(no subject)

[which_chick]

In addition to being on the cover of a funk band album from Australia, my photographic work (different picture, though) is now worth fifty dollars from some graphic designer guy named Ron. Wow. Fifty bucks. That's more than ten lattes from the mermaid. The graphic designer guy wanted "unlimited use" and I think I'm okay with that. Without going into the sort of detail that makes my mother squirm, fifty bucks can buy a lot from me. Besides, I reckon "unlimited use" is different from "exclusive use". Not sure I'd sell "exclusive use" for fifty bucks.

I'm sure you're all dying to see the fifty dollar picture, right?

Hrm. And if I report this income as income on my taxes for 2005 (odds are good I will unless I forget -- I report income from my loan business, after all), am I then allowed to straight-line depreciate my digital camera against the "business" income? Hrm.

[Voice of reason] NO! Bad touch! NO! The camera is a TOY. It is a TOY for FUN. We do not depreciate FUN TOYS on our fucking taxes. That would totally defeat the fun and toy aspects of the thing, don't you see?[/Voice of reason]

Just report the fucking income and pay the damn taxes. Gotcha. Er. The last time I called the IRS to find out how to report income that wasn't wages or 1099 forms or whatever, the IRS helpline person got all shirty with me like it didn't WANT me to report income from my loan business. It started talking about things like usury. (Seven percent on unsecured personal loans is not very usurious, if you ask me.) It did not sound very interested in helping me report my loan-business income, so I hung up on it. I report said income on schedule B -- interest income -- by the name of the person I use in my bookkeeping. So, y'know, I have First American National Bank of PA and I have ING DIRECT (those being the people who send me 1099 forms) and then I have stuff like PG2 and BKW and CSM, these being some of the people who send me interest but not 1099 forms. I know how much interest each of them pays me because I've got amortization schedules and stuff for each loan. Thus far (it's been three years of tax returns), the IRS has not complained.

Comments

[ornery-chick.livejournal.com]

Hurray for getting $50 for a wild violet. It is a pretty picture, indeed, and hey, $50 isn't anything to sneeze at.

I tend to treat any income that comes from doing something I like to do anyway as "fun money" and use it to continue supporting my frivolous hobbies. My most recent spate of alterations funded a spree of buying flower seeds for my garden. Actually, I hate doing alterations with a passion, but I tend not to make huge wads of money off my sewing, so the $10 here or there usually gets treated as mad money.

[which-chick.livejournal.com]

I'll probably blow this on lattes at the sign of the mermaid. It's not a noble use, but there are not a lot of ways I can justify four-dollar coffee, you know? This money, which has found-money status, is suitable for extra, beyond-allowance Starbucking.

[sara-merry99.livejournal.com]

The photo is gorgeous, Jessica! Do you have a link to the photo that's going to be on the CD cover?

I don't know that I'm exactly surprised that the IRS gets a little shirty with you about the interest income from personal loans. Though it's disappointing.

Sara

[which-chick.livejournal.com]

The one on the CD cover is a feather (http://www.bedford.net/teep/walk/feather.jpg) that they manipulated somewhat after the fact. (I've seen the cover but don't currently have the .jpg they sent me.) When I get my CD, I'll take a picture.

[ladyivy.livejournal.com]

Is it required to gush about the $50 picture the way it is required to gush about the horse? :-)

It is a really nice picture, but I agree, $50 for EXCLUSIVE use is not enough for your personal creativity.

[which-chick.livejournal.com]

Nah, the only required gushing is when I'm all thrilled about how wonderful the insane red horse is. The rest of the time, you can gush or not, as you see fit.

I think my primary objection to selling exclusive rights is that then I'd have no rights to use my own stuff myself, and that'd sux0r.

[zhasper.livejournal.com]

*ahem*

Let me be the real voice of reason, the down-under voice of reason:

It mattereth not that you're having fun. What mattereth is that you're good enough at what you do that people are willing to pay for the results of your fun.

It's income; it's tax-write-off-able.

Sure, that wasn't your intent. Sure, it's not going to change the way you do things in future - your primary goal is to have fun. The fact that you're doing it for fun, and enjoying it, doesn't take away from the fact that you're producing quality work.

By the way, it is actually one durn fine picture you got there.. you've captured the flower perfectly... if I can ever manage to do as well, I'll be thrilled..

[which-chick.livejournal.com]

Good points, all, but I'm not sure my ego really needs the help. :) I've got a lot of ego right out of the box.

One thing I will note is that I didn't get into picture-taking until the advent of digital cameras made it free to take fifty-three shots of a flower with minute variations on each effort so that I could keep the only one that came out just right. It's not like I have to pay for the film developing on all the crappy pictures (and there are a lot of them), so I feel free to take as many as I like. This has helped my picture-taking no end.

PIctures in the which_chick family

[ardvaark99999.livejournal.com]

The which_chick family of photographers has also had their work published on a news site from Philadelphia which ran a blurb about a coffee pot shaped building in Bedford as well as a picture of a local covered bridge which was used in a Ford promotional piece in connection with one of their cars.

The power of the Google image search is thrilling. Soon, we will all be millionaires. At $50 a pop. Funny thing though...my crack ho clients don't seem to be millionaires yet at $50 a...er...pop.

In any case, I've been pleased with the result of publishing interesting photos on the web. I've come across several instances of unauthorized use, but usually in connection with a discussion of my subject matter, which is actually ok with me. I'd prefer to be asked, but as long as something else is added to the content (like a discussion of historic buildings from our area, for instance), it is enough remuneration for me.

FWIW, the covered bridge purchaser, which sale of said photo was a collaborative effort between which_chick and myself, issued me a 1099, so the IRS will be getting a report from me. That's fine w/ me, though. The case was basically found money. Plus, AFAIK (w/o looking at my tax file), I think they paid us $120 for that one. Corporate money is always fatter.