MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 - Anyka

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 [37]
901
Thanks Silverfox, I knew I couldn't be the only one in this situation!

As for the other posters : absolutely right, we're talking about earnings, but in this case, my question was about VAT, and not about income tax.

My accountant gave up discussing with me and asked for the advice of the "BTW-huis". 
If you like, I will send you their super-complicated answer by e-mail (just give me your mail address), as I am not going to translate the whole stuff into English.

However, the VAT-house is not the VAT-institution, so it is still possible that I am "caught" during my first VAT-control in a few years, just because they have another opinion.  So my accountant sent the VAT-house mail to the local VAT and asked them for a written confirmation.  I am not sure this will all be settled before the end of my first VAT-quarter end of this month!

The thing that makes it most complicated is :  most photographers (like me and probably you too) do more than microstock - they also sell prints/portraits, do weddings or product photography work in their home country.  In my case, that's only 5% of my photography earnings.  So the biggest question for me is :  can I recover/re-claim VAT for my professional purchases for 100% or only for 5%.

The funniest part of all is :  they want me to send invoices to the microstock companies  ;D
OK, OK, I will make these invoices, and file them, but I'm not going to make myself ridiculous and really SEND them!

902
In case there are any Belgians around, living in Belgium and earning extra money with microstock, I'd be SUPER greatful if you could mail me and tell me how you solved the tax and VAT problems.

My accountant tells me to send invoices to the European microstock sites (like StockXpert in Hungary) can you believe that? 

Photography is an "official side-job" for me (free translation of "zelfstandige-in-bijberoep").  Combine that with selling partially outside/inside the E.U. makes my situation pretty complicated (says my accountant). 

So if any of you can compare your version of the VAT-story to mine, I'll be eternally grateful!

THANKS A MILLION - SUPER BEDANKT BIJ VOORBAAT - MERCI MILLE FOIS  :D

903
757
total 28.882

904
Site Related / Re: Forum visualization problems
« on: February 09, 2008, 14:07 »
I've got the same problem, only worse :  I don't even see the polls on the right. 
The Forums work allright, it's just the home page that's completely empty.

905
Site Related / Re: What happened?
« on: February 06, 2008, 12:15 »
I agree.  I'm sure most of us value this site enough to be willing to do a donation or even pay a membership fee.  So if the old or new host is asking for more, just give us a button "donate" to click on!

906
Adobe Stock / Re: Can't connect
« on: February 04, 2008, 11:37 »
Yes, all I get is a blank page!

907
Adobe Stock / Re: Strange e-mail from Fotolia
« on: February 03, 2008, 10:14 »
You're right, I'll report it.  I followed your advice and found that the "here" link goes to "as1.emv2.com".

908
Adobe Stock / Strange e-mail from Fotolia
« on: February 03, 2008, 08:19 »
I got this strange e-mail from Fotolia (or from some one claiming to be Fotolia) :

"We regret to inform you that content 2422629 easter duckling looking up in a grass field was not accepted. An error appeared while uploading to the website and only a part of the file has been received. As a result, we can not review the file. This problem sometimes occurs when the upload server is busy or if the connection between your computer and our server has been interrupted.
We are sorry for this inconvenience and we encourage you to submit your file again.

This email has been sent to you by Fotolia. If you do not wish to receive these emails, please modify your profile by clicking here"


The strange thing is, that this image was successfully uploaded a week ago, got approved the day after, and is immediately found when I do a search.

I am definitely not going to click on "here" and will change my password.

Any one else got mails like this? 

909
Even if EVERY trick of Miz' tutorials COULD be found somewhere in a book (or in 10 books), then I would still prefer his video tutorials, and not just because they're free!  ;D

Many people (especially the not so young ones like me) hate studying bulky photoshop books - video tutorials are easier, and much more "hands-on".
It's nice to view one of them, then go to photoshop, try it out and say "hey, it really works". 
Of course Miz did not INVENT those tricks, that was done by those fantastic Adobe software guys.   
So thanks Miz for not making me read those tough 'n bulky books - you made it so much easier for me/us.

910
VERY useful tutorial!  Can you believe I used the healing tool for dust?  This will save me lots of time --- and the time saved will be used to watch all Miz' other tutorials  :)

911
Thanks Miz, that was really helpful! 
So it is possible to make reflections that look so real that it makes me think of plexiglass effects ...  I must give the skew transformation a try !   
It also explains why I often see truly perfect reflections, without 1 little dust spot  ;) ... with real reflections I always have this problem with real dust and real scratches on the plexi surface!
I think I will make a special folder on my hard-disk, for photos that may-be useful later on, like hands, and well-isolated objects.
Thanks again Miz, for taking the time for such a long explanation! 

912
I'm impressed Miz, I hope I'll reach that level once! 

Two questions pop up immediately while I checked out the site-page : how much is photo, and how much is photoshop?  (like the globes and the banknotes :  do you start with a photo of a globe/banknote, or are even the basic images purely photoshop?). 

As for the photos with reflections, I have a second question : I know that many reflections are made in photoshop, but the roses on the red background are a real reflection?  If yes, then I would LOVE to know what material they were lying on.
You see, everytime I use glass, I get double reflections.  I have shiny, non-transparent plexiglass, but only in black and white (buying all colors is way to expensive), so how to avoid those nasty double reflections in real photos?

913
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Istock twisting my keywords?
« on: January 17, 2008, 15:53 »
Correct!  It's as if they have created a limited vocabulary in the beginning of the new system, and anything that does not fit into it, should be deleted.
But they forget that they cannot control the vocabulary that is used in the searches ...

The system picks the first meaning if I don't pick one?  OMG, that is awful. 

I wonder if we could just delete the rejected (or non-fitting) words, and then add them again after acceptance ... like some voluntary second disambiguation  ;)

914
iStockPhoto.com / Istock twisting my keywords?
« on: January 17, 2008, 14:46 »
I know Istock's keyword system has its pros and cons, but what can I do against them twisting my keywords?

I submitted a photo with a burning computer hard disk (it was broken anyway) and used the usual keywords, including :  drive (like in hard drive), digital, crash, magnetic, data, deleted, memory, save.
Istock rejected the photo due to incorrect keywording, and lists the "guilty" keywords (in the same order) :

Drive(Sports Activity)
Digital Display(Text)
Crash(Transportation Event)
Magnet(Man Made Object)
Document(Printed Media)
Delete Key(Computer Key)
Nostalgia
Savings(Financial Item)

I did not tick these meanings, in fact if the exact meaning is not mentioned in Istock's list, I don't tick a meaning, but leave the keyword in my list. 

Of course it's easy to resubmit the photo without the above keywords, but that would mean that it will not appear in searches for "computer crash" or similar.

Any one here who knows the tricks how to play Istock's keywording system?

915
General Stock Discussion / Re: Scary Copyright story?
« on: January 04, 2008, 14:13 »
My initial reaction was also you cant copyright an idea, but the writers of the books would not sue me for playing with food, but for copying (and commercializing!) their copyrighted designs with food.  As they have already filled 10 books with it, it's hard to carve a face in fruit in a way that has not been done in one of their books already, or looks like one of their designs. 
You're right that they cannot forbid me to create food faces, but they claim copyright for the style, not the hobby.

As for YingYangs points :
I didnt touch his images, not even part of it.
No the faces are not recognizable, just funny.
I cannot take photos of his fruits and vegs, as he ate them already  ;D, but I can imitate his style.
And last : my e-mail was to the writer himself, not to his lawyer, and he answered in person.

916
General Stock Discussion / Scary Copyright story?
« on: January 04, 2008, 12:51 »
This week I learned something interesting about copyright, that I thought I 'd share with you.

We all see photography as art, and it definitely is art, just like painting, sculpture and architecture.  We also know there are severe restrictions when we take photos of art.  However, there are forms of art that are less obvious, like flower arranging, ice sculptures or ... food art. 
 
This is what happened : I had been playing with food on a rainy day with my little nephews, and the results were quite fun.  So afterwards I took a few photos of fruit and vegetables with faces carved in them.  The pictures were really fun and probably saleable. 
Meanwhile I came across a book "Food Play" by Saxton Freymann, who made food carving a true art form and published lots of books about it.  The second page talked about copyright, not only for the pictures in the book, but also for the food designs itself. 
To avoid copyright problems, I wrote an e-mail to Freymann's company, and the answer was loud and clear (but very friendly) : I can create food art as much as I want, but whenever I try to sell something that resembles his designs (even slightly) I will meet his lawyers in court.
Well, I can hardly buy all of his books to check if my radish-guy or pepper-face resembles one or more in his books!
That's bad luck of course, so the microstock sites will have to do without my funny fruit & vegs, but it makes you think, doesn't it?

What if I make a nice flower arrangement, take photos of it and sell them on Shutterstock.  Couldn't there be somewhere in the world a person who specializes in the exact style I used for the flower arrangement, published twenty books about it (unknown to me), who challenges me in court for copying his style?

Suppose I find a "niche" subject of my own, like "flowers with carved faces" - who says there isn't someone who has been doing that for years and is truly famous for it? 
In short :  even if we create artwork ourselves as photography subjects, we are not 100% safe and can still be accused of copyright infringement ? 
Wow, scary idea!

917
General - Top Sites / Re: Use of Photoshop plug-ins?
« on: December 29, 2007, 15:15 »
Thanks for explaining the legal English.  So in general there's no problem with the makers of the plug-in software packages.

What about the microstock sites?  I did a search on space/planets and found quite a lot of renderend planets and non-existant stars, but I have no idea what software was used to create them and how much creativity was involved.  The same goes of course for other rendered subjects like lightning, starbursts etc.  They seem to be accepted, even as the MAIN subject of the image, but were they created with photoshop plug-ins?

918
General - Top Sites / Re: Use of Photoshop plug-ins?
« on: December 29, 2007, 12:54 »
Thanks Stokfoto.  I followed your advice and went looking for the user agreements of these plug-ins.  That was easier said than done!

As for Alien Skin (Xenofex), there wouldn't be a problem.  I found the agreement and it was only about warranty and software copyright (not about the images created with it).

Mystical lighting goes much farther :  quote :
The software contains copyrighted material, trade secrets, proprietary material and unique visual imagery that is generated from the software algorithms that is proprietary to the Licensor and is not
for resale by the Licensee. You may not decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble or otherwise reduce the software to a human-perceivable form. You may not modify, network, rent, loan, distribute or create derivative works based upon the software in whole or in part including the creation of effects products or content for resale.

I suppose that means :  no selling of pictures with their effects in it?  (sorry, English is not my mother language, but I do my best).

And for the other plug-ins :   I simply cannot find their user agreements anywhere!


919
General - Top Sites / Use of Photoshop plug-ins?
« on: December 29, 2007, 02:44 »
Hi, I have a small dilemma/question that could have ethical answers, but also answers concerning the law and/or Microstock rules.

I am talking about the results of photoshop plug-ins like Xenofex, Flood, Mystical Lighting, Lunar, Splat, Eye Candy
These are all software packages that can create saleable effects.  In fact, I have three questions about using such effects as the MAIN subject of a photo :  (a) is copyright law allowing this? (b) are the microstock sites allowing this? (c) what is your personal opinion (ethics) about it?

I know I have seen examples on the sites, especially the flood effect, but rarely as the main subject on an image.  I have also seen great pics of non-existant planets and skies suppose they were created with the Lunar plug-in, would that be OK (for copyright, microstock rules and ethics) ?  In this case copyright problems might not come from other photographers, but from the makers of the plug-ins?

Just as a comparison : we cannot use fonts created by other people, so can we sell an image with (just an example) a lunar-created moon ?
There IS a difference of course : the images created with the plug-ins remain unique.
Thanks for your input!


920
General Stock Discussion / Re: Where to go?
« on: February 03, 2007, 02:23 »
Thanks for the tips, I'll go and google surf a few days on Honfleur and Southern Italy.  Honfleur can be reached in just a few hours from my home, which is a plus of course.  I'll keep Ireland as a back-up, cause I've never been there and it always sounded tempting (but never found some one to join me because of the rain).

921
General Stock Discussion / Re: Where to go?
« on: January 30, 2007, 01:01 »
Greece would definitely be on my list if it were not July (too hot). 
Austria and Switzerland I have visited a lot when I was a kid, and these are beautiful countries, but do mountains sell ?  The same for Italy : so many people have been to that great country, so aren't stock companies flooded with Tuscan scenics and Italian art?

When looking at your portfolio (and skipping all images done in your studio), what sells best?   The great scenics, the famous places or architecture ? 

922
General Stock Discussion / Where to go?
« on: January 29, 2007, 16:23 »
I have this great dilemma : in july, I will be going on holidays for a week or max 10 days.  I usually know right away which country I like to go to.  The last three years I went to Wales, Scotland and France (Aquitaine). 
This year I haven't a clue.  So my question is :  with regard to stock photography, what would the best place, country or city be for a visit? 
Just to limit things : it should be in Europe (read : affordable for me), and please don't say Belgium, as I live there.
I'm not asking for the nicest places in Europe.  I'm just curious what would be the best selling subject / city / region, as I love photography where ever I go.  And what would be wiser : country side, coastal regions or cities?

923
Thanks, that would be the best solution, using my own logo and not mentioning any microstock site.

Has Istock ever asked for some kind of ID of the model, in addition to your model release(s) ?

924

Great idea!  I'll try that in future!

Have you ever had the request for an ID ?

925
iStockPhoto.com / Different model releases for every site?
« on: June 05, 2006, 11:20 »
Hi, 20 of my Shutterstock photos were submitted (and accepted) with a model release.  Several are quite successful, so I would like to submit them to Istock too.  But the model release is the Shutterstock text.  I can hardly visit the model(s) every time I join another microstock site and ask him/her to sign a new form for an old shoot, can I ? 

What do you do in such situations?

The most recent release mentioned Shutterstock AND Istockphoto, but when I submitted the photo, it was rejected by Istock because they needed an ID ???   Are they kidding?  Here in Flanders, the only ones that ask for ID's are the police ...

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 [37]

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors