pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Models Required for Success?  (Read 3145 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: February 01, 2010, 11:02 »
0
I am new to the microstock world and am doing everything I can to learn the business.  Forums, books, photo study, etc.  You could say that I'm a bit of a planner, which has hindered my start, but I expect it to help me in the long run.

Anyway, as I learn more about the industry, I'm starting to draw a conclusion that I wanted to run by you.  To be successful (I define successful as being able to make a living, say $3000/month for the purposes of this thread) a microstock photographer will most likely have to shoot models.  Granted, there's always 3D, vectors, etc, but sticking with photography (because I lack some of those other talents), it seems like there's only so much you can shoot before you run out of material that is of benefit to the industry.  However, people are always changing and therefore they will always sell.

Am I on to something here, or is this conclusion a stretch?  I know that there are always extraordinary circumstances, so let's assume that I'm just your average photographer in an average situation.

Thanks for !


« Reply #1 on: February 01, 2010, 11:10 »
0
diversity is the key to success but from my experience, "people" shots move better than my "object" or "location" images.

ShadySue

« Reply #2 on: February 01, 2010, 11:15 »
0
Probably most of the really successful microstockers use models. Just check out Yuri, for example. On the other hand, there are some high flyers with very few models, but carefully lit and arranged 'articles' arranged to fit popular concepts. I've also seen some people who are able to find models but whose work has been unsuccessful. Generally, there's a stock 'look' and 'style' (clue: the US is by far the biggest market), and you need to know what you're doing.

LSD72

  • My Bologna has a first name...
« Reply #3 on: February 01, 2010, 11:22 »
0
Overall, it seems People Shots and Good Vectors seem to be the "Money". Anything else is hit or miss. JMO.

« Reply #4 on: February 01, 2010, 11:58 »
0
Agreed but I think that it should read 'Good' people shots as I have seen many portfolios full of average people shots that rarely sell.

Overall, it seems People Shots and Good Vectors seem to be the "Money". Anything else is hit or miss. JMO.

« Reply #5 on: February 01, 2010, 12:20 »
0
Thus far my assumption has been confirmed, but it's still early  :)

Agreed but I think that it should read 'Good' people shots as I have seen many portfolios full of average people shots that rarely sell.


fotographer, I certainly agree and my intent was not to suggest that one could fill their portfolio with people shots and succeed.  Whether submitting people, vectors, landscape, 3D, etc, the expectation is that they are of good quality and a subject that is useful in the world of stock imagery.

Thanks!

« Reply #6 on: February 01, 2010, 12:26 »
0
You may find this posting from Ellen Boughn interesting.

« Reply #7 on: February 01, 2010, 12:54 »
0
If you're very good at what you do, you'll be successful.  Models, or no models, concepts or no.

Being all analytical and trying to roll out theories and such takes all the fun out of it. ;)

« Reply #8 on: February 01, 2010, 13:43 »
0
If you're very good at what you do, you'll be successful.  Models, or no models, concepts or no.

Being all analytical and trying to roll out theories and such takes all the fun out of it. ;)

Ha!  You bring up a good point.  It's a flaw of mine, however, if you ask my employer they would consider it a positive trait :)  With that being said, I am looking at microstock as a business rather than a hobby, so I am working through my business case.  Granted, it does take some of the fun out of it, but I hope that by doing this up front work I am preparing myself for years of "work" that I can consider fun.

Regarding the 'very good', I agree.  I just wonder if I'll be 'very good' or just 'good'.  I tend to lean towards 'good', so I'll have to let hard work make up for the 'very'.

« Reply #9 on: February 01, 2010, 13:46 »
0
I am looking at microstock as a business rather than a hobby, so I am working through my business case.  Granted, it does take some of the fun out of it, but I hope that by doing this up front work I am preparing myself for years of "work" that I can consider fun.

Regarding the 'very good', I agree.  I just wonder if I'll be 'very good' or just 'good'.  I tend to lean towards 'good', so I'll have to let hard work make up for the 'very'.

A lot of us are here for the "business".  Just trying to define it as "if I have X number of images of people doing Y means I will make Z" will result in you being disappointed.

« Reply #10 on: February 01, 2010, 13:47 »
0
You may find this posting [nofollow] from Ellen Boughn interesting.



Great link, thanks!


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
14 Replies
4602 Views
Last post December 14, 2007, 08:06
by a.k.a.-tom
43 Replies
9581 Views
Last post October 06, 2011, 18:08
by Graffoto
12 Replies
4142 Views
Last post March 20, 2013, 07:02
by gillian
0 Replies
1214 Views
Last post June 20, 2015, 10:22
by Symbiostock Official
7 Replies
1755 Views
Last post June 18, 2017, 21:24
by imagesbykenny

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors