible people like Elizondo, Nolan, Coulthart or Valle. You will not hear stories about the Galactic Federation or alien races from them. But what you hear from them sounds very serious. Elizondo and Nolan probably cannot disclose everything they know and have seen. Look up that famous "somber" comment from Elizondo...
There are plenty of reports from "experiences", just look for them. There are some recurring "races" of aliens in their stories, but it is up to you to judge how credible a given experiencer is. I will not do that for you. I am not trying to convince anyone about anything, but I wish some people expanded their intellectual horizons a little. It is great to be an open-minded skeptic, but it is stupid to be a denialist.
Why haven't we had a disclosure or an official first contact yet? Well, just look at this thread... Denialists and religious fundamentalists on the whole planet would probably go berserk... But things have accelerated greatly in the recent months for some reason. I think we are approaching that moment.
This will be just another farce from the UFO cult followers. These events are nothing but more programming for the weak minds of the brainwashed.
Here's the basis hypothesis. They see a light in the sky that they can't identify, it must be space aliens. A extreme leap and conclusion without any basis.
16
« on: June 10, 2023, 09:11 »
I like you so I will play your game (but it's small pictures to tell from):
1- AI
2- AI
3- AI
4- AI
5- AI
6- AI
7- Reality
8- Reality
9- AI
10- Reality
11- AI
12- Reality
13- AI
14- Reality
15- Reality
16- Reality
17- AI
18- AI
19- Reality
20- AI
21- Reality
And don't tell me they are all AI because then I will not like you anymore 
I have a nasty feeling they are all AI.
My vote the same all AI, made to look like AI and too small to look close.
17
« on: June 10, 2023, 09:09 »
For all the sightings and different types of crafts and different types of aliens, they are already here in numbers. "There's like an 8-foot person beside it and another one is inside and it has big eyes and it's looking at usand it's still there," They don't know how to fly good there are so many crashes. They are little green men or giants, or reptiles. One study says there are 36 different kinds of aliens visiting us. We are not alone we are a major destination if you accept any of the wild speculation.
18
« on: May 19, 2023, 06:29 »
Yeah Roswell, a nice photo for someone with a radar tracking balloon
1951 man-made. Looks like parts could have been of the same 'tin foil' material.
The "believers" will never listen to reason and come up with the same stale "prove it's not real" which is a contradiction in logic. Prove I don't own a giant invisible frog, that lives in my yard. Impossible.
Believers don't want answers, they want the mystery and intrigue. http://www.roswellproof.com/rawin_construction.html
RAWINs are basically a balsa-wood kite stick framework forming corners covered with a radar reflecting substance like aluminum foil.
The Mogul Project occasionally used the ML-307 radar target for tracking of their balloon trains. This is also the model of RAWIN displayed in Gen. Ramey's office on July 8, 1947.
But you'll see that anything that disagrees with the conspiracy, crash, aliens, Etc. will be a planned cover-up and discounted. While any wisp of a blurry note, will become proof, without a doubt. If the only evidence that is acceptable, is that which supports a theory, and all the other evidence is eliminated and discounted, of course, it's going to make a convincing story.
Roswell wasn't even an event or interesting, to anyone, not even UFO people, until someone brought it back to life years later.
In 1978, nuclear physicist, author and UFO researcher Stanton Friedman interviewed Marcel, who said that the discovery made 31 years earlier was not from this world, and that the government had ordered him to keep quiet. Friedman revisited the incident and sought other witnesses, and his work inspired Charles Berlitz and William Moore to write "The Roswell Incident" published in 1980. Their conclusion was simple: There had been a huge cover-up.
1980! Because the original incident was an error and it was resolved and the truth was known. But lets look at Friedman, Berlitz and Moore for a bit.
From Random House: Charles Berlitz, the author of The Bermuda Triangle, was a renowned linguist, lecturer, and underwater explorer. In addition to The Bermuda Triangle, which has sold over 10 million copies in twenty-three languages, Berlitz wrote other best sellers on archaeology, languages, Atlantis, and underwater exploration. Wow, there's some background, the fake Bermuda Triangle mystery that's clearly solved (The Bermuda Triangle Mystery Solved by Larry Kusche, which people who deny the truth won't pick up and read, because it goes against the mythology) Atlantis? Wait, let me point out, the author of the Roswell Incident and his writings?
The Mystery of Atlantis, 1969
Mysteries from Forgotten Worlds, 1972
The Bermuda Triangle, 1974, ISBN 0-285-63326-0
Without a Trace, 1977
The Philadelphia Experiment Project Invisibility, 1979
The Roswell Incident, 1980
Doomsday 1999 A.D., 1981, ISBN 0-586-05543-6
Atlantis The Eighth Continent: G. P. Putnams Sons, New York, 1984
Atlantis: The Lost Continent Revealed, Macmillan, London, 1984
The Lost Ship of Noah: In Search of the Ark at Ararat, 1987
The Dragon's Triangle, 1989
World of the Incredible but True: Ballantine Books, New York, 1991
World of Strange Phenomena: Little Brown & Company, New York, 1995
Some list, and for those who say, Friedman and Berlitz were exposing something, I'll say, they are only in it for the money. William Moore co-author.
I see where Pete brought the Bermuda Triangle into this. Berlitz wrote all those books.
19
« on: April 25, 2023, 10:51 »
"In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. Ones standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control."
Theodore Dalrymple
This goes for the US culture wars, racial division, age divides, and political extremes. Those who only watch Fox and the others who only believe NPR are destined to become single minded with dehumanized closed minded values. Easy to control by the ones in power of their group.
20
« on: March 19, 2023, 05:24 »
If you see only what you want to see and draw conclusions from that.
"This policy does not mean that
technological tools cannot be part of the
creative process. Authors have long
used such tools to create their works or
to recast, transform, or adapt their
expressive authorship. For example, a
visual artist who uses Adobe Photoshop
to edit an image remains the author of
the modified image,"
Is the final image transformative and making it a new work. Here's my point. I obtain an AI created image, using my prompts, from one of these computer driven systems. I open and edit it, and transform it, into a new work... it's now mine and I can copyright it.
Same:
"If you see only what you want to see and draw conclusions from that."
That's very obvious not what is meant when they say "For example, a visual artist who uses Adobe Photoshop to edit an image remains the author of the modified image"
Because they say REMAIN. Which means you need to have owned copyright of the image before you edited it in the first place, so they are talking about editing your own human created artwork, not AI generated images. It does not mean that you become the copyright owner of an AI created image if you edit it in photoshop, because according to the US copyright office you were not the copyright owner of the unedited image, so you cannot "remain" the copyright owner by editing it.
Sorry you have twisted the meaning by picking out the word remain. They are saying you don't lose your rights by editing in Photoshop. I can take an AI image and become the owner of a new human created artwork by editing.
21
« on: March 14, 2023, 07:48 »
@UnclePete how did you predict this news? Mediterranean diet associated with 23% lower risk of dementia. But new fads come and go, there's a new one the Mono diet.
Cameras took away the art of creating images by hand. Acrylic paint isn't oil. Digital cameras took away years of learning and experience by real photographers.
22
« on: February 20, 2023, 10:17 »
i've had same experience -100% rejection on 23 lots of 25 submitted a week apart - and i had selected only images that had been taken at other sites
update - next batch had about 50% accepted, latest was 100% accepted, including a dozen Dall-e images. content from same shoots
How do you get Dall-e images accepted? All of mine are rejected for quality.
23
« on: February 12, 2023, 08:08 »
Unfortunately this happens on a lot of forums, where the old-timers feel they have the right to bully the newcomers. I had to leave a forum a week after joining, after being attacked by one of the more "experienced" posters, because I expressed an opinion he didn't share.
Some people feel that the forums are their territory that they need to protect.
Well spoken, because that is almost exactly what happened. The old guard thought they could insult newcomers and then left crying when they couldn't handle the response of the newcomers.
Interesting that you are joining this discussion here when you are part of the problem and some of your posts here have been deleted.
So it was you who bullied newcomers out here. Unfortunately, there is not much left, but here is a small example:
" And Thijs, my new years wish is that you will not mention the Netherlands in each of your comments but just comment from your own heart. I know you think it's a great country but actually that was a long a time ago. Around the 18th century or somewhat"
That was admittedly one of your kinder comments.
Yes Ralf, I know. I was probably the person to drive Thijs away. But that was after some high horse remarks he made towards me which were quite insulting. As you remember, because he didn't agree with my opinion, he wished I would be banned from the forum. So, I believe I kept it pretty civil nonetheless. Same goes for Martha that had a nasty, I know it all better attitude, around here and was also pretty insulting to everyone she did not agree with. I don't mind she left. I am not the person that expresses my opinion and get's ridiculised to crawl away with my tail between the legs. Just because you are, seemingly, with your buddies does not give you the right the insult others with a different opinion, let alone be outraged when they speak back to you and your "buddies".
If you can't take the heat, don't go into the kitchen. I certainly did not start it. It was a reaction to other people's insults.
edit: Ralf, I was the newcomer and some people of the old guard left, don't twist it around.
edit 2: some of my posts were deleted, but not by Leaf, probably by your buddies who couldn't stand another person's opinion. Actually my whole account was deleted by one of your buddies. It wasn't Leaf who did that, but most likely, it was Martha because I did not agree with her "superior" vision.
You came to the forum new, started insulting people. Nobody but Leaf Tyler can delete messages you've been told that before. Only Tyler can ban someone. You aren't the victim you are the cause of your own problems.
24
« on: February 10, 2023, 11:35 »
Can anyone assist me, I got images on Getty submitted through EyeEm that refuses to pay or respond to our messages. I sent Getty a e mail and they responded that EyeEm needs to be taken down via EyeEm. EyeEm have not paid contributors since September 2022 and still receives royalties on our work. I explained that EyeEm gone rogue nor are they paying us.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Company review says they didn't pay on time in 2013. I'd avoid all of these, Talenthouse, EyeEm, Ello, Zooppa, Jovoto, Untitled, Media Foundry and Creative Commission.
25
« on: February 10, 2023, 11:26 »
Shutterstock disabled the forum on October 15th.
And all the trolls came here to ruin this forum. I just noticed most of the long time MSG regulars are gone.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
