MicrostockGroup

What kind of money do people expect in reality to make from micro stock photography sites?

Just trying to get some kind of idea about the expectations out there from people. I know it would be really nice to make heaps, but im talking reality here......

Thanks for your feedback.

From the stats I've seen most newer or inexperienced people seem to be making 25 cents per image per month or less.

More experienced people seem to be making $1 PIPM or a little more.

I'm guessing the average is 50 cents PIPM.

So, 50 cents PIPM means 100 images accross multiple sites would make $50 per month.

It really depends on the quality of the images and some luck.

1 billyon dollars!


Why?  Are you looking to submit, or start a new site to contribute to?

When you say "microstock site" do you mean owning a microstock site, or submitting images as a photographer to one microstock site??

it depends also on the gear/equipment you have or going to buy..! expenses are also very important, keeping the costs really low is the goal, I am talking in my personal experience once my expenses are really really low..

My goal is to make enough to afford my camera habit.   For me that would be $3-6K per year.

My first year I made about $700.   Its not much compared to all of the effort I put into it.  But this is primarily a hobby for me.  I keep learning stuff every day.  And I get a real kick when I make a larger sale.

My sales are still increasing as long as I keep feeding the little monsters.  Its slower that I thought it would happen, but I feel pretty confident that I will get to my goal within a few more years.

That's not bad considering that I ONLY put in effort when its fun and whenever its not fun... I stop.

I think it would be really tough to make any sort of living at this.

I agree with the $1 per image/month across all the sites to be reasonable. I've been at microstock for a bit over five years so it works that way for my entire portfolio. BUT, if I took the images submitted during only the last 3 years, those would be closer to $2/month/image. That's because I've learned what not to submit and what may be better stock sellers.

exactly, it's all about the effort just like everything in life!

that would only be true if  your best performer would outperform all others  if you went exclusive; plus you're betting that;'s today's results will apply tomorrow

one furhter consideration in RPI guesswork - the type of image you take will have a big effect -  eg, if you're shooting flowers, expect a very low return

steve

Peanuts because I'm sending in snapshots and self amusement, entertaining experiments with lighting. No models, nothing commercial or truly appropriate for the Micro market. I'm happy with anything I get. Not anywhere like the serious people who populate this site. But the part I enjoy is getting an idea and working out how to produce it. Mostly it's been a learning experience and like most others I've found that micro and the standards have improved my other work. That's a fringe benefit because it keeps me challenged to try new things and ways of taking images.

Considering the market and battle to the bottom, if sites paid a minimum of $1 per download, I'd be much happier than the 25c to 50c commissions that are more common. IS still averages four times what I get from SS per download, but SS still produces more income.

I shot breakfast one morning before the football playoffs. While I had the lights in place I borrowed someone's sandwich for a few quick snaps. Both are accepted and have sold. Didn't do well with the omelet,

 but got one good shot of the toast...   Nothing like setting up in a sports bar lounge with flashes and umbrellas, which amuses my friends. "Hey can I borrow your Sushi for a few minutes, I promise not to touch it!"

Reminder to oneself: Always make sure the plate is free of any small particles and has no chips in it. Spotless! (these are not)

Point is, when I sell one of these for a buck, it makes double use and helps pay for the meal?

There you go, low expectations at their best.

Wow, thanks for all the responses you gave.

We run a stock site, with a NZ twist. We do not allow subscribers for downloading x amount of images for $xx.xx - we work on a per sale basis.

But, after reading through here, I am thinking a bit more now, perhaps there is something with offering subs on our site, I would need to get good feedback from the photographers about it, at the moment, they get $30 per digital image sold, so getting a drop down to $2 or $3 might be hard to swallow, however they will also get the higher turnover as well......

Food for thought anyway.

Yeah, I thought we were talking from a contributor perspective to the regular microstock sites, so disregard everything I've said. Although, I'm sure most people do that anyway. 

The subs thing might cause a riot with your contributors. Although, a subs model for higher priced stock art might be interesting. Not sure how to price it though. I guess a lot of it depends on what kind of licenses you are offering.

The answer to that sjlocke is more then 0.25$ but not over 0.36$.  Also offer 0.15$ to upload your best shots and you'll have people here killing each other to upload to his site.