Author Topic: Agencies average RPI (Read 17677 times)

Fotonaut · « **on:** December 20, 2010, 15:49 »

I am making a comparison between some of the microstock agencies. Mostly for my self, but it could be of use for others as well.

One of the comparisons is average return per image/month. My port is to small to make any statistical significance, and I am only enrolled with a few agencies.

Thus I would kindly ask some of you big indies with MSG’s speed needle stat icon all to the red side to provide some insights I can use to fill in the blanks.

Comparison as Google Docs spreadsheet: https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Aokkln2kITNNdHRCcmN2UXg3T1Q0VHhsUnNETkk0Qnc&hl=no&authkey=CKC17dAB
(May require Google account login on some browsers)

Other comments are welcome as well.

lightscribe · « **Reply #1 on:** December 20, 2010, 16:14 »

Not sure why you only want to focus on the big pro indies? Would be interested in seeing your rpi on these sites, not just big-time numbers, having only large-scale pro info would kind of skew the data towards bigger folks with the money and means to hire models and have a bigger studio setup. Would be nice to get a polling of average rpi of average stockers.

If you are interested in my small-time numbers I'm happy to share, I have between 300-400 images on all sites mostly landscape, no people.

In order of RPI (assuming you are looking for monthly RPI)

Istock .50
Shutterstock .28
Dreamstime .17
Alamy .13
123RF .04
BigStock .04
Canstock .02

Hope more people share.

cthoman · « **Reply #2 on:** December 20, 2010, 16:19 »

I've always tried to shoot for $1 a month per image overall. My portfolio (around 3000) has always sold well, but I've never been much of a home run hitter with any particular image.

Fotonaut · « **Reply #3 on:** December 20, 2010, 16:53 »

Quote from: lightscribe on December 20, 2010, 16:14

Not sure why you only want to focus on the big pro indies?

That is a point. I just thought that stats from the big contribs will give more statistically correct data between agencies (faster). But with enough replies all input will be more representative.

And thank you for sharing!

gaja · « **Reply #4 on:** December 20, 2010, 17:06 »

Do you want rate per uploaded image, or rate per accepted image?

cathyslife · « **Reply #5 on:** December 20, 2010, 17:46 »

And is RPI the same as RPD ?

Fotonaut · « **Reply #6 on:** December 20, 2010, 18:21 »

Quote from: gaja on December 20, 2010, 17:06

Do you want rate per uploaded image, or rate per accepted image?

Hadn’t thought of that. I’m guessing per accepted image will be the norm, but feel free to correct me if that is the wrong way to count RPI.

lisafx · « **Reply #7 on:** December 20, 2010, 18:26 »

Quote from: cclapper on December 20, 2010, 17:46

And is RPI the same as RPD ?

I believe that RPD is the average amount of money paid for each download, but the RPI is the average amount of money earned per file in your port. At least that's how I understand it. If I'm wrong someone will hopefully set me straight...?

Fotonaut · « **Reply #8 on:** December 20, 2010, 18:43 »

Quote from: lisafx on December 20, 2010, 18:26

Quote from: cclapper on December 20, 2010, 17:46
And is RPI the same as RPD ?

I believe that RPD is the average amount of money paid for each download, but the RPI is the average amount of money earned per file in your port. At least that's how I understand it. If I'm wrong someone will hopefully set me straight...?

It is good to learn. Then I suppose RPD will make most sense in an agency comparison.

pancaketom · « **Reply #9 on:** December 20, 2010, 19:46 »

RPD makes little sense to me. 1 big sale = high RPD. lots of little sales = low RPD. BUT more importantly with the same number of images, a high RPI = more return than a low RPI.

To be more accurate RPI ought to come with a time - eg RPI/month or RPI /year.

In any case, mine is pretty low.

probably the easiest way to boost RPI is to delete all the low sellers, but that most likely won't maximise total return which is the number which really matters... maybe the best way of looking at it is for all the images submitted.

cathyslife · « **Reply #10 on:** December 20, 2010, 19:55 »

Quote from: Fotonaut on December 20, 2010, 18:43

Quote from: lisafx on December 20, 2010, 18:26
Quote from: cclapper on December 20, 2010, 17:46
And is RPI the same as RPD ?

I believe that RPD is the average amount of money paid for each download, but the RPI is the average amount of money earned per file in your port. At least that's how I understand it. If I'm wrong someone will hopefully set me straight...?

It is good to learn. Then I suppose RPD will make most sense in an agency comparison.

The agencies give us data to calculate for RPD and DT even does it for us. To figure RPI, I think I would have to spend time doing a lot of research. So I'm out.

cthoman · « **Reply #11 on:** December 20, 2010, 22:34 »

Quote from: cclapper on December 20, 2010, 19:55

The agencies give us data to calculate for RPD and DT even does it for us. To figure RPI, I think I would have to spend time doing a lot of research. So I'm out.

I'm not a mathlete, but I think you just divide your monthly earnings by the number of images in your portfolio for your RPI. For RPD, it is your earnings divided by the number of downloads. Pretty much the same process.

MicrostockExp · « **Reply #12 on:** December 20, 2010, 23:24 »

Here an post about RPI and $/dl I wrote on my blog a while ago.
If I look at my numbers in 2010, compared to the graph in the article (2008-2009)
my cumulative RPI stabilized at 0.5-0.6 and $/dl stabilized around 1, making it easy to calculate my projected earnings in 2011:) using http://www.lookstat.com/calculator.html

http://microstockexperiment.blogspot.com/2009/10/update-on-rpi-and-dl.html

Regards
L

RacePhoto · « **Reply #13 on:** December 20, 2010, 23:59 »

Quote from: pancaketom on December 20, 2010, 19:46

RPD makes little sense to me. 1 big sale = high RPD. lots of little sales = low RPD. BUT more importantly with the same number of images, a high RPI = more return than a low RPI.

To be more accurate RPI ought to come with a time - eg RPI/month or RPI /year.

In any case, mine is pretty low.

probably the easiest way to boost RPI is to delete all the low sellers, but that most likely won't maximise total return which is the number which really matters... maybe the best way of looking at it is for all the images submitted.

Sorry to disagree. I'm more interested in what I get paid for a download than counting how much I don't make for pictures that will never sell.

RPD will average out over the long term and will give you a good indication of what that agency pays per download, on average.

True, deleting non-selling images will make the RPI go up, which in effect tells me that it's an invalid measure, since it can be manipulated. On the positive side, if someone only uploaded their best images, and they sold, the RPI would go way up because of quality. In other words, it's not useful for anyone but the one persons photos who's looking at it. I can promise you that my RPI is way lower than most people, because of what I shoot, but the RPD is probably close to the same as others on IS.

RPI per year might be a good way to evaluate a site or collection. I have to agree with that one. Maybe RPD per year too, rather than monthly or average over five years, because things change, year to year.

Yes, mixing subs with el and od would also be a problem. Maybe the way to break it down isn't RPI but RPD in each type of sale.

RPD will be a better measure between people, since it's counting what has sold, and for how much, on average, someone can expect to get for a sale?
.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #14 on:** December 21, 2010, 02:03 »

Both measures are affected by the age of the porfolio, how commercial the subject matter is, how good the photos are, how much competition they face in their niche and, of course, any exclusivity bonuses. So the figures don't mean much. I can tell you, though, that my RPI has fallen by almost half in the last six years, which says something about sales dilution.

aeonf · « **Reply #15 on:** December 21, 2010, 02:09 »

Your forget that RPI changes from month to month.
My RPI for December so far (not such a good month) is 31c as an IS exclusive.
Same as my average but much less then August till November which was between 43 and 50 cents.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #16 on:** December 21, 2010, 02:33 »

Quote from: aeonf on December 21, 2010, 02:09

Your forget that RPI changes from month to month.
My RPI for December so far (not such a good month) is 31c as an IS exclusive.
Same as my average but much less then August till November which was between 43 and 50 cents.

If you were writing towards my comment, no I didn't forget, that's why I said, annual might make more sense. I suppose long term is my view and maybe some people are watching month to month. Or maybe day to day or hour to hour?

But if the time and effort to build a portfolio is the goal and then make a profit and returns on the basis of a collection across multiple agencies. It makes sense that long term is the way to look at RPI, not short term.

Yes to the dilution comment of BaldricksTrousers. I can't see anyone denying that what he said or what Helkix7 has pointed out are a sign of the times. Doubling the portfolio doesn't double income. That's kind of a mystery, isn't it? Wouldn't the RPI stat say, if you make $ per 300 photos, you should make 2X for 600 photos? That doesn't work. Back to dilution, flat out, sales have dropped because instead of competing against 2 million other shots everyone is competing against 8 million newer shots, plus the older 2 million. Chances of selling, just pure numbers are now 1 in 5 and worse than before.

So back to the point. Annual RPI by year, would be interesting, especially 2010 vs 2009. Then as another measure, RPD for the same two years, because RPD isn't volume based but sale based, which is where I like to look. Bottom line, not statistics that don't pay me anything.

cathyslife · « **Reply #17 on:** December 21, 2010, 07:33 »

Quote from: cthoman on December 20, 2010, 22:34

Quote from: cclapper on December 20, 2010, 19:55
The agencies give us data to calculate for RPD and DT even does it for us. To figure RPI, I think I would have to spend time doing a lot of research. So I'm out.

I'm not a mathlete, but I think you just divide your monthly earnings by the number of images in your portfolio for your RPI. For RPD, it is your earnings divided by the number of downloads. Pretty much the same process.

Sounds easy enough, no mathlete here either, as you noticed, but as has been said above in others' posts, why figure in images with no sales? I was thinking I would need to research all images that actually had sales in order to get an accurate result, hence my "lot of research" comment.

I'm like race, I would rather know how much I am getting paid per DL.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #18 on:** December 21, 2010, 07:45 »

Of course, beyond a certain level you can't double your portfolio every year. But, so far, the collections have been able to increase their size much faster than an established artist can grow his. At a certain point, clinging on to a certain RPI depends on producing much higher standard work than the average provider, so that it is newbies who are feeling the dilution more than the old-timers.
If the collections doubled in size this year, while I grew my portfolio by maybe 15%, then for me to cling on to similar sales figures to last year must mean either the number of overall sales by the sites almost doubled, or that my work sells at a higher rate than the average.
It does get increasingly difficult to maintain - let alone grow - your income the longer-established you are.
I'm not sure what that means for RPI but I suppose it must mean something.
The most useful information from site-by-site RPI data is the ratio between the sites, rather than the actual cash value per image. That directly reflects the value of each site's contribution to our earnings and is likely to be similar for most contributors.

RPD simply tells you about the pricing structure of different sites, it doesn't tell you anything about how worthwhile they are in terms of earnings.

gaja · « **Reply #19 on:** December 21, 2010, 08:34 »

Re RPI: I think the rate per uploaded image is the only one that makes sence, since that tells you which site gives you most value for your work. If I work 1 hour, upload the same number of pictures to two different agencies, and they earn me the same sum in money; they are equally good. Even if one of the agencies accepts all my pictures, and the other one rejects half of them. If you calculate RPI based on accepted images, the stricter agencies get a head start.

Suggestion for formula:
(Gross income for agency A)/((total # pics uploaded before jan 2010 + total # pics uploaded before jan 2011)/2)

Using this formula, my stats for 2010 are:
SS: 0,72
IS: 0,52
DT: 0,71
BS: 0,07
123RF: 0,08
DP: 0,05
CanStockPhoto: 0,04
YAY: 0,08
SSP: 0,07
Total: 2,34

louoates · « **Reply #20 on:** December 21, 2010, 10:30 »

Nope. You are all looking at this incorrectly.

The meaningful calculation is this:

Total dollars earned in micro minus total dollar outflow for newest Photoshop version and newest digital camera and lenses. It you still have money left over you are doing very well. Merry Christmas all.

cathyslife · « **Reply #21 on:** December 21, 2010, 10:46 »

Quote from: louoates on December 21, 2010, 10:30

Nope. You are all looking at this incorrectly.

The meaningful calculation is this:

Total dollars earned in micro minus total dollar outflow for newest Photoshop version and newest digital camera and lenses. It you still have money left over you are doing very well. Merry Christmas all.

Now that's my kind of calculation. I know the answer immediately: ZERO!
Merry Christmas to you, too.

pancaketom · « **Reply #22 on:** December 21, 2010, 11:30 »

Gaja is close to a meaningful #, but the relative time to upload to a site should also be counted if you want to be really anal.

The important number is total $ in - total $ out and how much time you spent to get there.

If all you care about is RPD, then you are nuts to be in microstock.

If I wanted to boost RPD and RPI at DT, I could delete all my pictures below level 3, but that would probably be a stupid thing to do to my total income. In general my RPD and RPI have been going down and my total income has been going up across the board. I'd rather that than any sort of reverse of that.

cthoman · « **Reply #23 on:** December 21, 2010, 14:07 »

I think what a lot of people alluded to. The numbers are just numbers. It is how you use them that can make them important. You can use RPI to try to set goals for the future and decide which agencies give you the biggest bang for your time. The numbers are always a moving target though. Many factors can change them, so there is never a sure bet for what will make you more. But, that is pretty much the nature of this business. I like to keep track of statistics to make plans for the future. I know others don't, so to each his/her own.

gaja · « **Reply #24 on:** December 21, 2010, 14:35 »

Quote from: pancaketom on December 21, 2010, 11:30

Gaja is close to a meaningful #, but the relative time to upload to a site should also be counted if you want to be really anal.

Well, that is part of the reason my stats at Istock are lower than at Dreamstime and Shutterstock. Before I stopped uploading to Istock in september, I had a backlog of 30 or something pics that were uploded, but not keyworded.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Agencies average RPI (Read 17677 times)

Fotonaut

lightscribe

cthoman

Fotonaut

gaja

cathyslife

Fotonaut

lisafx

Fotonaut

pancaketom

cathyslife

cthoman

MicrostockExp

RacePhoto

BaldricksTrousers

aeonf

RacePhoto

cathyslife

BaldricksTrousers

gaja

louoates

cathyslife

pancaketom

cthoman

gaja

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors