Author Topic: Feb 2011 microstock earnings (Read 29999 times)

BaldricksTrousers · « **on:** March 01, 2011, 02:43 »

What a lousy month! Only CanStockPhoto and SS held up and even at SS a lack of ELs prevented it matching last year. Fotolia down 60% (half from the pay cut, half from the new best match), DT down 30% year on year, 123 down 15%, even Bigstock's brief recovery in the last quarter of 2010 has faded away.

It's looking as though this year my earnings will drop back to where they were in 2008.

aeonf · « **Reply #1 on:** March 01, 2011, 03:19 »

Not a bad month for us. (2nd BME)
Down ~3% since last month
796$ in income as IS exclusives.

I wish more people would share REAL NUMBERS instead of very pretty charts and tables which don't really say much.

Ploink · « **Reply #2 on:** March 01, 2011, 03:21 »

What a funny month (not as in "Haha", but as in wierd):

-) 123RF made more than Fotolia and Dreamstime together - my editorials are really doing well there

-) Shutterstock delivered - no surprise there, with approx. 100 new photos
-) IS held up pretty good, despite going down to 16% percent payout and their search not up to its best
-) Only 2 non-subscription sales on DT the whole month

-) Bigstock completely dead until the last five days of February

All in all it was good February for me, the sum of my earnings is OK. The pattern of the individual contributions by each agency to this sum is something I've never seen before

visceralimage · « **Reply #3 on:** March 01, 2011, 03:38 »

Quote from: aeonf on March 01, 2011, 03:19

Not a bad month for us. (2nd BME)
Down ~3% since last month
796$ in income as IS exclusives.

I wish more people would share REAL NUMBERS instead of very pretty charts and tables which don't really say much.

i somewhat agree. My numbers are so bad it will make anyone look better compared to mine.

I just left DT exclusive at mid-month.
DT at about $70, down from $125 (1000 images online)
the rest based on 15 days of being active (ranging from 19 images to 700 images online)
SS at about $33
Veer at 3.50
Fotolia at 2.00
DP at 0.60
all others (14 of them including IS) at a big whopping zero

MikLav · « **Reply #4 on:** March 01, 2011, 03:46 »

for me istock was pretty much in line with the previous months until yesterday. And then suddenly several ELs on the last day of the month

So Feb-2011 my BME on istock.

SS, DT, FT are ok, no surprises

123rf is better than usual but still within the historical deviation

I continue uploading to Alamy (which used to have very small portion of my portfolio until a few months ago) and that helps - I am getting sales there more often than before. Got 2 decent sales in Februrary.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #5 on:** March 01, 2011, 03:54 »

Quote from: aeonf on March 01, 2011, 03:19

I wish more people would share REAL NUMBERS instead of very pretty charts and tables which don't really say much.

Real numbers say nothing at all unless you have all of them. I don't know how many files you have online, whether your sales are up or down. If you have 50,000 files then your result is pathetic, if you have 50 files then your result is brilliant. I don't know if your sum of money is more or less than last year (or if you have a big increase in files online or not) so I don't know if things are getting better or worse for you.

aeonf · « **Reply #6 on:** March 01, 2011, 04:06 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on March 01, 2011, 03:54

Quote from: aeonf on March 01, 2011, 03:19

I wish more people would share REAL NUMBERS instead of very pretty charts and tables which don't really say much.

Real numbers say nothing at all unless you have all of them. I don't know how many files you have online, whether your sales are up or down. If you have 50,000 files then your result is pathetic, if you have 50 files then your result is brilliant. I don't know if your sum of money is more or less than last year (or if you have a big increase in files online or not) so I don't know if things are getting better or worse for you.

Well then just ask

Feb last year we made 80$
We have ~2,000 images online of which ~1/4 are from 2008 and not worth much.
And things are quite stable for us if mesured by DPI & RPI.
We are going to get a substantial boost in income soon since we are expected to hit the 30% target in the next 2-3 months.

microstockphoto.co.uk · « **Reply #7 on:** March 01, 2011, 04:19 »

All sites slightly up - including the hopeless ones - except IS (main site) which is continuing it's downward trend since mid 2010 for me.

So in the short term I'm happy. What worries me is the long term: my projected growth for 2011 (linear regression based on Jan and Feb data) is far lower than previous years.

leaf · « **Reply #8 on:** March 01, 2011, 04:43 »

... and oh yeah.. don't forget to vote in the monthly polls

leaf · « **Reply #9 on:** March 01, 2011, 04:49 »

and here's a colorful graph you don't like

Compared to last month

No real big changes except Veer didn't have as many extended licenses so they are at a more expected level and Fotolia managed to account for a larger % of income. Shutterstock is by far still my 'bread earner'

mtkang · « **Reply #10 on:** March 01, 2011, 05:01 »

hi all, any good tool or website to track all sales results? i notice the microstockcharts.com is half-gone? all my previous results i keyed had disappeared..

ShadySue · « **Reply #11 on:** March 01, 2011, 06:42 »

iStock exclusive.
DLs down unspeakably: Feb '10: 175dls; Jan '11: 102dls; Feb 11: 85dls.
$$$ up c5% on Jan '11, up c10% on Feb '10, thanks to a good EL early in month.
Jan+Feb still well down on Jan+Feb 2010 for dls and $$$.
84 acceptances in Feb (mostly editorial) and another 50 in the oh-so-slooooow inspection queue.

lagereek · « **Reply #12 on:** March 01, 2011, 07:35 »

All earnings aside. Has it occurred to anyone that the entire micro industry is singing on its 11th year and the novelty among buyers is wearing thin? not so cheap anymore, gazillions of irrelevant stuff in almost every search, painfully slow sites with all sorts of problems.
Its no picknick being a buyer anymore and as many buyers say, even after hours of searching and still dont find it.

microstockphoto.co.uk · « **Reply #13 on:** March 01, 2011, 08:07 »

Quote from: lagereek on March 01, 2011, 07:35

All earnings aside. Has it occurred to anyone that the entire micro industry is singing on its 11th year and the novelty among buyers is wearing thin? not so cheap anymore, gazillions of irrelevant stuff in almost every search, painfully slow sites with all sorts of problems.
Its no picknick being a buyer anymore and as many buyers say, even after hours of searching and still dont find it.

a partial solution to these problems could be that agencies started accepting the so called "low commercial value" pictures - which are actually selling if accepted:
- good, interesting lighting doesn't necessarily mean evenly lit;
- there's more to architecture than the big ben and brandenburger tor;
- not everyone is a businessman/woman smiling with a phone;
...

If I were a buyer, I'd like to decide MYSELF what I like, leaving to the agencies just a minimal technical/legal audit.

gostwyck · « **Reply #14 on:** March 01, 2011, 08:07 »

Quote from: lagereek on March 01, 2011, 07:35

All earnings aside. Has it occurred to anyone that the entire micro industry is singing on its 11th year and the novelty among buyers is wearing thin? not so cheap anymore, gazillions of irrelevant stuff in almost every search, painfully slow sites with all sorts of problems.
Its no picknick being a buyer anymore and as many buyers say, even after hours of searching and still dont find it.

Today is March 1st, not April 1st. I don't think I've ever read such a nonsensical collection of patently untrue statements. Where do you get the idea that "the entire micro industry is singing on its 11th year"? A couple of minor agencies that no-one had ever heard of might have existed but in reality microstock only really began less than 7 years ago. At that point IS only had about 40k images and SS, DT, CanStockPhoto, BigStock, FT, etc, etc were still little more than ideas in their founders' brains.

Almost all the search engines are far quicker than ever before, have vastly improved facilities and buyers have never ever had anything like the choice of images that they do now. If buyers can't find what they're looking for today then they certainly couldn't a few years ago.The IS collections might be expensive but there's still plenty of cheap images out there. On SS I can buy any of their 14M images for less than $4, up to medium size, or about $9 for full-size images. That's all Canon needed to have paid to have Yuri's image on their massive exhibition poster for example. If a buyer thinks that's expensive for the commercial use of an image then that's a buyer who I'm not interested in.

lagereek · « **Reply #15 on:** March 01, 2011, 08:19 »

gotswyck! never before has anybody so totally misread a post. When I said 11th year, I meant ofcourse the birth of micro NOT all the late comers. Use your head man.
Ofcourse todays searches are technically better then yesterdays but because of years of accepted garbage, pics are less effectivly found. Its the magnitude of files not the technique. These are the buyers speaking, not me.

Also, dont like the tone in your pathetic statement. If you dont like it or whats written then please refrain from answering or go somewhere else, you no...............like have another beer or something, sounds as if youve had some already, bit early isnt it.

Ellerslie · « **Reply #16 on:** March 01, 2011, 08:40 »

Luckily I'm not english so I don't understand this flame.
Feb was good except on Fotolia.

Shutterstock +25%
dreamstime +31%
Folotia =

velocicarpo · « **Reply #17 on:** March 01, 2011, 08:58 »

A stable month. About 10 % up from last month, but thats the usual up and down.
In real numbers: 3216.12 US$ in total.

Dreamstime continues to be the biggest disappointment due to their lack of understanding what images should be approved and which rejected. Veer, Canstock, 123rf, some local agencies are all above DT this month.

This shows the general image I expected and which I welcome. Income is distributing between sites more and more. This brings more competition against the established, more stability and less risk, and is also eliminating partially the competition of other contributors since many don`t bother to uplaod to new sites like veer, which is growing steadily for me.

disorderly · « **Reply #18 on:** March 01, 2011, 09:07 »

A strange month. Veer took off, 123 gained, Fotolia fell off a cliff, iStock and Dreamstime continued to disappoint. The last year was just slightly down from the year before.

	month		---	year
Shutterstock	28.3%	+1.6%		27.7%	-2.3%
Veer	18.1%	+1143.8%		9.1%	+338.3%
iStockphoto	13.2%	-3.4%		17.3%	-13.1%
123RF	9.9%	+39.2%		9.7%	+39.2%
Fotolia	8.3%	-40.2%		12.1%	-2.1%
Dreamstime	6.8%	-2.0%		8.1%	-33.6%
StockXpert	6.7%			1.3%	-86.1%
BigStockPhoto	4.3%	-1.5%		4.8%	-24.5%
CanStockPhoto	3.3%	+141.2%		3.0%	+112.9%

steheap · « **Reply #19 on:** March 01, 2011, 09:09 »

Unfortunately, this is a short month, and the results show that (and then some!). Total earnings were just $500, down 20% on January, but there were no real winners outside the main stock sites. Shutterstock and iStock were around the same level as January, Fotolia achieved its best month ever, but the rest of the sites were just steady and boring – no large image sales, and some sites with no sales at all. I've continued to add images - the most recent following a vacation in St Thomas and St John (working vacation for a stock photographer!!), but these were too late to make much of a difference. To make it worse, Shutterstock rejected about half with "Poor lighting, white balance may be incorrect..." I'll have to sell that x-rite colorchecker!

I keep a graph of sales per site on my blog - I'll work out to post that here for the next month. I've noticed that most people only post the percentage of sales from each site - is there some risk in posting actual numbers?

Steve
http://www.backyardsilver.com

stockmarketer · « **Reply #20 on:** March 01, 2011, 09:46 »

My BME in terms of RPI and total revenue for the month, pretty great considering Feb had just 28 days. I'm about 2.5 years into microstock, and the growth continues at roughly the same pace as my very first months, though some sites are performing much better than others.

Shutterstock - steady growth
Fotolia - fantastic growth
Dreamstime - steady
IS - peaked for me in Oct/Nov 2010 and has since been on a steady decline

All the rest - steady growth

I think it says a lot about iStock's position in the industry right now. My port is posting great and steadily rising numbers on just about every site except IS. I think my numbers are proof that buyers are slowly turning away from IS and buying elsewhere.

MatHayward · « **Reply #21 on:** March 01, 2011, 09:58 »

Oof Da!

Brutal Month! 2011 is not panning out to be super great at this point for me

Mat

stockmarketer · « **Reply #22 on:** March 01, 2011, 10:00 »

Quote from: steheap on March 01, 2011, 09:09

I keep a graph of sales per site on my blog - I'll work out to post that here for the next month. I've noticed that most people only post the percentage of sales from each site - is there some risk in posting actual numbers?

I used to like to post my numbers, but ultimately realized it served no real purpose. Everyone's ports are so different that comparing yours to mine won't really tell you anything. If you think my earnings are great, it could give you unrealistic expectations or make you feel like you're failing. That doesn't help anyone. Plus, as has been pointed out countless times, big dollar amounts are flags to people who want to "get rich quick" and think they can copy the success of others. None of us needs that.

traveler1116 · « **Reply #23 on:** March 01, 2011, 10:07 »

Quote from: stockmarketer on March 01, 2011, 09:46

My BME in terms of RPI and total revenue for the month, pretty great considering Feb had just 28 days. I'm about 2.5 years into microstock, and the growth continues at roughly the same pace as my very first months, though some sites are performing much better than others.

Shutterstock - steady growth
Fotolia - fantastic growth
Dreamstime - steady
IS - peaked for me in Oct/Nov 2010 and has since been on a steady decline

All the rest - steady growth

I think it says a lot about iStock's position in the industry right now. My port is posting great and steadily rising numbers on just about every site except IS. I think my numbers are proof that buyers are slowly turning away from IS and buying elsewhere.

Not sure I'd say proof although I'm only on IS now, my feb. 2010 to 2011 is +80% although I did add about 120% images.

stockmarketer · « **Reply #24 on:** March 01, 2011, 10:52 »

Quote from: traveler1116 on March 01, 2011, 10:07

Quote from: stockmarketer on March 01, 2011, 09:46
My BME in terms of RPI and total revenue for the month, pretty great considering Feb had just 28 days. I'm about 2.5 years into microstock, and the growth continues at roughly the same pace as my very first months, though some sites are performing much better than others.

Shutterstock - steady growth
Fotolia - fantastic growth
Dreamstime - steady
IS - peaked for me in Oct/Nov 2010 and has since been on a steady decline

All the rest - steady growth

I think it says a lot about iStock's position in the industry right now. My port is posting great and steadily rising numbers on just about every site except IS. I think my numbers are proof that buyers are slowly turning away from IS and buying elsewhere.
Not sure I'd say proof although I'm only on IS now, my feb. 2010 to 2011 is +80% although I did add about 120% images.

My Feb 2011 is also up significantly over Feb 2010, by about 60%. But the proof of a decline I'm seeing is the fact that for the past four months every agency but IS has posted steady, solid gains for me while IS has posted slow, steady losses. When every runner is sprinting forward, but one is crawling backward, clearly there's something wrong with that one under-performer.

PixelsAway · « **Reply #25 on:** March 01, 2011, 11:27 »

BME for earnings/day

my big 4 (80% of total earnings, it was 89% in January!):

IS down
SS up
DT down
FT down

unusually good month for CanStockPhoto, VEER and FeaturePics

BigStock up
123RF up

gaja · « **Reply #26 on:** March 01, 2011, 11:33 »

Well...

1. Shutterstock 27%
2. YayMicro 17%
3. Dreamstime 11%
4. Scanstock 11%
5. 123RF 8%
6. Istock 7 %

In total, if you ignore ELs, up from January. Yay and Scanstock are strong because of a few pictures that appeal to a Scandianvian audience, but rarely sell elsewhere.

lightscribe · « **Reply #27 on:** March 01, 2011, 11:37 »

Quote from: aeonf on March 01, 2011, 04:06

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on March 01, 2011, 03:54
Quote from: aeonf on March 01, 2011, 03:19

I wish more people would share REAL NUMBERS instead of very pretty charts and tables which don't really say much.

Real numbers say nothing at all unless you have all of them. I don't know how many files you have online, whether your sales are up or down. If you have 50,000 files then your result is pathetic, if you have 50 files then your result is brilliant. I don't know if your sum of money is more or less than last year (or if you have a big increase in files online or not) so I don't know if things are getting better or worse for you.

Well then just ask
Feb last year we made 80$
We have ~2,000 images online of which ~1/4 are from 2008 and not worth much.
And things are quite stable for us if mesured by DPI & RPI.
We are going to get a substantial boost in income soon since we are expected to hit the 30% target in the next 2-3 months.

So with 2000 images you earned $796 as an Exclusive at istock? That comes to a $0.40 Return Per Image (RPI). Is this what other istock exclusives are earning, any exclusives care to share real RPI numbers. I am earning $0.50 per image/per month at istock as a non-exclusive...I have a much smaller portfolio however, I was thinking of exclusivity just to simplify my life but if these are real numbers from exclusives it doesn't sound so promising.

ShadySue · « **Reply #28 on:** March 01, 2011, 11:41 »

Quote from: microstockphoto.co.uk on March 01, 2011, 08:07

Quote from: lagereek on March 01, 2011, 07:35
All earnings aside. Has it occurred to anyone that the entire micro industry is singing on its 11th year and the novelty among buyers is wearing thin? not so cheap anymore, gazillions of irrelevant stuff in almost every search, painfully slow sites with all sorts of problems.
Its no picknick being a buyer anymore and as many buyers say, even after hours of searching and still dont find it.

a partial solution to these problems could be that agencies started accepting the so called "low commercial value" pictures - which are actually selling if accepted:
- good, interesting lighting doesn't necessarily mean evenly lit;
- there's more to architecture than the big ben and brandenburger tor;
- not everyone is a businessman/woman smiling with a phone;
...

If I were a buyer, I'd like to decide MYSELF what I like, leaving to the agencies just a minimal technical/legal audit.

ITC, if you were a buyer you'd be better off considering Alamy for your main source.
It's often said in their forums that they'd be better off with a more tightly edited collection.
Me? I think they'd be better with more marketing and a better search engine.

travelstock · « **Reply #29 on:** March 01, 2011, 12:31 »

Quote from: lightscribe on March 01, 2011, 11:37

So with 2000 images you earned $796 as an Exclusive at istock? That comes to a $0.40 Return Per Image (RPI). Is this what other istock exclusives are earning, any exclusives care to share real RPI numbers. I am earning $0.50 per image/per month at istock as a non-exclusive...I have a much smaller portfolio however, I was thinking of exclusivity just to simplify my life but if these are real numbers from exclusives it doesn't sound so promising.

You can't compare RPI number between portfolios. If I have a portfolio that has a higher number of downloads per image on average than another portfolio, then the RPI will also be higher.

Going exclusive, your total download numbers should stay about the same, but your RPD will increase significantly. Again exactly how much depends on your canister level, how many images you put in Exclusive+ and how many Vetta files you have. You can get a more accurate idea of your own numbers by analyzing your recent downloads and recalculating the income by applying the exclusive pricing structure and royalty percentage. Its tedious, but fairly effective.

Back on topic - this month was my 6th as an exclusive.

Compared to Jan: Income + 15%, DLS + 12%
Compared to Feb 2010 (non exclusive): Income +15%

Images: + ax.200 with 75 still awaiting inspection - however many of these didn't come online until late in the month.

lisafx · « **Reply #30 on:** March 01, 2011, 13:56 »

Really disappointing February for me. I am up 3% on January (a terrible month) but down 4% on Feb 2010. All the micros are down for me. Only bright spot in my stats was a good month at Alamy. Not all that reassuring since my sales there are very inconsistent from month to month.

      =/- Feb 2010
ISP     37% (-12%)
Shut     19% (-2%)
Dream 12% (-11%)
Fotolia 17% (-14%)
BigS 4%
123     3%
Can     3%
Alm     5% (+27%)

ShadySue · « **Reply #31 on:** March 01, 2011, 14:20 »

Quote from: holgs on March 01, 2011, 12:31

Quote from: lightscribe on March 01, 2011, 11:37

So with 2000 images you earned $796 as an Exclusive at istock? That comes to a $0.40 Return Per Image (RPI). Is this what other istock exclusives are earning, any exclusives care to share real RPI numbers. I am earning $0.50 per image/per month at istock as a non-exclusive...I have a much smaller portfolio however, I was thinking of exclusivity just to simplify my life but if these are real numbers from exclusives it doesn't sound so promising.

You can't compare RPI number between portfolios. If I have a portfolio that has a higher number of downloads per image on average than another portfolio, then the RPI will also be higher.

Plus some contributors remove images which haven't sold over a certain time, and others don't. The former's RPI will 'seem' much better than the latter's, but the figure isn't meaningful.
It matters how much expense and time were put into an image. A picture which was taken when you walked to the shops and sells for $15 during its lifetime has done better than a picture which cost $500 to produce and earns $510.
Although some people bang on and on about RPI, it's really pretty irrelevant.

Oldhand · « **Reply #32 on:** March 01, 2011, 14:23 »

Feb 2011 - $1500 all told from 3-4000 portfolio

SS was king, 123 was over £100 and DT actually did well

IS and BS were steady, but the month's biggest loser was FT. Too many subscription sales for peanuts!

All told quite happy, but growth is a very slow process.

Crestock chipped in with $5, which should buy some more peanuts.

Long month March...

Rgds

Oldhand

aeonf · « **Reply #33 on:** March 01, 2011, 14:37 »

Quote from: lightscribe on March 01, 2011, 11:37

Quote from: aeonf on March 01, 2011, 04:06
Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on March 01, 2011, 03:54
Quote from: aeonf on March 01, 2011, 03:19

I wish more people would share REAL NUMBERS instead of very pretty charts and tables which don't really say much.

Real numbers say nothing at all unless you have all of them. I don't know how many files you have online, whether your sales are up or down. If you have 50,000 files then your result is pathetic, if you have 50 files then your result is brilliant. I don't know if your sum of money is more or less than last year (or if you have a big increase in files online or not) so I don't know if things are getting better or worse for you.

Well then just ask
Feb last year we made 80$
We have ~2,000 images online of which ~1/4 are from 2008 and not worth much.
And things are quite stable for us if mesured by DPI & RPI.
We are going to get a substantial boost in income soon since we are expected to hit the 30% target in the next 2-3 months.

So with 2000 images you earned $796 as an Exclusive at istock? That comes to a $0.40 Return Per Image (RPI). Is this what other istock exclusives are earning, any exclusives care to share real RPI numbers. I am earning $0.50 per image/per month at istock as a non-exclusive...I have a much smaller portfolio however, I was thinking of exclusivity just to simplify my life but if these are real numbers from exclusives it doesn't sound so promising.

If you are considering exclusivity, my RPI should have nothing to do with your considerations.
A general rule of thumb is that your income will be anywhere between double to triple your current IS income.
This also greatly depends on your earning percentage canister, and so does the RPI.
I am at the 25% mark. if I was at the 30% mark that is a 20% increase or 40% increase if I was at the 35% (which I am expected to reach before years end).

GraphicGravy · « **Reply #34 on:** March 01, 2011, 20:18 »

Quote from: Ellerslie on March 01, 2011, 08:40

Luckily I'm not english so I don't understand this flame.

LOL.

My sales were up slightly from January. Almost all my files are vectors, so my results are probably different than most photographers. I made a ranking of my top selling 20 vector sites on my blog, www.graphicgravy.com. Shutterstock was my best, followed by iStock, ClipartOf, Vectorstock, and Can Stock Photo.

~ Eli

redo · « **Reply #35 on:** March 02, 2011, 05:23 »

agency %2011 (%2010) %+- average USD 2011 (average USD 2010) average USD +-
istock 33 (37) -4 - 3,13 USD (2,64 USD) +0,49 USD
shutterstock 21 (24) -3 - 0,5 USD (0,61 USD) -0,11 USD
fotolia 20 (22) -2 - 1,66 USD (1,83 USD) -0,17 USD
dreamstime 15 (13) +2 - 2,83 USD (2,41 USD) +0,42 USD
canstock 5 (1) +4 - 1,88 USD (0,67 USD) +1,21 USD
veer 3 (0) +3 - 6,39 USD (4 USD) +2,39 USD
123rf 2 (1) +1 - 0,89 USD (0,71 USD) +0,18 USD
bigstock 1 (1) +-0 - 1,39 USD (1,19 USD) +0,20 USD
StockXpert - (1) -1 -- (1 USD) -

money 02.2011/02.2010 -4,5 %
but only some new pictures

qwerty · « **Reply #36 on:** March 02, 2011, 05:58 »

Good month for me
total earning for feb 2011 up 70% on feb 2010
portfolio is about 30% bigger (total of between 550 and 700 online now)

steheap · « **Reply #37 on:** March 02, 2011, 10:46 »

Quote

Real numbers say nothing at all unless you have all of them. I don't know how many files you have online, whether your sales are up or down. If you have 50,000 files then your result is pathetic, if you have 50 files then your result is brilliant. I don't know if your sum of money is more or less than last year (or if you have a big increase in files online or not) so I don't know if things are getting better or worse for you.

This is a good point. I mentioned earlier a total set of earnings of $500 in the month, and I have now added a graph of the number of images online on each site at the end of February to my blog. The average is around 1300 mainly travel type images at this point.

Hope this is useful for beginners. I wish I had maintained a database of the number of images online through 2010 - I think it was about 300 or 400 last January, but I'm not very sure.

Steve
http://www.backyardsilver.com

lisafx · « **Reply #38 on:** March 02, 2011, 11:16 »

Anyone read through the Feb stats thread at IS? Reads like an obituary for the site. The mature portfolios, particularly diamonds, seem to be very hard hit. Looks like the month-on-month drops in downloads have finally begun to translate into drops in royalties.

Considering at IS I am 12% down on royalties and 18% down on DLs from last year, I feel their pain. Only 4% down across the board, so the other sites are picking up some of their slack.

I wonder how much of this is a result of the lower royalties kicking in, and how much of it is related to departure of some buyers?

ETA: Sorry, misspoke. I am 4% down, across the board, from Feb '10, not 5%. Only 1% difference, but hey, I'll take it

lagereek · « **Reply #39 on:** March 02, 2011, 11:39 »

Quote from: lisafx on March 02, 2011, 11:16

Anyone read through the Feb stats thread at IS? Reads like an obituary for the site. The mature portfolios, particularly diamonds, seem to be very hard hit. Looks like the month-on-month drops in downloads have finally begun to translate into drops in royalties.

Considering at IS I am 12% down on royalties and 18% down on DLs from last year, I feel their pain. Only 5% down across the board, so the other sites are picking up some of their slack.

I wonder how much of this is a result of the lower royalties kicking in, and how much of it is related to departure of some buyers?

Hi!

Well Im not surprised at all. I did some searches and it baffled me! Vetta and agency files, many with hardly any DLs at all, no flames, nothing are pushed right up front way before top-commercial sellers that generate money.
I thought the art of business was to make money, etc, but not in this case. As far as independants, well thats even worse.

Fair enough, Im not complaining, its Gettys company and maybe they have some secret logic behind it all but it sure as hell beats me.

lightscribe · « **Reply #40 on:** March 02, 2011, 12:08 »

Quote from: holgs on March 01, 2011, 12:31

Quote from: lightscribe on March 01, 2011, 11:37

So with 2000 images you earned $796 as an Exclusive at istock? That comes to a $0.40 Return Per Image (RPI). Is this what other istock exclusives are earning, any exclusives care to share real RPI numbers. I am earning $0.50 per image/per month at istock as a non-exclusive...I have a much smaller portfolio however, I was thinking of exclusivity just to simplify my life but if these are real numbers from exclusives it doesn't sound so promising.

You can't compare RPI number between portfolios. If I have a portfolio that has a higher number of downloads per image on average than another portfolio, then the RPI will also be higher.

Going exclusive, your total download numbers should stay about the same, but your RPD will increase significantly. Again exactly how much depends on your canister level, how many images you put in Exclusive+ and how many Vetta files you have. You can get a more accurate idea of your own numbers by analyzing your recent downloads and recalculating the income by applying the exclusive pricing structure and royalty percentage. Its tedious, but fairly effective.

Back on topic - this month was my 6th as an exclusive.

Compared to Jan: Income + 15%, DLS + 12%
Compared to Feb 2010 (non exclusive): Income +15%

Images: + ax.200 with 75 still awaiting inspection - however many of these didn't come online until late in the month.

Are you saying that your sales have only increased 15% since you went exclusive? and that 15% increase most likely includes increasing your portfolio size over the past year. I am just trying to gauge what type of increase to expect if I decide to go exclusive. Some say 200% to 300% increase in earnings if you go exclusive, but you are seeing a 15% increase? Sorry if I am reading these numbers wrong.

loop · « **Reply #41 on:** March 02, 2011, 12:22 »

It's true that Feb downloads were somewhat dull at IS. Ot the positive side, these three first days of March, at least for me, are the best I can remember.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #42 on:** March 02, 2011, 12:41 »

Quote from: loop on March 02, 2011, 12:22

It's true that Feb downloads were somewhat dull at IS. Ot the positive side, these three first days of March, at least for me, are the best I can remember.

How have you managed to squeeze three March days in, while I am only halfway through the second?

velocicarpo · « **Reply #43 on:** March 02, 2011, 12:41 »

Quote from: lisafx on March 02, 2011, 11:16

Anyone read through the Feb stats thread at IS? Reads like an obituary for the site. The mature portfolios, particularly diamonds, seem to be very hard hit. Looks like the month-on-month drops in downloads have finally begun to translate into drops in royalties.

I welcome that. It shows that contributor (and possibly buyers) protest is working. Better to cut out a foul branch instead of letting it infect the whole organism :-)

adamkaz · « **Reply #44 on:** March 02, 2011, 12:43 »

Royalties pretty much = to January and last February. But March is off to an incredible start....

loop · « **Reply #45 on:** March 02, 2011, 12:48 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on March 02, 2011, 12:41

Quote from: loop on March 02, 2011, 12:22
It's true that Feb downloads were somewhat dull at IS. Ot the positive side, these three first days of March, at least for me, are the best I can remember.

How have you managed to squeeze three March days in, while I am only halfway through the second?

Ouch... I meant the tree days of this week, Monday, Tuesday and today, that is shaping even better than Monday and Tuesday.

Kngkyle · « **Reply #46 on:** March 02, 2011, 12:56 »

IS exclusive, no new files. Second worst month since going exclusive in August 2010. I'm not too fussed though since it was a short month and PP income hasn't been added yet.

Kinda funky how 40% of my PP downloads come from just one file, and that file never sells on IS.

oboy · « **Reply #47 on:** March 02, 2011, 14:29 »

This is my stock photography sales statistic for February 2011. You can find a complete list of stock photography agencies that I work with here.

These are for me the best 4 performing stock agencies for February 2011:

1. Shutterstock
2. Alamy
3. StockXpert
4. Can Stock Photo

February was a good month with a 4% increase compared to January. It was the best month ever for Alamy, Featurepics.

djpadavona · « **Reply #48 on:** March 02, 2011, 15:28 »

Is it just me, or are the 5.9 and 5.4 Earnings Ratings on Shutterstock and iStock respectively the lowest they've been in years? I don't recall seeing the #1 earner below 6 lately.

tanedesign · « **Reply #49 on:** March 02, 2011, 22:03 »

Im an illustrator, my feb. was pretty lousy. Maybe if due to RC I hadnt lowered my royalty rate, my earnings would have matched last year´s. Only a couple of days of march have gone by and if they are representative of the rest of the month Id better go out of this business as Ive had hardly no downloads,it seems like someone turned some switch and my portfolio went off! Its truly discouraging. There was a time when I an average of 15 DL per day, with some months of even higher daily scores, now Im "happy" if I see 7.

melking · « **Reply #50 on:** March 03, 2011, 06:52 »

I had a great month in February... UP 19.22% in Total. The best Site for me this month was Shutterstock with a 41% increase!

You can see my Microstock Stats for February 2011 on my Blog - http://melissaking.ca/wordpress/211/

Melissa King

ingwio · « **Reply #51 on:** March 05, 2011, 08:07 »

Quote from: velocicarpo on March 01, 2011, 08:58

...
Dreamstime continues to be the biggest disappointment due to their lack of understanding what images should be approved and which rejected. Veer, Canstock, 123rf, some local agencies are all above Dreamstime this month.
...

Here is a nice example for submitting images on dreamstime.
I uploaded an image on fotolia, shutterstock and dreamstime.
fotolia: accepted after 3 days.
shutterstock: accepted after 1 day. 3 downloads (Australia, Europe, USA) in the first 2 days online (=2.38$).
dreamstime: rejected after 5 days because of the title, description or keywords. I changed the title and keywords a little and resubmitted the image. 10 days after the first upload the result was: again rejected because of the same reason (title, description or keywords???).

For such things at dreamstime I have no time. Then the image is just only sold at shutterstock.

Morphart · « **Reply #52 on:** March 05, 2011, 09:33 »

Quote from: visceralimage on March 01, 2011, 03:38

i somewhat agree. My numbers are so bad it will make anyone look better compared to mine.

I just left Dreamstime exclusive at mid-month.
Dreamstime at about $70, down from $125 (1000 images online)
the rest based on 15 days of being active (ranging from 19 images to 700 images online)
Shutterstock at about $33
Veer at 3.50
Fotolia at 2.00
DepositPhotos at 0.60
all others (14 of them including IS) at a big whopping zero

Wow with 1k images online it must hurt to only see 70$ for a whoe month. I am surprised you are not getting more sales off that many images, Shutterstock usually pay good money when you have a large portfolio.

mantonino · « **Reply #53 on:** March 05, 2011, 09:51 »

February was by *far* my best month ever. And I do post real numbers though never high enough ones.

http://www.niltomil.com/results/feb-2011-microstock-earnings/

Anyhoo - my first month ever over $1000 and my BME on several agencies IN a short month. I'll take that all day and twice Sundays.

Morphart · « **Reply #54 on:** March 05, 2011, 13:12 »

For my part I am happy with my month.

I have been increasing my portfolio since January, and the number adds up. Made 90$ more than usual in january (added around 50 illustrations during the month), and made 125$ more than January in February (with another 50 illustrations and photos added during the month). Can't really compare with last year, but currently I am happy with the sales, but some like Dreamstime and Fotolia sure are now adding up as they should.

Canstock is the best surprise for me with 70$ sales in February for a portfolio of around 350-375 illustrations and a few images during the month.

Dreamstime and Fotolia are doing bad for me, less than last years sale but with twise as much images online. 123rf and bigstock stayed similar, low sale.

The rest looks like:

Shutter: 155$
Canstock: 70$
Dreamstime: 19.29$
Veer: 7$ (only 40 images online there)
123rf: 11.93$
Fotolia: 13.13$ (eh..!)
Bigtstock: 7.50$
CreStock: 4.95$

The rest are cents or a few dollars :p

visceralimage · « **Reply #55 on:** March 05, 2011, 23:51 »

Quote from: Morphart on March 05, 2011, 09:33

Quote from: visceralimage on March 01, 2011, 03:38
i somewhat agree. My numbers are so bad it will make anyone look better compared to mine.

I just left Dreamstime exclusive at mid-month.
Dreamstime at about $70, down from $125 (1000 images online)
the rest based on 15 days of being active (ranging from 19 images to 700 images online)
Shutterstock at about $33
Veer at 3.50
Fotolia at 2.00
DepositPhotos at 0.60
all others (14 of them including IS) at a big whopping zero

Wow with 1k images online it must hurt to only see 70$ for a whoe month. I am surprised you are not getting more sales off that many images, Shutterstock usually pay good money when you have a large portfolio.

I am wildlife photographer, different market

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #56 on:** March 06, 2011, 01:05 »

Quote from: visceralimage on March 05, 2011, 23:51

Quote from: Morphart on March 05, 2011, 09:33
Quote from: visceralimage on March 01, 2011, 03:38
i somewhat agree. My numbers are so bad it will make anyone look better compared to mine.

I just left Dreamstime exclusive at mid-month.
Dreamstime at about $70, down from $125 (1000 images online)
the rest based on 15 days of being active (ranging from 19 images to 700 images online)
Shutterstock at about $33
Veer at 3.50
Fotolia at 2.00
DepositPhotos at 0.60
all others (14 of them including IS) at a big whopping zero

Wow with 1k images online it must hurt to only see 70$ for a whoe month. I am surprised you are not getting more sales off that many images, Shutterstock usually pay good money when you have a large portfolio.

I am wildlife photographer, different market

Yeah, dude, 1,000 photos is an extraordinary level of effort. I've put in 20+ hour weeks for 3 years and haven't hit 1,000 photos yet. I'd have to question whether the effort was really worth the return. Just sayin...

visceralimage · « **Reply #57 on:** March 06, 2011, 01:23 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on March 06, 2011, 01:05

Quote from: visceralimage on March 05, 2011, 23:51
Quote from: Morphart on March 05, 2011, 09:33
Quote from: visceralimage on March 01, 2011, 03:38
i somewhat agree. My numbers are so bad it will make anyone look better compared to mine.

I just left Dreamstime exclusive at mid-month.
Dreamstime at about $70, down from $125 (1000 images online)
the rest based on 15 days of being active (ranging from 19 images to 700 images online)
Shutterstock at about $33
Veer at 3.50
Fotolia at 2.00
DepositPhotos at 0.60
all others (14 of them including IS) at a big whopping zero

Wow with 1k images online it must hurt to only see 70$ for a whoe month. I am surprised you are not getting more sales off that many images, Shutterstock usually pay good money when you have a large portfolio.

I am wildlife photographer, different market

Yeah, dude, 1,000 photos is an extraordinary level of effort. I've put in 20+ hour weeks for 3 years and haven't hit 1,000 photos yet. I'd have to question whether the effort was really worth the return. Just sayin...

If we were only counting last month, I would agree the effort did not match the return; the advantage of wildlife images are they are a bit timeless-no changes in clothing styles or other similar problems. Hopefully, in the long run, it will all even out.

ShadySue · « **Reply #58 on:** March 06, 2011, 08:40 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on March 06, 2011, 01:05

Quote from: visceralimage on March 05, 2011, 23:51
Quote from: Morphart on March 05, 2011, 09:33
Quote from: visceralimage on March 01, 2011, 03:38
i somewhat agree. My numbers are so bad it will make anyone look better compared to mine.

I just left Dreamstime exclusive at mid-month.
Dreamstime at about $70, down from $125 (1000 images online)
the rest based on 15 days of being active (ranging from 19 images to 700 images online)
Shutterstock at about $33
Veer at 3.50
Fotolia at 2.00
DepositPhotos at 0.60
all others (14 of them including IS) at a big whopping zero

Wow with 1k images online it must hurt to only see 70$ for a whoe month. I am surprised you are not getting more sales off that many images, Shutterstock usually pay good money when you have a large portfolio.

I am wildlife photographer, different market

Yeah, dude, 1,000 photos is an extraordinary level of effort. I've put in 20+ hour weeks for 3 years and haven't hit 1,000 photos yet. I'd have to question whether the effort was really worth the return. Just sayin...

The difference is that most wildlife photographers are doing it for love, anyway.
Obivously if you are shooting business concepts on white, or other 'set ups', you're doing it for money, and you wouldn't be doing it 'anyway'; so you'd need to look at whether it was 'worth it' (e.g. what other uses could you have for the images?)

visceralimage · « **Reply #59 on:** March 06, 2011, 17:59 »

Quote from: ShadySue on March 06, 2011, 08:40

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on March 06, 2011, 01:05
Quote from: visceralimage on March 05, 2011, 23:51
Quote from: Morphart on March 05, 2011, 09:33
Quote from: visceralimage on March 01, 2011, 03:38
i somewhat agree. My numbers are so bad it will make anyone look better compared to mine.

I just left Dreamstime exclusive at mid-month.
Dreamstime at about $70, down from $125 (1000 images online)
the rest based on 15 days of being active (ranging from 19 images to 700 images online)
Shutterstock at about $33
Veer at 3.50
Fotolia at 2.00
DepositPhotos at 0.60
all others (14 of them including IS) at a big whopping zero

Wow with 1k images online it must hurt to only see 70$ for a whoe month. I am surprised you are not getting more sales off that many images, Shutterstock usually pay good money when you have a large portfolio.

I am wildlife photographer, different market

Yeah, dude, 1,000 photos is an extraordinary level of effort. I've put in 20+ hour weeks for 3 years and haven't hit 1,000 photos yet. I'd have to question whether the effort was really worth the return. Just sayin...
The difference is that most wildlife photographers are doing it for love, anyway.
Obivously if you are shooting business concepts on white, or other 'set ups', you're doing it for money, and you wouldn't be doing it 'anyway'; so you'd need to look at whether it was 'worth it' (e.g. what other uses could you have for the images?)

I am certainly doing the wildlife photography for love; I am putting the time into getting the images on the microstock sites for money. Sometimes, it is difficult to concentrate on the love part when you are hungry!

Morphart · « **Reply #60 on:** March 06, 2011, 20:33 »

Quote from: visceralimage on March 06, 2011, 17:59

I am certainly doing the wildlife photography for love; I am putting the time into getting the images on the microstock sites for money. Sometimes, it is difficult to concentrate on the love part when you are hungry!

Time to get those animals some business suits lol!

visceralimage · « **Reply #61 on:** March 06, 2011, 20:47 »

Quote from: Morphart on March 06, 2011, 20:33

Quote from: visceralimage on March 06, 2011, 17:59
I am certainly doing the wildlife photography for love; I am putting the time into getting the images on the microstock sites for money. Sometimes, it is difficult to concentrate on the love part when you are hungry!

Time to get those animals some business suits lol!

Hey, there is a good idea. A bear and a Tiger shaking hands; three bears around a conference table discussing business matters, or a bear holding a weigh scale and looking back over her shoulder (aka Yuri)

Noodles · « **Reply #62 on:** March 07, 2011, 01:34 »

IS Exclusive (105 Images) Feb = $252 which is 97% up on last year, -6% down on previous month, no new images added

Morphart · « **Reply #63 on:** March 07, 2011, 11:11 »

Quote from: visceralimage on March 06, 2011, 20:47

Quote from: Morphart on March 06, 2011, 20:33
Quote from: visceralimage on March 06, 2011, 17:59
I am certainly doing the wildlife photography for love; I am putting the time into getting the images on the microstock sites for money. Sometimes, it is difficult to concentrate on the love part when you are hungry!

Time to get those animals some business suits lol!

Hey, there is a good idea. A bear and a Tiger shaking hands; three bears around a conference table discussing business matters, or a bear holding a weigh scale and looking back over her shoulder (aka Yuri)

Haha!!

Good luck with making that bear sign a model release :p. You gave me a good laugh this morning... a Yuri Bear !

grp_photo · « **Reply #64 on:** March 07, 2011, 14:19 »

Quote from: visceralimage on March 06, 2011, 20:47

Quote from: Morphart on March 06, 2011, 20:33
Quote from: visceralimage on March 06, 2011, 17:59
I am certainly doing the wildlife photography for love; I am putting the time into getting the images on the microstock sites for money. Sometimes, it is difficult to concentrate on the love part when you are hungry!

Time to get those animals some business suits lol!

Hey, there is a good idea. A bear and a Tiger shaking hands; three bears around a conference table discussing business matters, or a bear holding a weigh scale and looking back over her shoulder (aka Yuri)

Hahaha lol very good one Morpart and Viscealimage :-)

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #65 on:** March 07, 2011, 20:59 »

Quote from: ShadySue on March 06, 2011, 08:40

The difference is that most wildlife photographers are doing it for love, anyway.
Obivously if you are shooting business concepts on white, or other 'set ups', you're doing it for money, and you wouldn't be doing it 'anyway'; so you'd need to look at whether it was 'worth it' (e.g. what other uses could you have for the images?)

Oh c'mon, I love shooting handshakes on white. It's my passion.

And it's a bonus when it costs me more to produce than I make.

visceralimage · « **Reply #66 on:** March 07, 2011, 21:09 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on March 07, 2011, 20:59

Quote from: ShadySue on March 06, 2011, 08:40
The difference is that most wildlife photographers are doing it for love, anyway.
Obivously if you are shooting business concepts on white, or other 'set ups', you're doing it for money, and you wouldn't be doing it 'anyway'; so you'd need to look at whether it was 'worth it' (e.g. what other uses could you have for the images?)

Oh c'mon, I love shooting handshakes on white. It's my passion.

And it's a bonus when it costs me more to produce than I make.

Paulie; you need to find models that actually own suits so that your expenses are not so high. Getting the local bums or homeless from the park is cheaper but buying the suits gets expense

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #67 on:** March 07, 2011, 21:18 »

Quote from: visceralimage on March 07, 2011, 21:09

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on March 07, 2011, 20:59
Quote from: ShadySue on March 06, 2011, 08:40
The difference is that most wildlife photographers are doing it for love, anyway.
Obivously if you are shooting business concepts on white, or other 'set ups', you're doing it for money, and you wouldn't be doing it 'anyway'; so you'd need to look at whether it was 'worth it' (e.g. what other uses could you have for the images?)
Oh c'mon, I love shooting handshakes on white. It's my passion.
And it's a bonus when it costs me more to produce than I make.

Paulie; you need to find models that actually own suits so that your expenses are not so high. Getting the local bums or homeless from the park is cheaper but buying the suits gets expense

Hey, c'mon now. Those manicures cost a lot of money so I can get the perfect handshake shot. I try to use twins for models so their hands are perfectly symetrical. I hold hand auditions.

visceralimage · « **Reply #68 on:** March 07, 2011, 22:21 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on March 07, 2011, 21:18

Quote from: visceralimage on March 07, 2011, 21:09
Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on March 07, 2011, 20:59
Quote from: ShadySue on March 06, 2011, 08:40
The difference is that most wildlife photographers are doing it for love, anyway.
Obivously if you are shooting business concepts on white, or other 'set ups', you're doing it for money, and you wouldn't be doing it 'anyway'; so you'd need to look at whether it was 'worth it' (e.g. what other uses could you have for the images?)
Oh c'mon, I love shooting handshakes on white. It's my passion.
And it's a bonus when it costs me more to produce than I make.

Paulie; you need to find models that actually own suits so that your expenses are not so high. Getting the local bums or homeless from the park is cheaper but buying the suits gets expense
Hey, c'mon now. Those manicures cost a lot of money so I can get the perfect handshake shot. I try to use twins for models so their hands are perfectly symetrical. I hold hand auditions.

Yeah, I know; because you only see the hands: you could have two trolls shaking hands for all we know because you only see the lower arm and the hands.

I think I really need to start a parody microstock business; my mind keeps doing all these shots as a parody.

This one: A really large rough oily hand shaking a real feminine delicate hand with perfect nails

Or, how bout a business suit arm shaking the flipper of a sea lion.

stockmarketer · « **Reply #69 on:** March 08, 2011, 10:00 »

Quote from: visceralimage on March 07, 2011, 22:21

This one: A really large rough oily hand shaking a real feminine delicate hand with perfect nails

Or, how bout a business suit arm shaking the flipper of a sea lion.

I want to play... but why limit it to parodies of shots that sell well? I think it would be even funnier to lampoon the overproduced stuff that no one actually wants, yet people still produce in vast quantities.

How about this... a cute puppy standing at the edge of the Grand Canyon, with a rainbow in the sky above it. Oh, and the puppy is in lingerie, with an alluring look in its eyes.

visceralimage · « **Reply #70 on:** March 08, 2011, 19:50 »

Quote from: stockmarketer on March 08, 2011, 10:00

Quote from: visceralimage on March 07, 2011, 22:21
This one: A really large rough oily hand shaking a real feminine delicate hand with perfect nails

Or, how bout a business suit arm shaking the flipper of a sea lion.

I want to play... but why limit it to parodies of shots that sell well? I think it would be even funnier to lampoon the overproduced stuff that no one actually wants, yet people still produce in vast quantities.

How about this... a cute puppy standing at the edge of the Grand Canyon, with a rainbow in the sky above it. Oh, and the puppy is in lingerie, with an alluring look in its eyes.

Or we could also do fairytales; all the lemmings going over the cliff (maybe with a reflection of Marlin Perkins (sorry, forgot how to spell his name-the guy with wild kingdom) tossing them over

Morphart · « **Reply #71 on:** March 10, 2011, 10:06 »

Quote from: visceralimage on March 07, 2011, 22:21

I think I really need to start a parody microstock business; my mind keeps doing all these shots as a parody.

Haha by seeing the posts here it would DEFINETLY work... You should edit this post someone will steal your idea

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Feb 2011 microstock earnings (Read 29999 times)

microstockphoto.co.uk

lagereek

microstockphoto.co.uk

lagereek

velocicarpo

traveler1116

lisafx

lisafx

lagereek

velocicarpo

Noodles

grp_photo

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors