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 - Danybot

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Shutterstock.com / Missing files restored this morning
« on: March 31, 2022, 08:40 »
They appear to have sorted out the problem, as the missing files just popped up in my portfolio this morning.

I agree that commercial photos sell more frequently than editorial ones.  However, as we know, even frequent sales don't translate into a lot of money in this business.

I do this mainly as an offshoot of the hobby of photography, for what one might call artistic satisfaction, if that's not too pretentious a term.  I find that editorial photos are more likely to be used in publications and web pages that credit the photographer.   It's interesting to search for my name and come up with hits of my photos being used.

Alamy.com / Re: No money
« on: September 16, 2021, 21:27 »
Alamy's opaque bookkeeping drives me nuts.

Alamy is the only agency that I deal with that refers to the total sales value in my "Revenue" chart, prior to deducting their commission.   The other agencies at least are honest enough to report what we actually got paid after they deducted their large cut.

I noticed an annoying thing when uploading photos taken with my Sony cameras (either A7Rii or A6500).  Caption metadata that has been added to the jpeg is lost.  This does not happen when I upload files from other camera brands (Panasonic or Canon).   Similarly, when I upload Sony files to any of several other stock agencies, they get the caption data.

If I use DeepMeta, Istock gets the caption even from Sony cameras.  However, I find that a pain to use.

Has anybody else noticed this, and found a workaround?

Generally, I find uploading to Istock to be more time consuming and bothersome than other sites.  As a result, I upload to them more sparingly, focussing on files that I think might sell better there.

Adobe Stock / Adobe rejecting almost everything recently
« on: August 08, 2021, 11:09 »
Adobe has suddenly gone from accepting about 90% of what I submit to rejecting 80%, including many that I consider to be quite high quality, and not too similar to others.   There must be something going on with their review process.

When they do accept something, they sit on it thinking about it for about a week.

I have stopped uploading to them for the time being.  Might as well save up my files for when they are ready to accept them again.

Adobe Stock / Re: rejections due to technical issues
« on: July 24, 2021, 21:17 »
Lostintimeline is quite right.  Unlike Adobe, technical rejections at SS say something like focus or noise, but on close examination there is no focus or noise problem in the photo, so the stated reason is useless.

Shutterstock.com / Re: SS sales January
« on: January 27, 2021, 21:58 »
For the last few months, Shutterstock has fallen to third place for me, well behind Adobe and even Istock, though my portfolio at SS is considerably larger.   It's not the level royalty calculation that did this, but the fact that most subscription sales are now 10 cents compared to 35 cents previously.  By the end of January, I will be at level four, but most sub sales are at 10 cents regardless of what your level is. 

If they ever explained the radical change for subscription sales, I missed it, but explanations are beside the point anyway.  The bottom line is that they are paying out a lot less.  They've suddenly gone from being one of the more generous payers to one of the worst.

As a result, I've paused in uploading to SS and I'm working on building out my Adobe portfolio, particularly in catching up with editorial (which I find is selling reasonably well there).  It will take years, but eventually buyers will notice that SS does not have as good a selection of new material as it used to.

iStockPhoto.com / Re: March stats are in (istock)
« on: April 21, 2020, 11:15 »
My Istock for March was higher than March in either of the previous years, so no adverse impact from coronavirus so far.  Adobe is also quite good, including through April, while Shutterstock is somewhat weaker than usual.  It is possible that the other two are taking business from.

There are no doubt people working on long-term projects.  E.g., in March, I sold numerous fall season and Christmas-themed items.   The coronavirus impact will probably hit more gradually, with the weaker economy and weaker advertising, as these projects wind down.

I have to say I'm feeling quite pleased with Adobe recently.   Yesterday afternoon I took some nice fall color shots, and then uploaded them in the evening.

This morning, when I checked, they hadn't been reviewed yet.  The next time I checked my account, it was around noon to look at my sales.  One of the shots I took yesterday had already sold (for 0.99).   From pixels to pennies in less than 24 hours.  :)

iStockPhoto.com / Re: September numbers...
« on: October 18, 2019, 22:37 »
The earnings are low, but that's supply and demand.  A lot of people take pictures for fun without expecting to make money from it.  My microstock earnings will never be enough to retire on, but they pay for my photo gear and photo trip travel expenses.  That's more than I hoped for in the old pre-internet, pre-microstock days.   With so many free pics available on the internet, I'm kind of grateful that anybody is actually paying even a few pennies for my photos.

It's tough on those for whom photography is not a labor of love, and actually hope to make a significant amount of money on the side.

Istock earnings are indeed down this year, but Adobe is up, so it evens out.  Adobe is paying better, and their upload policy is better, so I upload more to them than istock. 

Adobe Stock / Face detection
« on: September 17, 2019, 20:49 »
It looks like face detection software has been implemented.  I uploaded a photo with a crowd of people with their backs to the camera.  There was one person I hadn't noticed in the corner who was facing the camera.  The system flagged it right away.

Adobe Stock / Re: Adobe Terms
« on: April 07, 2019, 16:21 »
Further on the issue of tax on Canadians, it appears that royalty payments are exempt from GST/HST:  https://www.sfu.ca/finance/departments/payments/tax-compliance/hst/hst-atoz-list.html

Adobe Canada should be issuing T5 slips to Canadians to report the royalty payments (I remember that istockphoto used to do this when they were located in Canada before becoming part of Getty).

Adobe Stock / Re: Adobe Terms
« on: April 07, 2019, 16:16 »
I don't think Canada withholds  (and note the word "think", I'm not sure).  They are probably doing non-U.S. photographers a service by paying through a Canadian company.  Remember that the IRS didn't get the bright idea to withhold until sometime in the last few years/decade.  [Question - does Canstock withhold, they are Canadian and did the original Istock withhold?]

But.... they do have to issue documents to Canadian residents.  Has anyone received those?

AND - if this contract went into effect on that date (without looking it up June 2018)..... they should not have collected taxes on International photographers since that date.  Some non-treaty countries had 20- 30 - 40% withholding rates!  If that's what I understand from above, and the contract was retroactive, Adobe better set it right.

9.1. Relationship. If you reside in the United States, your relationship is with Adobe Systems Incorporated, a United States company. If you reside outside of the United States, your relationship is with Adobe Canada Services Corporation, a Canadian company. 

Your guess is correct.  Royalties are exempt from Canadian withholding tax "if the payment is made on, or for, a copyright for the production or reproduction of any literary, dramatic, musical, or artistic work."


Adobe Stock / Re: Adobe Terms
« on: April 03, 2019, 18:11 »
9.1. Relationship. If you reside in the United States, your relationship is with Adobe Systems Incorporated, a United States company. If you reside outside of the United States, your relationship is with Adobe Canada Services Corporation, a Canadian company.

.. now this is interesting... if we got our royalties with deduction, will someone from Adobe explain exact meaning of this...

I can answer your because answer is pretty straightforward.

Did you ever get 1042-s forms?


Now read this (just first 8 words)


That does not explain it at all.  It sounds like Adobe has a subsidiary that is incorporated in Canada, and all payments to non-US photographers are from the Canadian company.  That means the recipients should all be filling out Canadian tax forms, not US tax forms.

Adobe Stock / Re: Adobe Terms
« on: April 02, 2019, 20:51 »

And 9.1.  As a Canadian - has this always been the case?  Does a Canadian Company pay me and how do I receive a T-5?

9.1. Relationship. If you reside in the United States, your relationship is with Adobe Systems Incorporated, a United States company. If you reside outside of the United States, your relationship is with Adobe Canada Services Corporation, a Canadian company.

Payment has been from Adobe Canada for the past couple of years.  I'm registered for HST in Canada, and I suspect that I should be collecting HST from them.  I wrote to them last year to ask about it, but they never responded.

Pond5 / Re: Pond5 login
« on: March 19, 2019, 17:53 »
Thank you.  I was already aware of the existence of a spam folder.   Even if I hadn't been, Pond5 automatically tells you to look in it when you say you have forgotten your password.  Nada nada nada.

Pond5 / Re: Pond5 login
« on: March 18, 2019, 21:56 »
They never sent me an e-mail about the problem.  I had to come to this forum to learn about it.

I contacted support, and they just replied telling me to enter "forgot password."
I have entered a "forgot password" request a few times.  It promises that a reset link will be sent, but it never comes. 

I wonder if this affects customers also, or just us lowly contributors?

Remind me never to complain about Getty again :)

Adobe Stock / Re: Problem with Dashboard Changes
« on: January 24, 2019, 18:43 »
Thanks Mat.

Is there any way to get it to stay on "activity" as the default?  It always seems to revert to "top earners."

Adobe Stock / Re: lack of a search feature
« on: November 14, 2018, 22:52 »
This came up in Reply #52 in the other thread with Mat Hayward, http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/important-fotolia-announcement/50/

Mat agrees that having a search feature is very important and he has sent a request for it to their development team.

I only "synced" to adobe because I was forced to. I liked the fotolia interface much better.

For instance, how do you search and delete an old file to replace ?

You can't you have to wade thru all the images :(

It is a very poor interface

iStockPhoto.com / Re: accepted but not "published"?
« on: October 24, 2018, 21:22 »
Yes, I have contacted them now.  It appears that this is a known problem.  When you go to the "contact" page, they have a ready-made form for "accepted but not published."  They just ask you to fill in the file IDs. 

One would think that with modern computer software that kind of thing should not happen.

iStockPhoto.com / accepted but not "published"?
« on: October 22, 2018, 22:29 »
A peculiar thing has happened.   Two of my photos that were marked as accepted about a week ago have not shown up in my portfolio.  I notice now that the typical notation is accepted/published, while these two languish with just "accepted" beside them.

Has anybody else encountered this? 

Pond5 / Re: Is it worth it to upload photographs to Pond5?
« on: October 02, 2018, 21:31 »
It's been slow but picking up a bit recently, and shows promise.  I've had some big sales, with one about $15 and one over $70, and that's net.

Dreamstime.com / Re: Big Four question for Leaf
« on: September 22, 2018, 11:23 »
Actually, that's not very convenient.   You have to scroll way down to find a popular site like Shutterstock with 50,000 posts, tucked in among others with just a few hundred.   The forums with most posts should still be at the top.

Shutterstock.com / Re: Understanding Editorial /commercial
« on: July 05, 2018, 17:29 »
It depends on the inspector.  Sometimes they are quite inconsistent.

If the description is less than 10 words, they give you a snide comment "Oops, your description only has 5 words!"

Don't they know a picture is worth 1000 words?  Occasionally, a photo will need some clarification, but most of the time a good stock photo's content will be obvious from looking at it.  Shutterstock, which sells far better than Dreamstime, doesn't even ask for a separate title and description except for editorial photos.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4


Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results


3100 Posing Cards Bundle