pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Poll

What's your average monthly RPI?

$0-.25
12 (15%)
$.26-.50
14 (17.5%)
$.51-.75
17 (21.3%)
$.76-$1.00
8 (10%)
$1.01-$2.00
12 (15%)
$2.01-$3.00
4 (5%)
$3.01-$4.00
6 (7.5%)
$4.01-$5.00
4 (5%)
$5.01-$7.00
1 (1.3%)
$7.01-$10.00
1 (1.3%)
Over $10.00
1 (1.3%)

Total Members Voted: 66

Author Topic: POLL: RPI  (Read 15702 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RacePhoto

« Reply #25 on: February 27, 2012, 01:06 »
0
It's very simple, it tells you how good (or bad) stock photographer you really are. If that's important to you, than this stat is important to you, if it's not, you don't bother with it anyway

You think this is the only way you can establish it?  :D

So if you happen to support a few to many low earners you might be bad, but if you did not you might be good.....?

This is not a race for me, it is a way to earn extra income I really need. If I reach my personal sales target, I am good, if I did not, the industry is bad!  Does it not work for most of you that way?  ;D

Oh yes, and my congratulations to the big winners!  ;)

PS wut I am rooting for you, are you the hat or the iron?


The race car!  ;D 
jpg image hosting

There are people with a $10 a month RPI? WOW, that's fantastic. Is there some reason why I shouldn't believe that?

Lets see 3000 images, x $10 = $30,000 a month? Please buy one of the agencies and change the commission to 50% for all of us. (exclusive only of course) so we can "punish" the low pay/percentage sites. At $360,000 a year, someone could afford to make an artist friendly agency.

$10 a month and 200 pictures? Dang, that person needs to have 2000 photos and bank it.

Of course if it's someone with one photo on Alamy that sells once a year, their RPI is easily $10 a month.

And there lies the flaw in RPI. How many pictures, how much did they cost, how many agencies. The obvious also is I have some photos that have never sold in five years and probably never will. Best thing for me to do is remove them and make my RPI better.  ::)

Still not a fan of RPI, but a huge fan of bottom line.


lagereek

« Reply #26 on: February 27, 2012, 02:21 »
0
Why is this important?  all I care about is the monthly net pay,  sod the rest.

So if you had 100 images and made $10,000 per month or had 10,000 images and made $100 per month this would mean nothing to you?

Sure!  it will give an indication, I agree but in the end of the day, its the net result that counts. Here is an example: I have certain images in my port, that are always selling for extremely good money, now if I were to include these in the overall RPI, it would be slightly misleading, since they would increase the RPI by a huge amount. See what I mean?

best.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #27 on: February 27, 2012, 07:18 »
0
Why is this important?  all I care about is the monthly net pay,  sod the rest.

So if you had 100 images and made $10,000 per month or had 10,000 images and made $100 per month this would mean nothing to you?

Sure!  it will give an indication, I agree but in the end of the day, its the net result that counts. Here is an example: I have certain images in my port, that are always selling for extremely good money, now if I were to include these in the overall RPI, it would be slightly misleading, since they would increase the RPI by a huge amount. See what I mean?

best.

Yes, I see what you mean. This isn't a scientific poll meant to figure in all of the variables. It's a loose ballpark to get a basic idea on trending and I think it does the job.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #28 on: February 27, 2012, 07:28 »
0
It's very simple, it tells you how good (or bad) stock photographer you really are. If that's important to you, than this stat is important to you, if it's not, you don't bother with it anyway
You think this is the only way you can establish it?  :D

So if you happen to support a few to many low earners you might be bad, but if you did not you might be good.....?

This is not a race for me, it is a way to earn extra income I really need. If I reach my personal sales target, I am good, if I did not, the industry is bad!  Does it not work for most of you that way?  ;D

Oh yes, and my congratulations to the big winners!  ;)

PS wut I am rooting for you, are you the hat or the iron?

There are people with a $10 a month RPI? WOW, that's fantastic. Is there some reason why I shouldn't believe that?

Lets see 3000 images, x $10 = $30,000 a month? Please buy one of the agencies and change the commission to 50% for all of us. (exclusive only of course) so we can "punish" the low pay/percentage sites. At $360,000 a year, someone could afford to make an artist friendly agency.

$10 a month and 200 pictures? Dang, that person needs to have 2000 photos and bank it.

Of course if it's someone with one photo on Alamy that sells once a year, their RPI is easily $10 a month.

And there lies the flaw in RPI. How many pictures, how much did they cost, how many agencies. The obvious also is I have some photos that have never sold in five years and probably never will. Best thing for me to do is remove them and make my RPI better.  ::)

Still not a fan of RPI, but a huge fan of bottom line.

I believe it. Why do I believe it? Because a few years ago I used to get well over $10 RPI on my macro stuff but not anymore. So, it's possible. While a lot of people think RPI is useless it has helped me track trending on my performance and make adjustments to where I spend my time. I've seen people who have a couple hundred images in their portfolio and tens of thousands of downloads. I'm guessing their RPI is a lot higher than the average showing in the poll.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2012, 07:37 by PaulieWalnuts »

Microbius

« Reply #29 on: February 27, 2012, 07:37 »
0
.....
There are people with a $10 a month RPI? WOW, that's fantastic. Is there some reason why I shouldn't believe that?


You are correct that it seems there is little point just asking what people's RPI is in a thread like this unless you also specify how it is to be calculated.
I have already said how I calculate mine. If others delete low earners and then don't take them into account, or only take into account images accepted etc. etc. they will get wildly different results.
Results that are of very little use from a business perspective, though they may be good for an ego boost if that kind of thing floats your boat.
This seems to be the source of the arguments on this thread.

« Reply #30 on: February 27, 2012, 08:00 »
0

And there lies the flaw in RPI. How many pictures, how much did they cost, how many agencies. The obvious also is I have some photos that have never sold in five years and probably never will. Best thing for me to do is remove them and make my RPI better.  ::)


There's really no flaw in RPI if you calculate it correctly.  TOTAL income across all agencies divided by TOTAL images in your port (every image you've created for the purpose of microstock).

Playing with the numbers (not counting the poor selling or rejected shots) is like saying "I make $50,000 a year at my job, but about half the time I sit around doing nothing, so I really make $100,000!"   

An intelligent forecaster and analyst knows how to calculate an honest RPI and use it to his/her advantage. Someone with a shrinking RPI may  try justifying a poor number by claiming it's unimportant or deceptive, but those folks are shooting themselves in the foot.  The truth is it's an honest number (if calculated correctly!) that will tell you which direction you're REALLY going and if it's time to alter what you're doing.

Microbius

« Reply #31 on: February 27, 2012, 08:04 »
0
^^lol, what I was trying to say but failed to!

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #32 on: February 27, 2012, 08:06 »
0
Of course if it's someone with one photo on Alamy that sells once a year, their RPI is easily $10 a month.
Not quite: their RPI could be $10 a month, or it could be much less. Depends.

« Reply #33 on: February 27, 2012, 11:07 »
0
does low earners/new agencies enter here?

they should but then it would bring RPI way lower..

« Reply #34 on: February 27, 2012, 11:19 »
0
For me the analysis is more valuable in comparing my own images - for example Editorial with Creative content on IS, I find that m RPI is about 2.5 times higher on creative images. What would be more interesting would be matching RPI figures with portfolios, but I suspect not too many are going to volunteer that info!

« Reply #35 on: February 27, 2012, 11:26 »
0
Just to reiterate, the "honest" way to track RPI is: TOTAL income across all agencies divided by TOTAL images in your port (every image you've created for the purpose of microstock).

Adding results from more agencies, no matter how large or small, will only drive RPI higher.  It would not decrease it. 

rubyroo

« Reply #36 on: February 27, 2012, 11:31 »
0
Just to reiterate, the "honest" way to track RPI is: TOTAL income across all agencies divided by TOTAL images in your port (every image you've created for the purpose of microstock).

Yep.  That's exactly how I calculated mine.  If anyone's doing it differently to that, it might be worth re-starting the poll with the desired calculation at the top, so that all entries are truly comparable.

« Reply #37 on: February 27, 2012, 11:32 »
0
Just to reiterate, the "honest" way to track RPI is: TOTAL income across all agencies divided by TOTAL images in your port (every image you've created for the purpose of microstock).

Adding results from more agencies, no matter how large or small, will only drive RPI higher.  It would not decrease it. 

only if you do as you say its correct which I agree

wut

« Reply #38 on: February 27, 2012, 11:39 »
0
Just to reiterate, the "honest" way to track RPI is: TOTAL income across all agencies divided by TOTAL images in your port (every image you've created for the purpose of microstock).

Adding results from more agencies, no matter how large or small, will only drive RPI higher.  It would not decrease it. 

Total or average? It's a bit confusing, because if you add the numbers (IS 908+SS 1022+CS 4569 etc) the number becomes huge. And your next sentence contradicts that. It makes some sense to me to either count for every image you've ever created for MS, but not really, since you don't even postprocess, keyword and upload 90%+ of them (at least I don't), it would make most sense to take into account every image you've ever submitted. Or even the average or the agency with the biggest port isn't so bad either

« Reply #39 on: February 27, 2012, 11:45 »
0
yep total submitted sounds the more accurate, not every single frame we have shoot

steheap

  • Author of best selling "Get Started in Stock"

« Reply #40 on: February 27, 2012, 11:46 »
0
Interesting question about how to do this!

I have a separate set of folders of images I have uploaded somewhere (not necessarily to all sites), and that contains 3784 images. My largest portfolio actually for sale on a site is about 3000. I had worked out RPI on a site by site basis last year by looking at the online files on each site and dividing that into the earnings from that site, so it told me how much each site was contributing in terms of revenue per image online - the answer was $0.70 per online image per month. If I take the earnings in January ($1144) divided by the total set of images I have created and uploaded at least once (3784) I get $0.30 per created image per month.

Now the big question is - does any of this help us very much???

Steve

PS - if you want to see the details per site it is here: http://www.backyardsilver.com/2011/12/earnings-per-image-what-can-you-make-from-each-photo/

« Reply #41 on: February 27, 2012, 11:57 »
0
Now the big question is - does any of this help us very much???

it does if you can change (if needed) the subjects you are approaching, basically if you are willing to change the way you do stock, overall it makes a lot of sense but it combines a lot stuff such as: money, time, gear, props, research, skills, keywording etc..


« Reply #42 on: February 27, 2012, 12:12 »
0
It's very simple, it tells you how good (or bad) stock photographer you really are. If that's important to you, than this stat is important to you, if it's not, you don't bother with it anyway
It doesn't really tell you that. It might tell you how large your sensor is, or that you are not favoured in iStock's search engine or that your preferred subjects aren't "HCV" or lots of other stuff that isn't immediately apparent.

wut

« Reply #43 on: February 27, 2012, 12:17 »
0
It's very simple, it tells you how good (or bad) stock photographer you really are. If that's important to you, than this stat is important to you, if it's not, you don't bother with it anyway
It doesn't really tell you that. It might tell you how large your sensor is, or that you are not favoured in iStock's search engine or that your preferred subjects aren't "HCV" or lots of other stuff that isn't immediately apparent.

But isn't it your fault that your subjects are not HCV? And IS, the way it is now for most indies, can't affect RPI much ;)

steheap

  • Author of best selling "Get Started in Stock"

« Reply #44 on: February 27, 2012, 13:18 »
0
I got 24c per online image per month on Shutterstock and 19c per online image on iStock. Earnings on iStock are lower in total because I don't have as many online images, so I think both ways of analysis (by site and overall) are interesting and perhaps useful.

If only I could work out before I take the shot which ones are going to be successful, I could be really efficient!! ;D

I see this sort of thing as interesting, but not particularly useful in terms of what I do next, to be honest.

Steve

« Reply #45 on: February 27, 2012, 13:21 »
0
I see this sort of thing as interesting, but not particularly useful in terms of what I do next, to be honest.

me too unless I start shooting a lot less and spending a lot more

RacePhoto

« Reply #46 on: February 27, 2012, 15:18 »
0
^^lol, what I was trying to say but failed to!

Here's what I'm trying to get at: "I believe it. Why do I believe it? Because a few years ago I used to get well over $10 RPI on my macro stuff but not anymore. So, it's possible." Hey but isn't Macro, this a MICROSTOCK site and Microstock pole? If not then I can understand, but someone getting a monthly Return Per Image of $10 on Microstock is fairly difficult to believe, unless they have maybe 30 agencies and that's how they get to five times higher than the high, $2 a month claims!

Am I reading this wrong? $10 a month per image, every month? Darn that's amazing. That's $120 a year, per image! I guess there is big money in microstock after all?
Of course if it's someone with one photo on Alamy that sells once a year, their RPI is easily $10 a month.
Not quite: their RPI could be $10 a month, or it could be much less. Depends.

Sorry again but numbers are numbers and math isn't an opinion or depends. It either IS or ISN'T. One sale per year for $120 commission, with only one image, is $10 RPI per month. Pretty much as easy as it gets?

I know Paulie is trying to ask a nice simple question and see what's up with the marketplace, but how it's calculated needs to be explained and I'm skeptical that so many people are making big numbers Per Month, Per Image, on micro alone.

Even using Paulie's nice clear math explanation, someone with 1000 images is making $10,000 a month, $120 grand a year, on Micro? Really? Darn I'm impressed! One person says they do? Even the $7 RPI per month is something worth an award. $84,000 a year on Micro. That's super! Nice work.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2012, 15:24 by RacePhoto »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #47 on: February 27, 2012, 15:25 »
0

Of course if it's someone with one photo on Alamy that sells once a year, their RPI is easily $10 a month.
Not quite: their RPI could be $10 a month, or it could be much less. Depends.
Sorry again but numbers are numbers and math isn't an opinion or depends. It either IS or ISN'T. One sale per year for $120 commission, with only one image, is $10 RPI per month. Pretty much as easy as it gets?
You didn't say anything in your original post about $120 commission. You seemed to imply that that was a fixed amount, which it certainly isn't. You can get well over $120 for a commisssion, or much, must less. The latter, sadly, seems more common nowadays, at least for those frequenting the forums.

RacePhoto

« Reply #48 on: February 27, 2012, 16:16 »
0

Of course if it's someone with one photo on Alamy that sells once a year, their RPI is easily $10 a month.
Not quite: their RPI could be $10 a month, or it could be much less. Depends.
Sorry again but numbers are numbers and math isn't an opinion or depends. It either IS or ISN'T. One sale per year for $120 commission, with only one image, is $10 RPI per month. Pretty much as easy as it gets?
You didn't say anything in your original post about $120 commission. You seemed to imply that that was a fixed amount, which it certainly isn't. You can get well over $120 for a commisssion, or much, must less. The latter, sadly, seems more common nowadays, at least for those frequenting the forums.

Yes you are correct, it was about, one image, one sale, RPI = 1/12th of that. Plus I used Alamy and that contradicted my own arguments because Alamy isn't microstock.

Obviously the person with a $10 a month, per image RPI isn't selling on SS or ThinkStock where it would take 40 downlaods of every image they own, on average, ever month, to make $10 RPI. (extend that out and it means every single image, gets downloaded on an average of 480 times a year!) Now you see why I'm skeptical of the poll and the $10 a month RPI?

We're also assuming Dollars. I remember a few years back when someone said their knew someone making five figures on Microstock and when we pushed for facts, it was South African Rands or something. 8 per dollar, 12 per Pound. And for all I know, some people include the two decimal places when they are talking five figure incomes.  ::)

Sometimes there are things lost in the translation. Like what is a RPI per month? (not year) And if I remember right the usual claim is an average of $2 beck when Micro was hot and sales were good before subs and price cutting everywhere took over. $1 a month would be pretty hot if you ask me. I can see an IS exclusive getting more. Someone with a bunch of agencies doing what's normal would be $3 a month, average, for their whole collection.

$10 a month RPI? Microstock only? I'm finding it difficult to accept.
 

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #49 on: March 01, 2012, 18:16 »
0

Of course if it's someone with one photo on Alamy that sells once a year, their RPI is easily $10 a month.
Not quite: their RPI could be $10 a month, or it could be much less. Depends.
Sorry again but numbers are numbers and math isn't an opinion or depends. It either IS or ISN'T. One sale per year for $120 commission, with only one image, is $10 RPI per month. Pretty much as easy as it gets?
You didn't say anything in your original post about $120 commission. You seemed to imply that that was a fixed amount, which it certainly isn't. You can get well over $120 for a commisssion, or much, must less. The latter, sadly, seems more common nowadays, at least for those frequenting the forums.

Yes you are correct, it was about, one image, one sale, RPI = 1/12th of that. Plus I used Alamy and that contradicted my own arguments because Alamy isn't microstock.

Obviously the person with a $10 a month, per image RPI isn't selling on SS or ThinkStock where it would take 40 downlaods of every image they own, on average, ever month, to make $10 RPI. (extend that out and it means every single image, gets downloaded on an average of 480 times a year!) Now you see why I'm skeptical of the poll and the $10 a month RPI?

We're also assuming Dollars. I remember a few years back when someone said their knew someone making five figures on Microstock and when we pushed for facts, it was South African Rands or something. 8 per dollar, 12 per Pound. And for all I know, some people include the two decimal places when they are talking five figure incomes.  ::)

Sometimes there are things lost in the translation. Like what is a RPI per month? (not year) And if I remember right the usual claim is an average of $2 beck when Micro was hot and sales were good before subs and price cutting everywhere took over. $1 a month would be pretty hot if you ask me. I can see an IS exclusive getting more. Someone with a bunch of agencies doing what's normal would be $3 a month, average, for their whole collection.

$10 a month RPI? Microstock only? I'm finding it difficult to accept.
 

I recently saw a contributor that has a couple hundred images and over 100,000 downloads. I wouldn't call that average. I'd say that's some spectacular performance and exponentially above average. Could they have deleted thousands of images? Maybe. Looking at their work, I doubt it. Excellent, well edited, highly sellable stuff. I'd guess they have a massively high RPI and $10 wouldn't surprise me.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
5184 Views
Last post July 20, 2006, 06:02
by melking
17 Replies
4398 Views
Last post March 10, 2015, 17:55
by jamiehooper
15 Replies
5593 Views
Last post July 01, 2016, 02:30
by weltreisendertj
17 Replies
5723 Views
Last post March 15, 2018, 11:07
by Stock4Me
42 Replies
10409 Views
Last post May 17, 2020, 18:04
by Tenebroso

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors