Author Topic: Size & Sales (Read 6723 times)

bjorn · « **on:** May 18, 2007, 00:42 »

Hi,

Just curious...
What size photo's do you sell most?
Would there be a difference per agent, or per image? (if i look at my numbers there is).

I checked the last couple of weeks and here are my stats (in %):
If I look at my % there is little need for a bigger camera

DT:
Max   68%
Large 15%
Mid 4%
Small 13%

FT:
XL Standard 4%
L Standard 26%
M Standard 70%

Istock:
Large      17%
Medium 21%
Small        45%
Xsmal      17%

looking forward to see your score's and to hear what you think of it.
Regards,
Bjorn

CJPhoto · « **Reply #1 on:** May 18, 2007, 01:24 »

I dont keep that statistic but I do keep a similar one which shows a similar thing, as by chance, I was just drafting a blog few minutes ago that had this info in it (the post will be going up over the weekend).

So here is the average price per DL from the various sites. Obviously the higher the amount, the larger the size (ie. Fotolia is about 64c which means my average size is medium - but that could be 1 large and 3 small):

25c shutterstock
71c istockphoto
14% dreamtime
64c fotolia
58c 123RF
110c StockXpert
76c bigstockphoto
190c Featurepics
80c LuckyOliver

le_cyclope · « **Reply #2 on:** May 18, 2007, 15:28 »

Here's my stats:
IS:
Xs 29.8%
S 26.4%
M 27.7%
L 16.2%
XL 0%

DT:
S 4.8%
M 0%
L 44.6%
XL 45.8%

ST:
S 55.9%
M 26.5%
L 8.8%
XL 8.8%

FT:
S 70.1%
M 23.9%
L 6.0%

And for commission per DL:
IS 0.59$
DT 0.82$
ST 0.90$
FT 0.45$
SS 0.25$ (

)

Claude

sharply_done · « **Reply #3 on:** May 18, 2007, 17:29 »

Sorry, I don't track that statistic, either.

Apart from making larger images, a higher resolution camera also allows you to downsize, which can be a real bonus for noisy and blurry grab shots.

hatman12 · « **Reply #4 on:** May 18, 2007, 17:33 »

These size statistics are largely irrelevant, or at least possibly misleading.

As mentioned in another thread, advice from hidesy says that if you have images available at XL and/or XXL size that sends an important message to potential buyers that you are a serious player and are prepared to invest in the best equipment. That might generate downloads of smaller sizes that wouldn't otherwise happen.

le_cyclope · « **Reply #5 on:** May 18, 2007, 21:54 »

Quote from: hatman12 on May 18, 2007, 17:33

These size statistics are largely irrelevant, or at least possibly misleading.

Well it all depends on what you do with these.

For me and my photos, it says that for exemple, my sales at IS are well balanced. On the other hand, sales at FT are not so... Whitch leads me to ask myself why and try to find an answer (still looking for it!)

Stats reflect what I've done so far, and I'm sure I can use these to improve my sales.

Claude

bjorn · « **Reply #6 on:** May 19, 2007, 02:18 »

Hi le_cyclope/Claude & others,

Interesting to see we both sell mostly large images on DT and mostly small on Istock.
It would be interesting to see if that is just us or more common. (so common guys/girls show your numbers).
Could it be that IS has more web buyers and DT more print customers?

If this is true, it may be worth putting small/medium versions on the microstock sites and the XL versions on eg. Alamy. (anyone doing this?) (and it gives an excuse to buy that 16Mb camera

)

Personally I believe my customers are intelligent enough to see quality by looking at the image and not on the size of...

fleitao · « **Reply #7 on:** June 07, 2007, 20:30 »

Hi,

I also don't keep those kind of stats, but i'll let you in on my revenue per download...

SS: 0,252
DT: 0,819
FT: 0,424 (not counting with affiliation which is about 50% of my income)
IS: 0,283
LO: 4,212 (one EL does the thing...)

So DT is clearly the best (LO doesn't really count, because it has so few downloads)... if only they had the DL numbers of SS and IS...

And one other interesting number (IMO)... the ratio between Downloads and number of portfolio pictures.

SS: 6,62
DT: 0,47
FT: 0,20
IS: 0,85
LO: 0,03

Here we can see the importance and excellent performance of SS, as it's the only one where i can make more downloads then portfolio pics almost every month.

Regards

sharply_done · « **Reply #8 on:** June 07, 2007, 20:42 »

You need to get more images on IS - the ratio of DLs to portfolio size can be quite high there. My two best ratios are (by far) IS at 10.3:1 and SS at 7.6:1.

fleitao · « **Reply #9 on:** June 07, 2007, 21:15 »

Quote from: sharply_done on June 07, 2007, 20:42

You need to get more images on IS - the ratio of DLs to portfolio size can be quite high there. My two best ratios are (by far) IS at 10.3:1 and SS at 7.6:1.

Yes, i really do... i know that, but that piece of software is so lame... i don't have time and patience for it

It's kinda awkward that such a good site, one of the best if not the best performer has such a sub standard uploading system... probably they do it to scare people away...

Bateleur · « **Reply #10 on:** June 08, 2007, 00:39 »

Quote from: hatman12 on May 18, 2007, 17:33

As mentioned in another thread, advice from hidesy says that if you have images available at XL and/or XXL size that sends an important message to potential buyers that you are a serious player and are prepared to invest in the best equipment. That might generate downloads of smaller sizes that wouldn't otherwise happen.

You reckon?

Buyers are usually busy people, looking for a specific image to fit their needs. I very much doubt that, when looking at an image, they say to themselves "Oh, that photographer's got XL and XXL sizes ... so he/she has bought good equipment ... so he/she must be a serious player ... so I'll buy his/her image."

They see what they want, at the right size, and buy it. They don't give a tinker's cuss about the equipment that was used to produce it.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Size & Sales (Read 6723 times)

bjorn

CJPhoto

le_cyclope

sharply_done

hatman12

le_cyclope

bjorn

fleitao

sharply_done

fleitao

Bateleur

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors