|
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 - stockmarketer
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35
801
« on: February 15, 2011, 11:25 »
Luckily we dont sell goods or services...
Maybe I missed something. Are our commissions considered "royalties" making us exempt from the whole PayPal 1099 issue?
802
« on: February 15, 2011, 10:12 »
So is anyone else concerned enough to be thinking of a strategy on dealing with the new tax code affecting PayPal payments? Just as a refresher: Under the new legislation, PayPal will be required to report to the IRS the total payment volume received by PayPal customers in the US who:
* Receive more than $20,000 in gross payment volume from sales of goods or services in a single year, AND
* Receive over 200 payments in a single year.PayPal's information page here: https://cms.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/marketingweb?cmd=_render-content&content_ID=marketing_us%2FIRS6050WSo what's the big deal? We get 1099s from the agencies already, so we're not having to pay additional taxes, right? I think I'd rather not have to deal with yet another 1099. I'm already requesting fewer payouts in 2011, not because I'm making less but to stay under the 200-payment trigger point. If I just request payouts twice a month from the big agencies (of course, SS and 123RF will only send once a month), and just one payout a month from the smaller agencies, I should stay under the 200-payment threshold and not have to worry about triggering 1099s from PayPal. Anyone else thinking this way?
803
« on: February 11, 2011, 12:53 »
Hey! I like it! youre having jokes, arent you? well for starters I been with Getty-RM, since 93. Im an Istock-Diamond with 40000 sales and just as many at SS and close even with FT. My DAILY quota of sales is somewhere around 250-300/ per DAY, that is.
Yep! I think I know the Micro, RM and RF.
Im not telling you this out of boast or anything but perhaps now you understand why Im questioning the formula of uploading to every tom,dick,harry available?
best. Christian
Clearly you know your way around this business, but since you're completely anonymous on the forum, that's been impossible to tell until now. (Of course, I maintain anonymity as well, so I can't fault you there.) Ultimately I agree that it makes sense not to upload to every Tom, Dick and Harry. For instance, I no longer send to Crestock and Veer, because for me the sales are too small and sporadic to justify. But I'm always quick to defend CanStock because I see them as on the same level as BigStock and 123. Not huge sales but quick and easy uploads with moderate payoffs... more than enough sales to justify a few extra minutes of uploading each night.
804
« on: February 11, 2011, 12:39 »
I think you have a valid point here,were only hurting ourselves. I've slowed down
uploading,and have stopped on some totally. My revenue is not where I was hoping .I've been with it for around five years with photos and graphics and it's evident my style of images are not popular. By flooding the sites with average images doesn't help our cause.
The whole "flooding the market" issue is masking a bigger problem. I think by "flooding the market" people generally mean, "uploading more of the same stuff that's already out there." If that's really what we're talking about then, YES, BY ALL MEANS, EVERYONE PLEASE STOP DOING THE SAME OLD STUFF! My argument is that if we're all truly generating unique, original work... covering subject matter that has not been done to death a million times over... then, the more the better. But if you're just adding unneeded images on top of mountains of other unneeded images, then no one will benefit from that. Everyone should take a breather, look at what's in your upload folders today, and stop and ask yourself... "Does this stand out? Is it depticting underrepresented subject matter? Does it have a unique style? Why would a buyer choose this over millions of others out there?" If you don't have quick, confident answers to these questions, you're doing something wrong.
805
« on: February 11, 2011, 12:17 »
You mean flooding the market, right, so if you upload to every single one of them, every little bit, exploring every avenue? when do you work? I mean surely you have to eat same as everybody else here or do you live in a country where you can survive on 3 sales/month, come on do me a favour, will ya?
I work a full time job and then spend about 2 hours on microstock a night. Uploading to CanStock takes about 30 seconds of those two hours. So far in the first 10 days of Feb, they earned me $143, or about 6.5% of my total microstock revenue for the past ten days. Yes, it's a small percent, but it's not chump change for spending an extra 30 seconds uploading each night. Oh, and now we're talking about flooding the market? Then we should all give up microstock completely if that's the overriding concern. Its exactly this attitude which have rendered agencies into having 10 million shots, totally clogged up wit say 80% of totally mediocre material, leaving a measly 20% worthwhile, its this attitude which makes us even read and write threads like this. To flood a market is the quickest way to destruction, didnt you know?
I've countered with this argument before... do you buy anything from Amazon? Why would you? They have too much stuff! 99% of it is crap you don't want. Dumb argument, right? The fact is that Amazon is so successful BECAUSE they have SO MUCH STUFF. It helps that their prices are right and their search engine works well. Likewise, the ms agencies that are priced right and have good search engines will continue to do well no matter how much stuff they have to sell. Still, read my above post, from a business perspective, for people who are trying to turn this into some sort of a living ( me? Im a fulltime freelance anyway), TIME, is money, big money and every business law in the world will tell you this and time well spent, is even better.
Again, see above... 30 seconds of extra uploading each night, which for me is feeding a daily sales rate of about $14 per day from CanStockPhoto. From a business perspective, would you say that is time well spent? Of course, many contributors don't see results like this... everyone's mileage will vary. But I'll go back to my argument from the other post... if you're seeing NO sales from CanStockPhoto, you're probably seeing LITTLE sales from the biggest agencies, and you should be questioning whether you should be doing microstock at all... again, from a business perspective.
806
« on: February 11, 2011, 11:22 »
You have to understand that Im looking at it strictly from a business point of view and without any preferances but like the post further up, he says he gets 3 sales/month and bloody hard work, well? then you really have to start asking yourself if youre flogging a dead horse, dont you?
If you're doing this as a business, you should be exploiting every revenue opportunity, as long as the outlay of resources ends up being justified -- either by current profits or the reasonable expectation of future profits. I think it makes sense to upload to just about every agency (aside from the ones you have significant issues with, such as the recent iStock fiasco), except for those who are so new that they have zero track record. If you're creating images that people actually want, and you're getting good sales at the biggest sites (SS, FT, DT and IS if you're still there), then you should absolutely be uploading to CanStockPhoto. They have a very easy uploading process and their sales are definitely growing. If you have a decent sized port there and you're seeing zero sales, my guess is that you're seeing very little sales at the big sites as well and you're probably not generating enough income to justify doing microstock period. Again, that's from a business perspective. If you're simply doing this for enjoyment, do whatever floats your boat.
807
« on: February 10, 2011, 09:45 »
I'm seeing good action at GL. I think it's one of the best of the up-and-coming sites. I'm not seeing daily sales, but I typically get several a week. Here's my stats, without giving enough away to blow my anonymity...
Member Since: early 2010
Portfolio Images: 1000+
Total Earnings: $338.52
I've had multiple email exchanges with the folks behind the site and they're an outstanding team. Keep up the great work!
808
« on: February 05, 2011, 09:13 »
Does anyone make much money from this? I just think after paying for the software and the hosting and spending lots of hours tweaking the site, it would have to make quite a lot for me to cover my expenses and make some profit. If this was just for my portfolio, am I going to be able to get enough buyers to use it?
I was just about to post the same question. Lots of talk here about how to set it up, and it seems lots of people have experience with Ktools. But is anyone generating sales? And a basic question... what is Ktools' cut on the sales or do you keep it all? I'm taking a different route, working with a friend who is a programmer to build a site from scratch. Everything coming along well but still figuring out the payment part. Hoping to launch in 30 - 60 days.
809
« on: February 03, 2011, 00:12 »
IMAGINE> If it was a shop and goods the shop bought from a manufacturer. Would the shop not pay the manufacturer for the goods it sold to a credit card thief. NO. It has nothing to do with the manufacturer which in this case is us.
And picture this scenario which is even closer to what happened to us. Imagine that Apple finds that 30,000 iTunes downloads of Lady Gaga's songs were made with fraudulent credit cards. Would it remove those royalties from Lady Gaga's future sales? Hell no. Apple screwed up and would take a major hit to its credibility in admitting the problem to Gaga and her label. It would be a slap to her face to tell her they're going to tap her future royalties to make up for the crime. But iStock has no problem slapping us after their security lapse. We're no Lady Gagas, I guess.
810
« on: February 03, 2011, 00:00 »
I believe the biggest number was sjlocke who had $3,400 removed
Just thought of this... we're all paying taxes on receiving this income in 2010, and then the income is taken away in 2011. Not that the taxes on my small-ish batch will kill me, but what do you think, Sean? Your damages are pretty significant. Are we getting screwed here, or what?
Seems like we're taking two serious hits here... iStock basically handed thousands of our images to criminals who are almost certainly going to somehow profit off of them, AND we are paying taxes on the "sale" of these images while the income is later taken away. Am I missing something here? I'm getting more furious the more I think about this.
811
« on: February 02, 2011, 23:58 »
.
812
« on: February 02, 2011, 18:44 »
For me, more than $50 removed! Argh.
813
« on: January 28, 2011, 11:44 »
Probably depends on what you're sending... subject matter could be a big factor. I haven't seen a rejection in a while. Maybe one every few months out of 100 or 120 images.
814
« on: January 27, 2011, 13:38 »
It's more like 'who' than 'why'. Young folk with lots of time. Depending of your definition of a developed world, there's 1billion+ people in that world, with DSLRs becoming incredibly accessible, and with smaller devices becoming incredibly more powerful
I used to think this as well. But for the most part, buyers want images of people who look like their customers... and in general those won't be people in India, China, etc. OK, maybe the "images on white" types of shots? Sure, some items are common around the world, but many are not, and anything with a style that hints at where it's from will face the same kind of geographic biases. OK, maybe locations and landscape. Sure, but the marketability of such shots is extremely limited, unless you're one of the world's top travel photographers. Then there's the whole other issue of processing and uploading. These young people who can afford extremely cheap cameras... can they also afford good computers with Photoshop or other processing software, and will they possess the skills to use them appropriately. And then there's access to the Internet... in much of the developing world, people get onto the Net in cafes where they pay by the minute, hour, day, etc. Will these people make enough at selling these shots of limited marketability to offset the cost of uploading them? Maybe in the future the answer will be yes, but for now, I don't think so.
815
« on: January 27, 2011, 12:10 »
"Jack of all trades (master of none?)" in a business office. Small enough company that I can have my hands in a lot of areas... product planning, events, design, etc... never boring. I actually enjoy it.
Microstock a well-paying hobby, working on it a few hours at night... at least for now.
816
« on: January 27, 2011, 12:06 »
Seems to me that the photos that have flooded the market in microstock also seem to be the costliest to produce: young-ish models, business settings, handshakes, etc. And all the "isolated on white" stuff that needs to be lighted just right with good lighting equipment. I can't see how anyone starting in microstock shooting this kind of subject matter is going to cover his/her costs. Maybe this is a good thing... perhaps this type of photography will become so cost prohibitive and the returns will not justify the cost and effort, and we'll stop seeing so much of it (or at least the copycat stuff by people who think they'll ride the coattails of Yuri and others). If you are new to microstock, and this is your plan, you might as well stop now.
So what's a newcomer to shoot? That's where you have to get creative... how do you eliminate costs and end up with shots that stand out and are marketable? (Hey, at least I solved half the puzzle for you... telling you what NOT to do.)
817
« on: January 27, 2011, 11:34 »
So what is everyone's status on DT today?
For me, the unprecedented lag (at least for me) continues. My sales from yesterday (Jan 26) are just now showing up, and continue to do so halfway through Jan 27. The good news is that yesterday turned out to be a very solid day on DT. The bad news is that I went to bed around midnight looking at a zero balance for the day. Today, it's telling me Jan 26 was over $30 and still counting, which is about what I expected. As for today, Jan 27... maybe I'll see those sales tomorrow?
This has never happened to me on DT in about two and a half years. I hope there isn't anything seriously wrong at DT... I've come to rely on them as a solid performer.
818
« on: January 27, 2011, 09:38 »
To those reposting huge RPI etc. - it very strongly depends on WHEN you started! Numbers are very different for those who did in 2005 and those in 2008. Just check istockcharts how many sales do have small portfolios from 2005 and same sized after 2008 - you will be very surprised.
Right, but also wrong. If you are of average quality, you could get in and establish yourself in 2005 or prior, and still be coasting somewhat on a seasoned portfolio that comes up highly in search results just because you've been around so long and seen a lot of downloads. So if you're average today, you really don't have much of a prayer. But it IS possible to jump in today and get a decent RPI, though you'll be one of a very tiny minority. To join this exclusive club, you have to stop downloading the same old stuff everyone else is and carve out your own niche. Think about what buyers actually want. They don't need your latest rainbow or puppy dog pics, or snapshots from your recent trip to Yosemite. There are tens of thousands of those already... you don't have a prayer of competing with the well-downloaded pics. Go beyond the no-brainer subject matter, put on a business person's hat, and ask yourself, "what business do I have doing this if I'm not offering anything new? What need is not being met today?" And it's not enough to say "I'll just try to do it better than everyone else." Quality is no longer a selling point, because just about everyone has it, or they wouldn't have gotten in the door. You have to say "I'll just do different things than everyone else." This is what separates the men/women from the boys/girls.
819
« on: January 26, 2011, 17:33 »
- No boss
- Freedom to work/sleep when I like
- No commute
- No annoying people
- Passive earnings mean if I want a day off, I have it.
- Creative outlet
- Intellectual stimulation
- Happiness
But hey, anyone who can even imagine working a 9-5 (or more often at minimum wage, a 7am-9pm job) after spending 3 years out on your own, then maybe it would be the right move for them.
This lifestyle is hard at first, but every bit of hard work you do today, is one bit less to be done tomorrow 
You could make this same pitch if you were selling a network marketing scam. Sure, those are the selling points, the dream we're all chasing. But how many will actually achieve this? Probably the same number who fall for a pyramid scheme. How many people have all of the above, and enough money to pay the bills? The number as a percent of total contributors is shrinking every day.
820
« on: January 26, 2011, 17:16 »
Seems normal for me. Often several days go by with no daily sales showing, then "catching up" with 6-7 in one day. I haven't checked the $ amt to see if that is going up without showing the thumbnails.
I have never seen this happen... the "catching up" period usually happens within 30-60 minutes. At this point on a weekday, I would normally be seeing 20-30 downloads. About 17 hours into the day, and I'm still at zero. This has never happened before.
821
« on: January 26, 2011, 16:54 »
Someone recently asked for my advice about whether he should enter microstock, and I had to share with him some hard truths. Most people simply won't make it. The majority of stuff that is uploaded these days simply isn't needed by today's buyers... either because the subject matter is so oversaturated, or the images have nothing unique to offer in terms of style or perspective, or even if the images are unique they're just not marketable.
You can be a great photographer or artist in terms of technical quality, but that doesn't matter anymore. Technical quality is a commodity now. It simply gets you in the door, but quality alone won't make you any money.
The only way to succeed now is to think of this as a business. What is selling today, and what will sell tomorrow? And I don't mean be a copycat. It doesn't work... may have tried and failed, because you're simply following the pack that has made its money and already moved on to new subject matter and styles. If you're attempting to compete in subjects that are oversaturated (and just about everything is), what is going to make a buyer choose your images and not the best sellers? Sadly, most will never figure out these answers.
822
« on: January 26, 2011, 14:07 »
I've noticed it for a while that my balance keeps going up without showing the actual sales in my list.
I was under the impression that the balance is "real time" while the list is not updated as often as the balance.
For me, todays' sales have been normal so far.
This is odd. Your Dreamstime needle suggest you get a lot of downloads at DT. And they're all showing up today as normal? I also tend to do well at DT but my sales are still showing as zero for the day. Yes, the balance in the upper right has inched up a tiny bit, but even that amount is about a third of what I would expect on a day like Christmas. The fact that your sales are showing up as normal today suggests that perhaps the data for contributors is spread across multiple servers and some of us are on a server being worked on and others are on a different server. Is anyone else in click_click's camp... sales showing up as normal today (if you normally just get a few downloads a day you might not be able to tell, but if you would normally have a few dozen sales by now and they're not showing up, chime in!)
823
« on: January 26, 2011, 13:18 »
OK, I just noticed the balance went up slightly, by maybe one sale, but the details haven't shown up. So maybe this is the first step in the site catching up to current.
I also recall this happening about a month ago, but I think that time our balances were updating all day long without a problem, and it took most of a day for the details to show up. Today seems worse, with more than 12 hours with no balance updates.
824
« on: January 26, 2011, 11:49 »
There does seem to some problems, stock. Images have been "under review" for several days?
I'm supposed to have unread comments but none appear when selecting the item?
Sales not posting could very well be another. I too have seen zero sales today?
ed: but it is early here.
Glad it's not just me. Something is broken or not being updated. Sales were fairly normal yesterday, right up through about midnight. But after that, for nearly 12 hours now, nothing. What is everyone else seeing at DT today?
825
« on: January 26, 2011, 11:17 »
Is it just me, or are no Dreamstime sales showing up today?
The day is almost half over and I'm showing zero sales for today. My weekday sales are typically very strong, so half a day with zero sales suggests a real problem.
I didn't see any notices on the Dreamstime forums, but I don't normally hang out there so I wouldn't really know where to look.
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
