|
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 - john_woodcock
51
« on: January 27, 2015, 12:54 »
52
« on: January 25, 2015, 03:15 »
In UK, I believe (hope?) that the national insurance number can be used as the foreign TIN. It is a unique reference, but easier to remember than the UTR. I think I found a document on UK .gov site that listed both and implied they were equivalent... of course, I can't remember the reference...
On the IS forums dealing with this UK contributors have said they have used either their NI number or their UTR number, both seem to work.
53
« on: December 22, 2014, 02:51 »
...I'M MORE A VECTOR ARTIST. I'M REAL SERIOUSLY INTO THIS BUSINESS AND CAN AFFORD TO WORK HARD, REAL HARD INTO IT TO HAVE A COOL AND QUALITY PORTFOLIO(MAY BE 2500 IMAGES BY THE END OF NEXT YEAR). YOU EXPERIENCED MICROSTOCKERS HERE, ADVICE ME PLEASE. AFTER HOW MANY MONTHS(BASED ON GENERAL CASES YOU KNOW BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S NOT THE SAME FOR ALL) WHAT IT TAKES(MONTH, PORTFOLIO SIZE, ETC....) TO ATTAIN $11000? I REALLY NEED ADVICES NOW. I WANNA DO IT, BUT NEED MORE MOTIVATIONS....AND ADVICE ME ALSO ON THE BEST OF AGENCIES...THANKS A LOT TO EVERYONE WHO CONSIDER THIS AND REPLY ME..
You need a portfolio of at least 10,000 across multiple sites (see the Microstock group forum list to research the top earning sites) to make an easy $1,000 per month (submit 50-100 illustrations weekly). You need to find a niche and a unique style as well. It's a brutal industry that rewards creativity and ingenuity. As others have written, don't make money the sole motivating force. Expect to put in 5-7 years to reap the rewards you desire. Peace.
I think this is far too prescriptive, a portfolio of 10,000 images is absolutely huge for a vector contributor, and to suggest someone can submit 100 vectors a week on a regular basis is not a realistic proposition, and to also suggest all that work would only bring in $1000 a month is also not necessarily true. I think to be a successful vector contributor you do need to be a reasonably proficient illustrator already though, and that may be something you need to concentrate on first.
54
« on: December 20, 2014, 02:23 »
I don't think you can do that at IS. If it's originated as a vector, I think it needs to be submitted as a vector. That certainly used to be the rules, although I can't guarantee it hasn't changed.
55
« on: December 13, 2014, 03:15 »
"I award you a Crackerjack Pencil."
That may be a cultural reference lost on quite a few people!
56
« on: December 12, 2014, 17:20 »
Interesting news.
Hopefully the current Fotolia management will be ditched. Not that Adobe is so much more trustworthy, but it can never get any worse than now.
However, let's not forget that Adobe has shown its real face with the greedy CC subscription model, which turned out to be much more expensive than off the shelf packages (let alone the inexplicable pricing difference between US-version and European versions).
Is it that greedy? I am pretty OK with it. What would Illustrator cost to buy outright, plus 2 annual updates say. (UK prices) 600 plus 2 x 120 for updates? 820, divided by 17, my monthly cost, = 4 years worth of use for the same cost, plus saves me capital outlay initially. I like to keep my software up to date, makes me look on the ball to my clients. If you stick to an older version, the odds are when you need to upgrade to a newer mac, older software won't work anyway ( this is why I got a subscription in first place, and I am OK with it.)
57
« on: September 22, 2014, 10:24 »
One positive thing I have seen is a vector uploaded one day last week, gained 6 views and sold a day later. This is pretty unusual these days so hopefully a good sign. Sales aren't too bad today either.
58
« on: September 05, 2014, 12:01 »
I didn't say I'd stop creating them. I said I'm not motivated to upload to iStock. If you're going to respond to my remarks, read them carefully and respond to the actual words I write, not the ones in your head.
Somebody got out of bed the wrong side. 
59
« on: July 13, 2014, 01:33 »
Well, it isn't private incur action. It's public.
I was wondering what that meant too.
60
« on: February 15, 2014, 06:34 »
OK, pointless for you, but you uploaded images less than 2 weeks ago. Not sure why you'd bother if it's pointless?
61
« on: February 14, 2014, 19:12 »
Well I'm still uploading, and although new files aren't currently selling as well as old ones I am getting sales, and if I'm going to be carrying on producing images I may as well upload them as have them sitting unused on my hard drive. Glad to know my activity is pointless though.
62
« on: February 14, 2014, 18:52 »
I think it's quite easy to get used to the new system, it did seem a bit weird at first but the increase in speed makes up for the lack of image. It was pointed out that you can add 5 general keywords then return to edit it later when the image is visible, if that is a problem.
63
« on: February 09, 2014, 04:21 »
"If a designer ever stops paying the monthly fee to Adobe for whatever reason, after a 30 day grace period they will not be able to open or edit any previously created work."
This isn't completely true, it depends what format you save your work in. E.g. it's true if you save photos out as .psds, but not e.g. .tif or .jpg.
Think about it - it can be necesary in any situation for someone owning photoshop to be able to share files with people who use other software, or who want to put photos into Word, put them on Flickr, Fb or an agency as jpgs etc.
(Not defending the subscription model, but this is one of the commonest inaccuracies.)
I can open any psd created with Photoshop CC with the previous Photoshop versions, I do it every day.
And I can open any psd created with previous photoshop versions with Photoshop CC, I do it every day too.
So I don't understand where is the problem?
I don't think the same applies to Illustrator files, you need ( I think) the current version to open a CS6 ai. or eps file.
64
« on: January 13, 2014, 06:55 »
"imacs and macbooks (even retina) screen is rubbish. And the Cinema Display (the old non glare version) is a joke compared with a Nec or Quato (I own the three)"
Of course you do.
Anyway, another vote for iMacs here. I use it for illustration mainly, but photo processing too, I must admit when I swapped from the Apple Cinema Display I was concerned about the glossy screen but have come to love it. Very stable reliable platform, wouldn't use anything else personally.
65
« on: January 02, 2014, 12:50 »
My sales are down quite a bit. The most discouraging thing is the low performance of new files. I'm still uploading in reasonable numbers but sales on new images are fairly rare.
Is this a vector market trend or iStock only problem? Is iStock getting too crowded or losing too many customers, or both??
My guess would be both. The field has definitely gotten more crowded and IS has taken a big dive from its once very high position. That said, I still think there are better opportunities for illustration work than photos.
I personally think prices are too high, I'd halve them. I'd also go back to the more exacting standards that previously existed, too much low quality stuff now being accepted ( in my opinion) , plus there's just such a volume of imagery available everywhere, it's hard to believe what it was like, say 20 years ago, things have changed so much, and continue to do so.
66
« on: January 02, 2014, 10:23 »
My sales are down quite a bit. The most discouraging thing is the low performance of new files. I'm still uploading in reasonable numbers but sales on new images are fairly rare.
67
« on: November 17, 2013, 08:36 »
"Very useful for illustrator you just can't not get organic sweeping curves with a mouse. "
Have to say I disagree with this. I used to use a tablet with Illustrator, now I find them cumbersome and the mouse a much better tool.
68
« on: August 15, 2013, 11:27 »
"I guess it depends on how $30 compares to what someone is getting elsewhere. For some, $30 a month anywhere is good. For others, it's terrible."
To be honest it was a bit of a stupid statement on my part. All sorts of parameters would come into play when deciding if $30 a month is good or bad. 1 file uploaded, making $30 a month, good, 1000 files uploaded making $30 a month, not so good etc etc.
69
« on: August 15, 2013, 08:46 »
"I believe you need to "start" submitting outside iStock"
If that's the ongoing reward, probably wouldn't bother. If that was the first months income and it grew from there, that might be a different story. I suspect it may be the former though, judging by other experiences. I used to think GL looked an interesting site, possibly not so much now.
70
« on: August 15, 2013, 08:13 »
"Made about $30 each in June and July. So it's definitely still worth submitting their IMO."
$30 a month earnings makes a site worth submitting to?
71
« on: July 12, 2013, 23:26 »
Site is down for me at the moment.
72
« on: June 05, 2013, 11:10 »
You can have more than one PayPal account too, then keep work and pleasure stuff separate.
73
« on: June 04, 2013, 08:59 »
Or, like I said, am I missing something? Is there a reason you can't just write down your IS amount each week as you get paid into PayPal? With the new arrangement you have to choose the dollar payment from IS and ask PayPal to convert it into sterling, and at that point PP tell you how much the stirling amount is. Therefore you know what your weekly payment from IS is, in pounds. Make a note each week and add it up at the end of the year, or am I missing something?
74
« on: June 04, 2013, 00:34 »
Yes, I saw this start a couple of weeks ago, I don't see it as being a problem though, it still shows the amount you are being paid in dollars, then, when you select that amount to be paid into your bank account, it shows the sterling conversion and the amount in sterling, it's just that the information is in a different place to where it was previously. Is not the important info how much you receive in sterling per week from iStock? That is still there. The conversion rate has always changed week on week, or am I misunderstanding your point?
75
« on: February 07, 2013, 09:50 »
I've been talking to a local printer about doing some one off prints of illustrations for an exhibition, I was quoted 10 ( about $8?) plus tax of 20% on 200gsm paper for an A2 print, that would probably come down for larger volumes. It was 15 for art paper ( whatever that is, I assume heavier, more textured) I specifically asked for that size, they do bigger. It would be interesting to compare that with capital printer cost, plus consumables, which must be quite a high cost with a big printer if you were doing it yourself.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
