MicrostockGroup

How did you know? Does they send a sitemail?

These posts always make me smile, 'cull these old images that do not get seen in the search', if that is true what harm do they do, take up disk space that is about all?

Some will be little nuggets of gold for the stock sites, photographer has moved on stopped contributing, any sales will likely never make payout threshold, if the photographer is no longer active who will cull them?

You might say the sites should cull these images, but never say where the money is coming from to pay the wages to sort through millions of images, cut the contributors percentage to pay for this?

I contribute to Alamy they will hit 15 million images this weekend, I have a couple of hundred image, but they get, views, zooms and sales and come up high in relevent searches, that is because of good tight keywording, buyers often find what they want on the first few pages.

Who decides what is a bad image, I have seen links to some average images that have sold for big bucks, and the reason some are down the pages is not because they are bad but because they are badly keyworded, and good images will end up in the dollar bin and get snapped up, a photographer with bad keywords could cost them lots of money.

Microstock is an infant it timescale, and what is not viewed today could be top of the search tomorrow, at the moment in the UK all things 1980's is getting big, and the fashion of that time is due to make a comeback, where will the old images of that era come from, stock sites that have the scanned image that would likely have not had a view for years, ones that in your opinion should have been culled?

The only thing that should matter is your own images, running your own business and contributing to the sites that have a business model you like.

Most photographers answer to your request for them to cull thier images, may be to request that you look after your own business, the stocksites would have much the same reply.

David  

Right On!!!

not that anyone should listen to me right now considering my dismal sales....but I think keeping your portfolio tight and up to date is really important. I understand the argument that why not leave it there in case of the odd download. but I think what is not being measured is the impression left on a buyer when they click through and check out your stuff and have to wade through every stage of your growth as a stock photographer.

I too keep some never downloaded files in my port that I just REALLY like and am very proud of. but in general, I cull anything that hasn't sold for a year. I keep my port under 2,000 images, and hopefully am putting my best foot forward everytime someone visits my profile.

another point is that keeping your portfolio clean allows you to manage it more easily. especially since updating keywords and titles can help an image to reappear in a best match return. I update my files regularly.

having said that, none of my strategies are helping my sales right now, lol

ah shank, don't make me ignore you....take some tylenol.

^ do you know if you can still suggest images for the dollar bin somehow? there are some really nice images in there. kind of discouraging to think stuff that good wasn't downloaded, yowser.

^ I'll take him off ignore to read his reply. but I suggest opening a new thread before another informative thread is hijacked.

hmm, interesting. thanks

really? that is kind of anticlimactic. I thought it would be worse than that. lol.

even though it is opposite to my usual strategy, I am not culling anything further....since old crappy files are being showcased, I'll take any dls I can get my hands on...