pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: shutterstock earnings question  (Read 1772 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

« on: October 12, 2018, 23:58 »
0
So... thinking of uploading to shutterstock...

Then took a look at a few numbers, did some math, and then noticed a few posts talking about 'spammy' portfolios (i.e., 1000 pictures of a pair of shoes, from 0-360 degrees in 0.3 degree increments, etc)...

If my math is correct, it seems on 'average' right now you'd need to have a portfolio size of about 10,000 images to 'make' about $600/year? Does that sound right? (Of course, I realize there would be outliers on both sides), but that seems to the case?

Any agreements/disagreements?


« Reply #1 on: October 13, 2018, 00:48 »
0
I wouldn't really worry about the "average" as it is skewed towards the huge numbers of mediocre or worse images. If you upload a sample of your images and extrapolate your earnings from them it will give you more idea.

« Reply #2 on: October 13, 2018, 01:50 »
+3
Way off the mark for me anyway :)


.. thankfully otherwise I wouldn't bother doing stock at all

The last time we got any data before the site was shut down (microstock.top it gleaned data from the SS website) was that of all the image producers only 10% had ports in excess of 1,000 images and that 80% of the images uploaded in any week were down to the top 200 image producers.

Outfits like Africa Studio and Monkey Business images.

The biggest producers were in vectors.

50% of the images didn't show sales (when we could still see undiscovered on the SS site)

So there's still plenty to work on so long as you avoid Christmas, pizza, burgers cups of coffee etc.

I'd say 90% of the so called artists that throw their stuff into Shutterstock don't actually have much of a clue what stock is let alone photography.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2018, 15:36 by Sammy the Cat »

« Reply #3 on: October 13, 2018, 08:30 »
+1
Okay, interesting.

Have you found the portfolios that 'spam' certain types of content (i.e., say 40,000+ images of a boat, or 15,000+ images of a piece of furniture) have affected discoverability of some of your items? Or somehow you still seem to perform well in spite of that?

« Reply #4 on: October 13, 2018, 08:33 »
0
Okay, interesting.

Have you found the portfolios that 'spam' certain types of content (i.e., say 40,000+ images of a boat, or 15,000+ images of a piece of furniture) have affected discoverability of some of your items? Or somehow you still seem to perform well in spite of that?
You will get a range of opinion on this too....for me not as much as I might expect as far as I can tell. It may be because I'm a relatively small player with a somewhat eclectic (some might say random) port of more niche pics rather than the hugely popular subjects.

« Reply #5 on: October 13, 2018, 11:26 »
+2
Okay, interesting.

Have you found the portfolios that 'spam' certain types of content (i.e., say 40,000+ images of a boat, or 15,000+ images of a piece of furniture) have affected discoverability of some of your items? Or somehow you still seem to perform well in spite of that?

I know which portfolio you are talking about and its ridiculous! 

Thankfully I don't do many boats but I did do some of a little rustic harbor which two months later had been drowned out by some asshat submitting 250+ shots of the same place

I wish they'd get that kind of crapola under control  :'(

I tend to research under represented items and hope no one then copies and buries them.  I've been pretty lucky so far.

Like Pauws99 I do a range of subjects and try to keep it niche.

Which is another reason I  don't post on the SS forum because with links to your portfolio you just attract copy cats
« Last Edit: October 13, 2018, 15:35 by Sammy the Cat »

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #6 on: October 13, 2018, 12:49 »
0
So... thinking of uploading to shutterstock...

Then took a look at a few numbers, did some math, and then noticed a few posts talking about 'spammy' portfolios (i.e., 1000 pictures of a pair of shoes, from 0-360 degrees in 0.3 degree increments, etc)...

If my math is correct, it seems on 'average' right now you'd need to have a portfolio size of about 10,000 images to 'make' about $600/year? Does that sound right? (Of course, I realize there would be outliers on both sides), but that seems to the case?

Any agreements/disagreements?

No, that calculation is way off, even for average standards. But it all depends on the quality of your content, and not so much on quantity. Of course it always helps to have MORE content of GOOD quality, but MORE content of MEDIOCRE quality won't increase your revenue.

I also think spammy portfolios dilute their own RPI as their content is repetitive and becomes oversaturated.

« Reply #7 on: October 13, 2018, 13:47 »
+3
If my math is correct, it seems on 'average' right now you'd need to have a portfolio size of about 10,000 images to 'make' about $600/year? Does that sound right? (Of course, I realize there would be outliers on both sides), but that seems to the case?

Any agreements/disagreements?

If someone isn't making a 4-figure amount per MONTH from 10,000 images they need to seriously work on improving their photography skills and choosing what they photograph better.

$50 per month from 10,000 images means you've taken snapshots on your way to the bus over and over again. Which some people actually have.  ;)

« Reply #8 on: October 13, 2018, 18:59 »
0
Okay, interesting.

Have you found the portfolios that 'spam' certain types of content (i.e., say 40,000+ images of a boat, or 15,000+ images of a piece of furniture) have affected discoverability of some of your items? Or somehow you still seem to perform well in spite of that?

tbh, those portfolios are hurting themselves even. Nobody in the middle of a project with a deadline wants to scan through thousands of incredibly similar images. I'm sure, like me, they search ... grab the one that will work, and proceed with their work.

« Reply #9 on: October 13, 2018, 21:55 »
0
True... but, don't people simply type something in the shutterstock search engine like "boat", and if 80,000 images of one profile boat pop's up - they are just going to go with it because they don't have the time to figure out that on page 123 (or whatever) that there are new pictures of boats?

Okay, interesting.

Have you found the portfolios that 'spam' certain types of content (i.e., say 40,000+ images of a boat, or 15,000+ images of a piece of furniture) have affected discoverability of some of your items? Or somehow you still seem to perform well in spite of that?

tbh, those portfolios are hurting themselves even. Nobody in the middle of a project with a deadline wants to scan through thousands of incredibly similar images. I'm sure, like me, they search ... grab the one that will work, and proceed with their work.

« Reply #10 on: October 14, 2018, 00:26 »
+3
So... thinking of uploading to shutterstock...

Then took a look at a few numbers, did some math, and then noticed a few posts talking about 'spammy' portfolios (i.e., 1000 pictures of a pair of shoes, from 0-360 degrees in 0.3 degree increments, etc)...

If my math is correct, it seems on 'average' right now you'd need to have a portfolio size of about 10,000 images to 'make' about $600/year? Does that sound right? (Of course, I realize there would be outliers on both sides), but that seems to the case?

Any agreements/disagreements?

That is a ridiculous notion and would illustrate zero understanding of the stock photography market. You could have 1 million photos that only earn $600 a year if they are of the wrong subjects. Or you could have 100 photos that make several thousand per year. Anyone posting hundreds of similars also has little clue about the business of stock photography. 10,000 for $600 per year is an epic fail financially and creatively and suggests one should be doing something they're better at to make a living.

« Reply #11 on: October 14, 2018, 01:46 »
+1
pkphotos!!...  correct 100% and there are tons of examples of this. I know a lifestyle guy using pro fashion models, 1300 pics in his port and earning well over 3K per month!  and what about that Russian woman with her dreamy sci-fi pics whos well over 5K per month and a port of barely 1500 shots.

A travel photographer have 14K files in his port and hardly reaching payouts.

This is a common rookie mistake to mix up quantity with quality and high commercial value images.

« Reply #12 on: October 14, 2018, 04:30 »
0
.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2018, 04:36 by msg2018 »

« Reply #13 on: October 14, 2018, 19:02 »
+2
It's a matter of figuring out what the market wants, and having images that can be legitimately keyworded to as many needs as possible. Boy playing with a puppy outside could (besides the obvious) have keywords like friends, pals, buddies, friendship, companion, love, and playful. Note that none of those keywords would be picked up by an AI keyword program based only on the objects it could detect.
Before I take a photo for stock I ask myself "why would anyone want this?"
Then, as I go through candidates to upload I ask myself "why would lots of people want this?"
If I can't imagine a good answer I don't spend any more time on it and move on.

So, to answer your question, no; size of portfolio is not (necessarily) reflective of sales. My portfolio has only about 600 images, but last year on SS they earned me $1,500.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #14 on: October 15, 2018, 08:05 »
+1
So... thinking of uploading to shutterstock...

Then took a look at a few numbers, did some math, and then noticed a few posts talking about 'spammy' portfolios (i.e., 1000 pictures of a pair of shoes, from 0-360 degrees in 0.3 degree increments, etc)...

If my math is correct, it seems on 'average' right now you'd need to have a portfolio size of about 10,000 images to 'make' about $600/year? Does that sound right? (Of course, I realize there would be outliers on both sides), but that seems to the case?

Any agreements/disagreements?

What are the photos?

Numbers, how many, don't matter. You could make $1000 a year on 20 photos, if they are the right shots.  :) And make $100 a year from thousands of spammy, repeating, or useless shots.

Just start uploading and find out, and please do even imagine that those 2,000 shots of a shoe will make anything. Total waste of time.

« Reply #15 on: October 15, 2018, 11:11 »
+1
So... thinking of uploading to shutterstock...

Then took a look at a few numbers, did some math, and then noticed a few posts talking about 'spammy' portfolios (i.e., 1000 pictures of a pair of shoes, from 0-360 degrees in 0.3 degree increments, etc)...

If my math is correct, it seems on 'average' right now you'd need to have a portfolio size of about 10,000 images to 'make' about $600/year? Does that sound right? (Of course, I realize there would be outliers on both sides), but that seems to the case?

Any agreements/disagreements?

No.

I have less than 10,000 and even if I took a below average daily stats I would be well over that....in a month. Today, for example, I currently have $211.68. A mix of large clip packs, Enhanced, ODDs and SODs plus Subs.

I'd put good money on my earnings being no where near the top and certainly not an outlier.

« Reply #16 on: October 15, 2018, 12:55 »
0
What are "ODD"s, "SOD"s, & subs? Also - I didn't know you could upload clip packs to ss?

So... thinking of uploading to shutterstock...

Then took a look at a few numbers, did some math, and then noticed a few posts talking about 'spammy' portfolios (i.e., 1000 pictures of a pair of shoes, from 0-360 degrees in 0.3 degree increments, etc)...

If my math is correct, it seems on 'average' right now you'd need to have a portfolio size of about 10,000 images to 'make' about $600/year? Does that sound right? (Of course, I realize there would be outliers on both sides), but that seems to the case?

Any agreements/disagreements?

No.

I have less than 10,000 and even if I took a below average daily stats I would be well over that....in a month. Today, for example, I currently have $211.68. A mix of large clip packs, Enhanced, ODDs and SODs plus Subs.

I'd put good money on my earnings being no where near the top and certainly not an outlier.


« Reply #17 on: October 15, 2018, 13:42 »
0
What are "ODD"s, "SOD"s, & subs? Also - I didn't know you could upload clip packs to ss?

So... thinking of uploading to shutterstock...

Then took a look at a few numbers, did some math, and then noticed a few posts talking about 'spammy' portfolios (i.e., 1000 pictures of a pair of shoes, from 0-360 degrees in 0.3 degree increments, etc)...

If my math is correct, it seems on 'average' right now you'd need to have a portfolio size of about 10,000 images to 'make' about $600/year? Does that sound right? (Of course, I realize there would be outliers on both sides), but that seems to the case?

Any agreements/disagreements?

No.

I have less than 10,000 and even if I took a below average daily stats I would be well over that....in a month. Today, for example, I currently have $211.68. A mix of large clip packs, Enhanced, ODDs and SODs plus Subs.

I'd put good money on my earnings being no where near the top and certainly not an outlier.

Do you submit to SS?

Subs = Subscription
ODD's = On Demand Downloads
SOD's = Single and Other downloads
Clip Pack = a type of footage sale (there are also Cart Sales)

When you look at your earnings page, these are all detailed on the top heading.

« Reply #18 on: October 15, 2018, 14:18 »
+1
So... thinking of uploading to shutterstock...

Then took a look at a few numbers, did some math, and then noticed a few posts talking about 'spammy' portfolios (i.e., 1000 pictures of a pair of shoes, from 0-360 degrees in 0.3 degree increments, etc)...

If my math is correct, it seems on 'average' right now you'd need to have a portfolio size of about 10,000 images to 'make' about $600/year? Does that sound right? (Of course, I realize there would be outliers on both sides), but that seems to the case?

Any agreements/disagreements?

No.

I have less than 10,000 and even if I took a below average daily stats I would be well over that....in a month. Today, for example, I currently have $211.68. A mix of large clip packs, Enhanced, ODDs and SODs plus Subs.

I'd put good money on my earnings being no where near the top and certainly not an outlier.

Sure its possible! a couple of years back every single month was between 2500-3000 a month, easily! no problems at all. Something happened about a year back and that was it! and for some of us that became a doomsday and today I just let my port hang in there, dont upload anymore and since new images dont even see the light of day its no point!
Adobe/Ft have come on strong and fill the loss pretty well and so has Pond-5!  so in the end of day the loss at SS is made up!

« Reply #19 on: October 17, 2018, 10:03 »
0
So... thinking of uploading to shutterstock...

Then took a look at a few numbers, did some math, and then noticed a few posts talking about 'spammy' portfolios (i.e., 1000 pictures of a pair of shoes, from 0-360 degrees in 0.3 degree increments, etc)...

If my math is correct, it seems on 'average' right now you'd need to have a portfolio size of about 10,000 images to 'make' about $600/year? Does that sound right? (Of course, I realize there would be outliers on both sides), but that seems to the case?

Any agreements/disagreements?

No.

I have less than 10,000 and even if I took a below average daily stats I would be well over that....in a month. Today, for example, I currently have $211.68. A mix of large clip packs, Enhanced, ODDs and SODs plus Subs.

I'd put good money on my earnings being no where near the top and certainly not an outlier.

Sure its possible! a couple of years back every single month was between 2500-3000 a month, easily! no problems at all. Something happened about a year back and that was it! and for some of us that became a doomsday and today I just let my port hang in there, dont upload anymore and since new images dont even see the light of day its no point!
Adobe/Ft have come on strong and fill the loss pretty well and so has Pond-5!  so in the end of day the loss at SS is made up!

You need to upload more gears and bearings 922 mighty not be enough.

« Reply #20 on: October 17, 2018, 10:21 »
0
So... thinking of uploading to shutterstock...

Then took a look at a few numbers, did some math, and then noticed a few posts talking about 'spammy' portfolios (i.e., 1000 pictures of a pair of shoes, from 0-360 degrees in 0.3 degree increments, etc)...

If my math is correct, it seems on 'average' right now you'd need to have a portfolio size of about 10,000 images to 'make' about $600/year? Does that sound right? (Of course, I realize there would be outliers on both sides), but that seems to the case?

Any agreements/disagreements?

No.

I have less than 10,000 and even if I took a below average daily stats I would be well over that....in a month. Today, for example, I currently have $211.68. A mix of large clip packs, Enhanced, ODDs and SODs plus Subs.

I'd put good money on my earnings being no where near the top and certainly not an outlier.

Sure its possible! a couple of years back every single month was between 2500-3000 a month, easily! no problems at all. Something happened about a year back and that was it! and for some of us that became a doomsday and today I just let my port hang in there, dont upload anymore and since new images dont even see the light of day its no point!
Adobe/Ft have come on strong and fill the loss pretty well and so has Pond-5!  so in the end of day the loss at SS is made up!

You need to upload more gears and bearings 922 mighty not be enough.

Oh Yadi Yadi!!  I will although the big bucks comes from some 900 oil and gas industrial workers and plants!!  thats where I got one of the biggest sales during 1917 through SPL, 11.000 bucks Thank you Sir! and for a single AD-picture, beat that sonny if you can!!
« Last Edit: October 17, 2018, 10:28 by derek »

« Reply #21 on: October 17, 2018, 10:45 »
0
So... thinking of uploading to shutterstock...

Then took a look at a few numbers, did some math, and then noticed a few posts talking about 'spammy' portfolios (i.e., 1000 pictures of a pair of shoes, from 0-360 degrees in 0.3 degree increments, etc)...

If my math is correct, it seems on 'average' right now you'd need to have a portfolio size of about 10,000 images to 'make' about $600/year? Does that sound right? (Of course, I realize there would be outliers on both sides), but that seems to the case?

Any agreements/disagreements?

No.

I have less than 10,000 and even if I took a below average daily stats I would be well over that....in a month. Today, for example, I currently have $211.68. A mix of large clip packs, Enhanced, ODDs and SODs plus Subs.

I'd put good money on my earnings being no where near the top and certainly not an outlier.

Sure its possible! a couple of years back every single month was between 2500-3000 a month, easily! no problems at all. Something happened about a year back and that was it! and for some of us that became a doomsday and today I just let my port hang in there, dont upload anymore and since new images dont even see the light of day its no point!
Adobe/Ft have come on strong and fill the loss pretty well and so has Pond-5!  so in the end of day the loss at SS is made up!

You need to upload more gears and bearings 922 mighty not be enough.

Oh Yadi Yadi!!  I will although the big bucks comes from some 900 oil and gas industrial workers and plants!!  thats where I got one of the biggest sales during 1917 through SPL, 11.000 bucks Thank you Sir! and for a single AD-picture, beat that sonny if you can!!

Good luck, good sale

What microstock site is SPL? Don't the buyers feel bad when they could get the same photo from istock Dreamstime Shutter for $10?
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 08:33 by YadaYadaYada »

« Reply #22 on: October 17, 2018, 10:53 »
0
So... thinking of uploading to shutterstock...

Then took a look at a few numbers, did some math, and then noticed a few posts talking about 'spammy' portfolios (i.e., 1000 pictures of a pair of shoes, from 0-360 degrees in 0.3 degree increments, etc)...

If my math is correct, it seems on 'average' right now you'd need to have a portfolio size of about 10,000 images to 'make' about $600/year? Does that sound right? (Of course, I realize there would be outliers on both sides), but that seems to the case?

Any agreements/disagreements?

No.

I have less than 10,000 and even if I took a below average daily stats I would be well over that....in a month. Today, for example, I currently have $211.68. A mix of large clip packs, Enhanced, ODDs and SODs plus Subs.

I'd put good money on my earnings being no where near the top and certainly not an outlier.

Sure its possible! a couple of years back every single month was between 2500-3000 a month, easily! no problems at all. Something happened about a year back and that was it! and for some of us that became a doomsday and today I just let my port hang in there, dont upload anymore and since new images dont even see the light of day its no point!
Adobe/Ft have come on strong and fill the loss pretty well and so has Pond-5!  so in the end of day the loss at SS is made up!

You need to upload more gears and bearings 922 mighty not be enough.

Oh Yadi Yadi!!  I will although the big bucks comes from some 900 oil and gas industrial workers and plants!!  thats where I got one of the biggest sales during 1917 through SPL, 11.000 bucks Thank you Sir! and for a single AD-picture, beat that sonny if you can!!

Good luck, good sale

Cheers mate! :)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
1429 Views
Last post November 08, 2010, 08:02
by leaf
5 Replies
1852 Views
Last post September 27, 2013, 11:03
by Anciients
16 Replies
5883 Views
Last post April 02, 2016, 07:31
by ccbcc
74 Replies
9340 Views
Last post August 11, 2016, 21:03
by AlessandraRC
51 Replies
7291 Views
Last post January 20, 2018, 14:14
by StockbyNumbers

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors