Hi there,
I have around 500 images and just to speak with numbers i`ve made 118 sales so far.Do you think that my images don`t have commercial value or they are not well executed? Or just maybe the stock is very saturated and i shouldn`t expect anything better. For me this is a part time job and i`m trying to increase my portfolio and whatever comes.I love photography and i will keep shooting whatever what but i would like to know if i can improve.

Yassou Dimitrios!

My first comment is that you have almost no editorials and as a travel photographer it can be extremely difficult to capture places without people. I would advise you not to be shy about submitting editorial images...they can do as well and in some cases even better than commercial images.

As for your existing images, you embrace the dark side as many of your images have quite dark undertones / themes. This is cool but I must say that for stock it's not ideal. If you're going to do travel photos, it's best to have them bright, vibrant (not saturated) and full of copy space (for buyers to insert text if they wish to do so). Some of your beach scenes are nice but they're not stock, they're fine art prints...to make them into stock you have to think about how a potential buyer would use such scenes to promote a product and/or service. Let's suppose a travel company wants to promote Corfu, they'll more likely use a sunny image with happy smiling tourists and delicious food, in my opinion. Some of your fine art may do well as Print on Demand on Fine Art America, for example.

As for still life, it's not really my thing but from a quick glance, they also look underexposed and or badly executed as the attached. You're lucky as only a few years ago Shutterstock would have rejected this for weak composition.

Good luck file

Hi there,
I have around 500 images and just to speak with numbers i`ve made 118 sales so far.Do you think that my images don`t have commercial value or they are not well executed? Or just maybe the stock is very saturated and i shouldn`t expect anything better. For me this is a part time job and i`m trying to increase my portfolio and whatever comes.I love photography and i will keep shooting whatever what but i would like to know if i can improve.

That`s my link: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/dimitris+vlassis?language=en
Thanks in advance!

Many of your images are good, you also don't have too many repetitions, which is very good and your results so far are quite encouraging for a start.
IMO you can improve a lot with better post production: many of your images are slightly under exposed, or lack of contrast or saturation

Thanks everyone again for the feedback, i had my suspicion about my crap old monitor .Maybe it`s time for me to upgrade.
I`m glad that people critique my portfolio.I appreciate it.

https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2017/11/08/three-professional-keywording-examples-by-clemency-wright-consulting/

Are these keywords for a particular agency?
Some of the keywords she scored out for the first image would be regarded as important for iStock (in their CV and relevant to the image), e.g. 20-25, standing and others would be appropriate for e.g. Alamy, e.g. man wearing jeans (have I missed it, or did she take jeans out altogether?), leaning against wall, black, and I'd add e.g. casual clothing, warm clothing.

IMO, the second photo needs Italian and could also have e.g. cars, juxtaposition, surprising, bizarre, contrast, danger. iS would not like 'girl' for this image, they would prefer 'young woman' and 20-25; street for agencies which don't split keyword phrases,

For the third image, for Alamy, 'empty airport' is good, also you might want some of the more important phrases in Italian, which I think you're far more up to than I would be!

Just my 2p worth.

Also, although it's apparently/allegedly true that poor keywording leading to false 'hits' can affect your Alamy Rank, she didn't point out that's it's inevitable with their system, which several other agencies also have, which can link any keyword out of any keyword phrase with any other and combine them in a search. I see that almost daily. The only thing is that everyone gets these, so maybe any disadvantage is equally shared, though it might just be luck as to how far down a buyer will search. Today I had something in the form of my tag 'Brasilnut Centre for Microstock Information" showing up on a search for Brasilnut, which wasn't what the buyer wanted.

Are these keywords for a particular agency?

I had Alamy in mind for these types of keywords, except for the passport which has gone to micros (not iStock though since i don't submit to them).

Just my 2p worth.

Thanks for your input

Today I had something in the form of my tag 'Brasilnut Centre for Microstock Information" showing up on a search for Brasilnut, which wasn't what the buyer wanted.

 

-------

Clemency Wright and I will be collaborating on future blog posts about keywording, in particular in regards to keywording for Alamy. The way their system works appears to be mystery even for Alamy veterans (which I am not yet)! Still trying to figure out the best practice and when to use single words and phrases. On the plus side, their Alamy Measures tool is extremely valuable.

JaenStock thanks a lot. I'll try to improve upon your feedback and everybody else's. Very valuable indeed.👍

I have some editorial only on alamy, not many but they are from popular events here in Corfu like Easter and carnival. Should i upload them to shutterstock as well or leave them to alamy exclusive hoping that if someone wants them they have to pay a higher price for them?
Thanks in advance
Dimitris

I'm of the opinion that SS isn't the best place to upload premium editorials. Alamy would be much better, not only because you can license them as RM (which has its benefits) but also that many buyers on Alamy are editorially-orientated.

It depends on how "premium" these editorials are.

What is 'premium", in my opinion?:
 
1. Images which took considerable expense or time to capture and/or post-process (least important but still relevant for deep expedition type shots);
2. Unique lighting condition;
3a. Unique editorial of a 'story' which isn't sufficiently covered by other contributors;
3b. Shooting niches (breaking news, medical, science, biology, chemistry).

I'd give a 25% weight to each one of them.

If they're "popular events in Corfu like Easter and Carnival", I'd have to see them first but I would imagine that they aren't that premium save for a few (perhaps you caught two men kissing during carnival).

There's a theory that buyers shop around and there's a risk that a non-corporate buyer at Alamy may see the same image on SS and license it for much much cheaper. Still trying to gather evidence on whether this really happens (relation between zooms on Alamy and purchases on SS). To avoid this, as you suggested, I would advise to keep your most premium images at Alamy and even as RM.

Hope that helps!

Alex

The truth is that I don't class them as "premium", especially the way you describe them but they are still editorials. They are not many around 100, so i may as well leave them only on Alamy and see what happens.

In that case, I would suggest that they be everywhere and RF.

Good luck

It will only be useful if she reveals e.g. why she wouldn't have 'empty airport' or 'jeans'; or why she used 'girl' instead of 'young woman'.
These may be trade secrets, but without them, the posts would be pretty useless. All I see from the post you linked to above is that probably you stuck in poor keywords to show the sort of things far too many people do on all the sites, and she cleaned them up a bit.
Sadly, the sort of people who keyword so badly generally don't want to learn. I have lots of evidence of this, but best not to name and shame.

These are valid questions and I'll ask why she chose one word or another. Perhaps she may post on here and if so I would appreciate if you all would make her feel welcome

I did my best to keyword to the highest standards. I admit that sometimes I rush through keywording, especially when I have 100s of images to get through. From the corrections, my weakness is overkeywording.

I have a limit on the number of images (hours a day) I can a day before I start to go crazy - probably about 3-4 hours worth/day, so any help from a profession is appreciated.

Quote

I have some editorial only on alamy, not many but they are from popular events here in Corfu like Easter and carnival. Should i upload them to shutterstock as well or leave them to alamy exclusive hoping that if someone wants them they have to pay a higher price for them?
Thanks in advance
Dimitris

I'm of the opinion that SS isn't the best place to upload premium editorials. Alamy would be much better, not only because you can license them as RM (which has its benefits) but also that many buyers on Alamy are editorially-orientated.

It depends on how "premium" these editorials are.

What is 'premium", in my opinion?:
 
1. Images which took considerable expense or time to capture and/or post-process (least important but still relevant for deep expedition type shots);
2. Unique lighting condition;
3a. Unique editorial of a 'story' which isn't sufficiently covered by other contributors;
3b. Shooting niches (breaking news, medical, science, biology, chemistry).

I'd give a 25% weight to each one of them.

If they're "popular events in Corfu like Easter and Carnival", I'd have to see them first but I would imagine that they aren't that premium save for a few (perhaps you caught two men kissing during carnival).

There's a theory that buyers shop around and there's a risk that a non-corporate buyer at Alamy may see the same image on SS and license it for much much cheaper. Still trying to gather evidence on whether this really happens (relation between zooms on Alamy and purchases on SS). To avoid this, as you suggested, I would advise to keep your most premium images at Alamy and even as RM.

Hope that helps!

Alex

Premium to me is simply "do you believe someone will pay a premium price for this image?" which 2 to three are measures of as its based on scarcity. 1 I think is irrelevant the buyer doesn't care how much it cost you to produce the image. A waterfall in the jungle discovered after a three day hike may produce an image similar to one taken on a coach tour ;-). It does inform the decision though whether to invest the time to produce something scarce that will be in demand.

There is one other factor in this discussion about premium images. A premium editorial shot needs to be one that a buyer will search outside their normal stock agency to find that specific image. As an example, if I'm a buyer for the Washington Post and my normal agency is iStock (they tend to use a lot of iStock photos to illustrate articles on their App), then I need to first of all not be able to find a suitable image on iStock, but also I need to be willing to search on more expensive sites (Alamy, Robert Harding, Getty etc.) and be willing to pay for a license at that site. So a premium image must be sufficiently unique to make someone take that extra step.

Obviously specific news images will require that search, but it is harder to justify for the sort of editorial images that many of us take.

That is why I'm more of the opinion that our images might as well be placed on all sites, not divided into "premium" and "ordinary."

Steve

I made a big sale on Alamy today. Big for me anyway. The biggest so far. 45 euros.
How weird, we was talking with Alex about it the other day...
It's an editorial shot from the Carnival in Corfu. I wouldn't say is "premium" but hey, it's sold. Now the question is : I have it only on Alamy exclusive. If I had it on shutterstock as well you think whoever bought it would look on shutterstock to get it cheaper?
Questions, questions.

Quote from: vlassisd on November 16, 2017, 03:18

I made a big sale on Alamy today. Big for me anyway. The biggest so far. 45 euros.
How weird, we was talking with Alex about it the other day...
It's an editorial shot from the Carnival in Corfu. I wouldn't say is "premium" but hey, it's sold. Now the question is : I have it only on Alamy exclusive. If I had it on shutterstock as well you think whoever bought it would look on shutterstock to get it cheaper?
Questions, questions.

No one knows for sure. Personally I doubt it but you would probably get less from Alamy as its not then exclusive.

It very seldom happens that an Alamy buyer wants exclusivity. And although we can tick to indicate that a file is exclusive to Alamy, there is no evidence that a buyer can see that. Although questions have been asked on the forum, Alamy have not indicated whether that tick box is only for their use or whether it will be visible to buyers down the line.
At Alamy, it's all about the discount each buyer can negotiate, and nothing to do with the file*, just like iS/Getty. I've netted less on a few Alamy sales than even my current pisspoor iS average RPD  (usually, but not quite always via the opt-outable UKNS).
*Officially confirmed on here by the guy who used to post officially on Alamy's behalf.

Anyway, whether Alamy is intending down the line to charge more for exclusive files or whether they intend to make that info available to buyers in the hope that they won't look elsewhere, only they know, assuming they have more forward planning savvy than iS.

If I had it on shutterstock as well you think whoever bought it would look on shutterstock to get it cheaper?

Yassou Dimitris!

Congrats on the sale!

Following on what Sue and Paul have stated, I'm not sure whether there would be substantial risk of a potential buyer going for a (generally) cheaper option on micros with that particular image. In other words, whether being exclusive on Alamy would yield a greater return over the image's lifetime.

I have looked at the image in closer detail and although it's a nice moment, I wouldn't classify this image anywhere as close to "premium", so in my opinion, there's no harm in putting it everywhere and RF. I have put it as a close up on this message, I trust that is OK. You didn't ask for a critique so I won't offer one

I'm leaning more towards Steve's way of thinking, although there will be images which I'll refuse to put on micros...perhaps I'm being stubborn and thinking with my ego, but I'll sleep well at night

Hope you get some more sales and let's keep in touch.

P.s. I see you have shot some airplanes landing. I have regular sales of these, more so on micros than Alamy.
 

Wow, I'm was out and didn't have internet. So many replies. Thanks all of you guys trying to put me at the right path. Don't forget that I'm a noob, in stock and photography, so take it easy on me guys... 


"I have looked at the image in closer detail and although it's a nice moment, I wouldn't classify this image anywhere as close to "premium", so in my opinion, there's no harm in putting it everywhere and RF. I have put it as a close up on this message, I trust that is OK. You didn't ask for a critique so I won't offer one "

Thanks again Alex. As i said on my previous post i didn't think that this shot was "premium" nor is technically perfect. Is one of this moments that lighting changes, people move back and forward and you just take the shot. I didn't plan it. I only put it so i can learn from you guys the ins and outs of stock.
Another question is that this image was RF, if i had it as RM you think the price would be the same or different, or it just dictates that with RF i can sell elsewhere if that makes sense.
Ah and thanks for the tip about planes.
P.s.: I don't know why i couldn't quote properly from my phone. 

Quote from: vlassisd on November 16, 2017, 03:18

I have it only on Alamy exclusive. If I had it on shutterstock as well you think whoever bought it would look on shutterstock to get it cheaper?

As was said, nobody knows.

But from my own experience: I had big RF sales on Alamy with the same files being available on different microstock agencies (the biggest one $250 gross, so $125 my share).
And I also had several times zooms on Alamy followed on sales of the zoomed images on shutterstock / fotolia the same day or a day later - which is no proof, but might indicate that buyers look on Alamy and shop where they find the images cheaper.

Still, I put all my RF files both on Alamy and the micros.

Thanks dirkr,good info.

I did a month long analysis of all Alamy zooms in August and checked whether the same image had been sold on any of the other sites I submit to. In a nutshell, I didn't find any evidence that a buyer would search elsewhere. In fact, my thinking is that most buyers at Alamy have company accounts there and so why would they search elsewhere? The chance of a Google search ending up on Alamy with someone willing to join or start an account and license the image is pretty remote as well.

As a result, my current philosophy is to submit all images to all sites and let the cards fall where they do...

Here is the analysis:
http://www.backyardsilver.com/2017/09/alamy-buyers-search-elsewhere/

I also did an analysis of RF and RM pricing on Alamy earlier in the year if you are interested. Bottom line - they are pretty much the same for me:
http://www.backyardsilver.com/2017/06/decide-whether-submit-macro-sites/

Steve