Author Topic: Quantity vs quality (Read 9217 times)

salaaaah · « **on:** February 16, 2017, 22:37 »

Would you rather give priority to quantity over quality in this era of microstock where million files are added monthly knowing your "one" super quality image will highly go unseen?

died from overdrawn

k_t_g · « **Reply #1 on:** February 16, 2017, 22:59 »

When people want it, they will find it.

You just provide them with quality.

spike · « **Reply #2 on:** February 17, 2017, 00:31 »

Why not both? Just not on the same outlets.

salaaaah · « **Reply #3 on:** February 17, 2017, 01:09 »

Quote from: spike on February 17, 2017, 00:31

Why not both? Just not on the same outlets.

What you mean by not on the same outlet?

died from overdrawn

spike · « **Reply #4 on:** February 17, 2017, 01:23 »

I mean that you can supply "quantity" to micro and "quality" to macro

sharpshot · « **Reply #5 on:** February 17, 2017, 02:55 »

Quality is highly subjective. Some of what I think are my best images sell very little but those that I almost didn't upload sell well. I see a few people with small portfolios packed with images that sell well but I think that would be hard for me to do. I just upload everything that I think might sell and let the buyers decide. The best images rise to the top in my portfolio and some of them are a real surprise.

Deciding what to sell on micro and macro sites is tricky as well. A high quality image on a macro site might never sell or only sell a few times and make less than it would on the microstock sites.

Rina21 · « **Reply #6 on:** February 25, 2017, 15:23 »

Hi, all! I think that quality should be at the first place. Becuse it's easy to shoot lot's of uninteresting photos but it's very hard to make one really valuable picture.

RAW · « **Reply #7 on:** February 25, 2017, 16:45 »

You need quality and lots of it.

Photodune Reject · « **Reply #8 on:** February 25, 2017, 17:43 »

Quote from: RAW on February 25, 2017, 16:45

You need quality and lots of it.

unless your 'Envato'

fritz · « **Reply #9 on:** February 25, 2017, 17:45 »

Quality is a much more complicated term than it appears! What is quality? Is it Coca-Cola,McDonald's,Burger King,Domino's or CNN!!!

Photodune Reject · « **Reply #10 on:** February 25, 2017, 17:54 »

Quote from: fritz on February 25, 2017, 17:45

Quality is a much more complicated term than it appears! What is quality? Is it Coca-Cola,McDonald's,Burger King,Domino's or CNN!!!

Yes, if you are drinking a coca-cola in McDonald's while watching CNN

fritz · « **Reply #11 on:** February 25, 2017, 18:28 »

Quote from: Photodune Reject on February 25, 2017, 17:54

Quote from: fritz on February 25, 2017, 17:45
Quality is a much more complicated term than it appears! What is quality? Is it Coca-Cola,McDonald's,Burger King,Domino's or CNN!!!

Yes, if you are drinking a coca-cola in McDonald's while watching CNN

Perfect quality combination!

Nikovsk · « **Reply #12 on:** February 26, 2017, 14:14 »

Quote from: fritz on February 25, 2017, 18:28

Quote from: Photodune Reject on February 25, 2017, 17:54
Quote from: fritz on February 25, 2017, 17:45
Quality is a much more complicated term than it appears! What is quality? Is it Coca-Cola,McDonald's,Burger King,Domino's or CNN!!!

Yes, if you are drinking a coca-cola in McDonald's while watching CNN
Perfect quality combination!

I love your sarcasm.

jamiehooper · « **Reply #13 on:** February 26, 2017, 14:32 »

"Quality" is really irrelevant in microstock. "Saleability" is the name of the game. This is a business, not an art gallery.
Any image that sells has to be competently done as a baseline; but to make money for the artist it needs to fit the buyer's needs.That means it should "tell a story" that many people want to tell, and for bonus points have impact in a small size. If not many artists are telling that story, you rise to the top.
In addition, I have seen (and I'll bet we've all seen) some of our top-selling images on one site fall flat on another. I don't know why that should be, but it is.
Month after month I find that about 3% of my images are providing 90% of my income. And, as I said, it's a different 3% for different sites.
Now, if I could just unlock the "magic formula" for that, I'd only have to submit a few images if each one sold really well. The holy grail of microstock!

Pauws99 · « **Reply #14 on:** February 26, 2017, 14:44 »

Quote from: jamiehooper on February 26, 2017, 14:32

"Quality" is really irrelevant in microstock. "Saleability" is the name of the game. This is a business, not an art gallery.
Any image that sells has to be competently done as a baseline; but to make money for the artist it needs to fit the buyer's needs.That means it should "tell a story" that many people want to tell, and for bonus points have impact in a small size. If not many artists are telling that story, you rise to the top.
In addition, I have seen (and I'll bet we've all seen) some of our top-selling images on one site fall flat on another. I don't know why that should be, but it is.
Month after month I find that about 3% of my images are providing 90% of my income. And, as I said, it's a different 3% for different sites.
Now, if I could just unlock the "magic formula" for that, I'd only have to submit a few images if each one sold really well. The holy grail of microstock!

Exactly......In business the term "quality" means fit for purpose if you use that definition things make more sense

cascoly · « **Reply #15 on:** February 26, 2017, 15:38 »

Quote from: sharpshot on February 17, 2017, 02:55

Quality is highly subjective. Some of what I think are my best images sell very little but those that I almost didn't upload sell well. I see a few people with small portfolios packed with images that sell well but I think that would be hard for me to do. I just upload everything that I think might sell and let the buyers decide. The best images rise to the top in my portfolio and some of them are a real surprise.

Deciding what to sell on micro and macro sites is tricky as well. A high quality image on a macro site might never sell or only sell a few times and make less than it would on the microstock sites.

same here - I upload if it's technically quality; I do most of my composition & cropping in camera.

also, with quantity you'll find more multiple sales - sometimes of very similar images

Harvepino · « **Reply #16 on:** February 26, 2017, 17:53 »

Some of my best sellers are images that I never expected to earn anything substantial. For that reason I wouldn't try to produce "quality" only. Volume and variety at acceptable quality level is my rule of the game.

cascoly · « **Reply #17 on:** February 26, 2017, 23:55 »

fwiw, note that those claiming quality most important are new to MSG and have no links to their portfolios

spike · « **Reply #18 on:** February 27, 2017, 03:18 »

Quote from: jamiehooper on February 26, 2017, 14:32

In addition, I have seen (and I'll bet we've all seen) some of our top-selling images on one site fall flat on another. I don't know why that should be, but it is.

Search engine variation / pure luck (if a buyer is present as you upload the pic, it'll get downloaded, boosted because of it in the search results, downloaded again due to this boost - positive feedback makes the first immediate download snowball the pic into a bestseller)

So it's not so much quality or quantity, it's something that we can't affect. Luck and search engines. But people need to have a feeling of control so they tell a story to themselves.

alno · « **Reply #19 on:** February 27, 2017, 04:25 »

Definitely quantity. And suitability for stock in general of course. There are really a lot of totally incompetent buyers who would buy real trash (frankly). And it costs very little time, effort and money to produce that trash, even in an semi-automated way sometimes, so why miss that opportunity. That's not a fine art gallery anyway.

everest · « **Reply #20 on:** February 27, 2017, 06:52 »

Always quality! People that defend quantity are usually wanabees that will not arrive anywhere, not in micro not in another field of photography. Quality will get you so far that someday you might even be miles away from micro and command much higher figures for your time and effort.

angelawaye · « **Reply #21 on:** February 27, 2017, 10:57 »

It feels like you can't win with quality in Micro anymore ... Hours spent on a photo only to be smothered with duplicates and spamming.

Bjorn999 · « **Reply #22 on:** February 28, 2017, 01:44 »

I believe that it is quantity. Assuming that, when you consider yourself to be a photographer, you already have a certain standard of quality that you use.
So don't go uploading technically trashy pictures, but don't go waiting for that one "Wow" pîcture, and upload only that, because you will end up selling nearly nothing.

outoftheblue · « **Reply #23 on:** February 28, 2017, 03:33 »

Quote from: spike on February 27, 2017, 03:18

So it's not so much quality or quantity, it's something that we can't affect. Luck and search engines.

Luck is not independent of quantity.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #24 on:** February 28, 2017, 03:57 »

Quote from: outoftheblue on February 28, 2017, 03:33

Quote from: spike on February 27, 2017, 03:18
So it's not so much quality or quantity, it's something that we can't affect. Luck and search engines.

Luck is not independent of quantity.

"the harder I work the luckier I get" Samuel Goldwyn

spike · « **Reply #25 on:** February 28, 2017, 04:04 »

Quote from: outoftheblue on February 28, 2017, 03:33

Quote from: spike on February 27, 2017, 03:18
So it's not so much quality or quantity, it's something that we can't affect. Luck and search engines.

Luck is not independent of quantity.

It's also not independent of quantity. What's your point?

outoftheblue · « **Reply #26 on:** February 28, 2017, 04:27 »

Quote from: spike on February 28, 2017, 04:04

Quote from: outoftheblue on February 28, 2017, 03:33
Quote from: spike on February 27, 2017, 03:18
So it's not so much quality or quantity, it's something that we can't affect. Luck and search engines.

Luck is not independent of quantity.

It's also not independent of quantity. What's your point?

Well, you said it's something that we can't affect: luck and search engines.
But it's not true because quantity affects luck, so we can affect luck by uploading more.

Bauman · « **Reply #27 on:** February 28, 2017, 04:44 »

70% quality 30% quantity

Bjorn999 · « **Reply #28 on:** February 28, 2017, 05:12 »

Quote from: outoftheblue on February 28, 2017, 03:33

Quote from: spike on February 27, 2017, 03:18
So it's not so much quality or quantity, it's something that we can't affect. Luck and search engines.

Luck is not independent of quantity.

Indeed, the more lotery tickets you buy, the more chances you have to win it...

spike · « **Reply #29 on:** February 28, 2017, 05:20 »

Quote from: outoftheblue on February 28, 2017, 04:27

Quote from: spike on February 28, 2017, 04:04
Quote from: outoftheblue on February 28, 2017, 03:33
Quote from: spike on February 27, 2017, 03:18
So it's not so much quality or quantity, it's something that we can't affect. Luck and search engines.

Luck is not independent of quantity.

It's also not independent of quantity. What's your point?

Well, you said it's something that we can't affect: luck and search engines.
But it's not true because quantity affects luck, so we can affect luck by uploading more.

Yeah; I misread your post, thought you were talking about quality.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #30 on:** February 28, 2017, 05:46 »

Quote from: Bjorn999 on February 28, 2017, 05:12

Quote from: outoftheblue on February 28, 2017, 03:33
Quote from: spike on February 27, 2017, 03:18
So it's not so much quality or quantity, it's something that we can't affect. Luck and search engines.

Luck is not independent of quantity.

Indeed, the more lotery tickets you buy, the more chances you have to win it...

Yep but thats to do with probability not "luck"

outoftheblue · « **Reply #31 on:** February 28, 2017, 05:57 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on February 28, 2017, 05:46

Quote from: Bjorn999 on February 28, 2017, 05:12
Quote from: outoftheblue on February 28, 2017, 03:33
Quote from: spike on February 27, 2017, 03:18
So it's not so much quality or quantity, it's something that we can't affect. Luck and search engines.

Luck is not independent of quantity.

Indeed, the more lotery tickets you buy, the more chances you have to win it...
Yep but thats to do with probability not "luck"

I have a probabilistic view of luck. In assence of any specific philosophical/religious reason to believe otherwise, the two coincide if the sample is large enough.

ShadySue · « **Reply #32 on:** February 28, 2017, 06:54 »

Quote from: outoftheblue on February 28, 2017, 05:57

Quote from: Pauws99 on February 28, 2017, 05:46
Quote from: Bjorn999 on February 28, 2017, 05:12
Quote from: outoftheblue on February 28, 2017, 03:33
Quote from: spike on February 27, 2017, 03:18
So it's not so much quality or quantity, it's something that we can't affect. Luck and search engines.

Luck is not independent of quantity.

Indeed, the more lotery tickets you buy, the more chances you have to win it...
Yep but thats to do with probability not "luck"

I have a probabilistic view of luck. In assence of any specific philosophical/religious reason to believe otherwise, the two coincide if the sample is large enough.

Yeah but if you buy 100 lottery tickets and win £10, you've lost.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #33 on:** February 28, 2017, 07:00 »

Quote from: outoftheblue on February 28, 2017, 05:57

Quote from: Pauws99 on February 28, 2017, 05:46
Quote from: Bjorn999 on February 28, 2017, 05:12
Quote from: outoftheblue on February 28, 2017, 03:33
Quote from: spike on February 27, 2017, 03:18
So it's not so much quality or quantity, it's something that we can't affect. Luck and search engines.

Luck is not independent of quantity.

Indeed, the more lotery tickets you buy, the more chances you have to win it...
Yep but thats to do with probability not "luck"

I have a probabilistic view of luck. In assence of any specific philosophical/religious reason to believe otherwise, the two coincide if the sample is large enough.

The larger the portfolio the less luck is a factor but in life there is always random chance....some people do win the lottery. But as you can't predict luck then doing the lottery and waiting for the jackpot is not a sound career choice any more than uploading 100 images and hoping a few will turn into mega best sellers.

zorba · « **Reply #34 on:** February 28, 2017, 09:23 »

Quote from: salaaaah on February 16, 2017, 22:37

Would you rather give priority to quantity over quality in this era of microstock where million files are added monthly knowing your "one" super quality image will highly go unseen?

died from overdrawn

There is no more this choice: bad quality doesn't sell anymore. You have to produce high quality in high quantity.

AYA · « **Reply #35 on:** February 28, 2017, 10:27 »

It's easy to look for a black and white answer but stock photography is a mature market, meaning that there is no easy answer. I think a lot of unhappy contributor miss the days when you could easily make money without much effort because there wasn't enough images to fill buyers needs but that was never going to last.

It's not just about quality and quantity anymore, it's about following trends, trying new techniques, going back and analyzing your sales and keyword success, getting your workflow in order, being consistent, finding and shooting niches... the list goes on!

It's hard work with high rewards it you are willing to evolve but stock photography in 2017 is not for the faint of heart and I get that it must be really tough for some of the forum members that have a family to support.

Just my two cents...

JimP · « **Reply #36 on:** February 28, 2017, 12:25 »

Quote from: jamiehooper on February 26, 2017, 14:32

"Quality" is really irrelevant in microstock. "Saleability" is the name of the game. This is a business, not an art gallery.
Any image that sells has to be competently done as a baseline; but to make money for the artist it needs to fit the buyer's needs.That means it should "tell a story" that many people want to tell, and for bonus points have impact in a small size. If not many artists are telling that story, you rise to the top.
In addition, I have seen (and I'll bet we've all seen) some of our top-selling images on one site fall flat on another. I don't know why that should be, but it is.
Month after month I find that about 3% of my images are providing 90% of my income. And, as I said, it's a different 3% for different sites.
Now, if I could just unlock the "magic formula" for that, I'd only have to submit a few images if each one sold really well. The holy grail of microstock!

You have it if saleability is the quality and then more quantity of those is the rest of answer.

Can't have an either or question when the right answer isn't one of the choices? Marketability, buyer demand, saleability, whatever it's called is more important than quantity or quality. Unless the word quality means what people want to buy, not just big, good looking images.

5000 average photos won't make as much as 1000 quality photos, and 100 marketable photos will beat all of that.

nazlisart · « **Reply #37 on:** February 28, 2017, 13:24 »

Quote from: jamiehooper on February 26, 2017, 14:32

Now, if I could just unlock the "magic formula" for that, I'd only have to submit a few images if each one sold really well. The holy grail of microstock!

If you find "magic potion" I give you half -NO- all of my Kingdom, for just a drop!!! I'll make it all back and then more the next month!

nazlisart · « **Reply #38 on:** February 28, 2017, 13:42 »

My experience as an illustrator is that the higher the quality the least easy to have your subject successfully copied and therefore "replaced" in sales. Subjects are more or less fixed and rarely something completely new comes to surface. Style is also very important - sometimes style equals niche - but a recognizable and desirable style is also high quality...

So my verdict for illustrations and vectors is that Quality is King!!!

Smiling Jack · « **Reply #39 on:** February 28, 2017, 15:41 »

Since all of my photo are aerials. I look for shots from the air that give a fresh view of marketable subjects.

EmberMike · « **Reply #40 on:** February 28, 2017, 16:43 »

Quote from: nazlisart on February 28, 2017, 13:42

So my verdict for illustrations and vectors is that Quality is King!!!

I agree. Unless you're one of those insanely productive illustrators who can crank out hundreds of thousands of images, I think the quality game is the better play. At least that's what I've experienced. In my limited experimentation with faster production of lower-quality images, the lower quality stuff just can't sell enough volume to keep up with a few high-end images.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #41 on:** February 28, 2017, 17:09 »

Quote from: EmberMike on February 28, 2017, 16:43

Quote from: nazlisart on February 28, 2017, 13:42
So my verdict for illustrations and vectors is that Quality is King!!!

I agree. Unless you're one of those insanely productive illustrators who can crank out hundreds of thousands of images, I think the quality game is the better play. At least that's what I've experienced. In my limited experimentation with faster production of lower-quality images, the lower quality stuff just can't sell enough volume to keep up with a few high-end images.

As a non-illustrator I'm just curious are those illustrations with various variations produced by automated software in some way?

nazlisart · « **Reply #42 on:** March 01, 2017, 13:55 »

Quote

As a non-illustrator I'm just curious are those illustrations with various variations produced by automated software in some way?

I don't know of any automated software option but if you have some experience you can organize your workflow so that you can easily produce variations (e.g. have the color & shading in separate layers so that you have variations by just changing the color). Again in my experience if the theme sells and it is well done variations just slightly enhance or refresh sales if it doesn't you just waste time you could put in a new illustration. The best use of variations is when a theme is proven its sale-ability.

miR156 · « **Reply #43 on:** March 02, 2017, 00:11 »

I think the key is to have quality photos in as many subjects/categories as possible.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #44 on:** March 02, 2017, 02:47 »

Quote from: nazlisart on March 01, 2017, 13:55

Quote
As a non-illustrator I'm just curious are those illustrations with various variations produced by automated software in some way?

I don't know of any automated software option but if you have some experience you can organize your workflow so that you can easily produce variations (e.g. have the color & shading in separate layers so that you have variations by just changing the color). Again in my experience if the theme sells and it is well done variations just slightly enhance or refresh sales if it doesn't you just waste time you could put in a new illustration. The best use of variations is when a theme is proven its sale-ability.

Thanks....I can only conclude that some of the more "prolific" producers have a very high boredom threshold

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Quantity vs quality (Read 9217 times)

RAW

Photodune Reject

Photodune Reject

Harvepino

alno

outoftheblue

outoftheblue

outoftheblue

JimP

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors