pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Chicken - egg dilema  (Read 7333 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: October 26, 2010, 13:18 »
0
Should I stop uploading to low earning agencies and focus only on top ones since time investment does not justify return or I need to continue to struggle and upload in order to build larger portfolios which may produce better returns?


« Reply #1 on: October 26, 2010, 13:36 »
0
This may not be the type of response you were looking for, but I think this type of answer will be more constructive for you in terms of an effective strategy.

What you should be re-examining is NOT which agencies will produce the greatest return for you.  Looking over your portfolios, and stats such as your downloads per image at Dreamstime, should tell you that the content you're creating is not connecting with buyers.  There's nothing technically wrong with it.  You're a good photographer.  Don't take this as a slam against your skills.  Far from it.

I think the problem experienced by many who frequent this forum is that there's a disconnect between what YOU WANT to upload and what BUYERS WANT. 

Eliminating the smaller agencies from your mix so you can focus more on the ones that could deliver a larger payoff will not get you more sales in the end.  To get more sales, you will have to upload more images that meet the needs of buyers.  Every time you're about to hit Upload on any given site, stop and ask yourself these questions:

Who will buy this?  What will it communicate for the buyer?  What goal does it help the buyer achieve?

If you can't quickly come up with a crystal clear answer to these questions, chances are you will see few if any sales for your new images. 

I hope this doesn't discourage you, or anyone else who reads it.  I'm just trying to offer helpful advice to anyone who has "hit the wall" or is not getting the desired ROI on their time spent in microstock.   The buyers are out there.  There are more than ever before.  The pie is growing, even though your slice of it may be shrinking.  Carve yourself a larger piece by doing a better job than your competitors at figuring out what buyers really want. 

Good luck!

« Reply #2 on: October 26, 2010, 14:18 »
0
melastmohican: I understand exactly what you mean , I'm struggling with the same issue :-\ and don't have an answer
stockmarketer: very good info, something all of us must keep in mind and thank you for that. the question still remains that if you have the same images on different sites and on some sites the images sell well but on another agency the same images don't, what do you do? Do you keep uploading in the hope that a bigger and better port would generate more sales or do you stop uploading there and only focus on the sites that give better return.
Sorry, I now almost repeated mohican's post.... :)

« Reply #3 on: October 26, 2010, 14:33 »
0
In another thread, Lisafx mentioned that 90% of her income came from the top 4 sites. I think for most of us that's roughly true. So while you can add a trickle to your income from the smaller sites, it really doesn't make a ton of difference to your totals.

Before I became exclusive I switched some of the low-earner sites to an intermittent upload status - every 3 to 6 months I'd catch them up with recent stuff in my portfolio.

I think the advice to focus on what sells - at the big 4 - is good.

« Reply #4 on: October 26, 2010, 15:08 »
0
@jsnover: I am slowly evolving to the point when I stick to top 4. I am re-testing some sites every couple months for a month to see if anything has changed.

@stockmarketer: I have been doing microstock for 2.5 years now. I haven't had a single smashing hit photo. I am evolving in this area too. For me SS is 10x better than anything else so my choices, keywording, etc is skewed towards them. I think that over time structure of categories I have been covering has changed. There are probably much less travel and nature shots and more poor man's studio attempts :-) I really like to shoot food but I have no space to have permanent setup for this.

« Reply #5 on: October 26, 2010, 15:17 »
0
new members at MSG everyday and with cool nicknames! :P

« Reply #6 on: October 26, 2010, 15:47 »
0
I haven't had a single smashing hit photo

Interesting what's considered a smash hit. For my portfolio my best seller is now at about 24 dls/month at IS. With 704 total images. The top dls/month on my page two of IS (24 per page) is only 3 dls/month.
My top five sellers at IS are 24.2  16.3   8.8  7.7  and 5.9 dls/month.

So for me if an image is selling 2-3 per month right from the first month I consider it a winner.

« Reply #7 on: October 26, 2010, 16:11 »
0
Unequivocally yes. Better spending time creating than uploading.

« Reply #8 on: October 26, 2010, 16:13 »
0
My top five sellers at IS are 24.2  16.3   8.8  7.7  and 5.9 dls/month.
I'm ashamed.  Mine are  2.8  2.0  1.9  1.9  1.4.

« Reply #9 on: October 26, 2010, 16:43 »
0
For me IS is one of these low earners. Uploading is so cumbersome that I was able to have 200 images in 2.5 years. I got only one image that got more than 1DL/m :-) At SS I got few dosens which had 2DL/m. So I guess I am not doing very well :-(

« Reply #10 on: October 26, 2010, 17:21 »
0
Tracking is too cumbersome on any site except IS. Especially dls/month. It's as if the sites are embarrassed to clearly show you your own results. The nice thing about the dls/month stat is that it leads you to focus on the kinds of shots that do better for your shooting style. In my opinion it also shows you where not to waste your time.
    When I started in this business about 6 years ago I uploaded topics that I was shooting anyway. Mostly landscapes and oddities that I found during my travels. Those images for the most part really sucked in microstock. As I began to put the microstock "hat" on during my travels I shot more and more with commercial use in mind. It was just as challenging as what I was doing before but I had more play value involved when seeing folks actually paying me to shoot. Luckily I don't have to make a living at this stuff but it's nice to get some money recognition for your time.
    Now at art shows I value less the oohs and ahhs about my landscape work and more on the "dollar votes" of the landscape images that actually sell.
    But this business is so screwy. A few years ago I uploaded to IS a landscape image I rejected for any art show display. I had zero expectations. To my surprise it jumped up to 20+ dls/month. It's receded to 16 dls/month this year but is still my number 2 seller.
    I may have set a record for wandering off topic but it's nice to chat and share stuff.

« Reply #11 on: October 26, 2010, 18:26 »
0
Quote
My top five sellers at IS are 24.2  16.3   8.8  7.7  and 5.9 dls/month.

I'm at     10.3     9.0     5.4     4.5     2.7  :(

« Reply #12 on: October 26, 2010, 18:41 »
0
Interesting stats. IS has been performing pretty nicely lately for me (Download wise only), I guess
33,1      24,3     16,1     12,7     10,6   

« Reply #13 on: October 26, 2010, 18:49 »
0
My top five sellers at IS are 24.2  16.3   8.8  7.7  and 5.9 dls/month.

Lou, are any of top sellers landscapes?

« Reply #14 on: October 26, 2010, 19:12 »
0
My top five sellers at IS are 24.2  16.3   8.8  7.7  and 5.9 dls/month.

Lou, are any of top sellers landscapes?

Not really. My 16.3 dls/month is a person sitting on a river bank backlit by a sunset but it would be a stretch to call it a landscape. So my top 48 has zero landscapes. But I make most of my photography income from landscapes. Go figure.

« Reply #15 on: October 27, 2010, 01:28 »
0
Quote
another thread, Lisafx mentioned that 90% of her income came from the top 4 sites. I think for most of us that's roughly true. So while you can add a trickle to your income from the smaller sites, it really doesn't make a ton of difference to your totals
thanx jsnover, I saw lisa's post just after I posted and it does answer the question.... So I am gonna focus on the big four and do the others when I can, have time, feel like it, am bored

Man, your guys rock with downloads per month!! Inspirational to see :)
I'm at 1.5   1.5  1.2  1.1 and a whopping 1  ::)
My "best seller" is a landscape, so yeah...go figure

« Reply #16 on: October 27, 2010, 08:31 »
0
3.0  2.8  1.8  1.2  1.0


« Reply #17 on: October 27, 2010, 08:50 »
0
1.3  1.3  1.1  1.0  1.0

« Reply #18 on: October 27, 2010, 09:51 »
0
Good to know there are people with worse results than me.   ;)

« Reply #19 on: October 27, 2010, 10:29 »
0
Now I don't feel quite so bad.

9.6 3.4 3.0 2.8 2.5

WarrenPrice

« Reply #20 on: October 27, 2010, 10:51 »
0
Where are these stats coming from? ??? ???

« Reply #21 on: October 27, 2010, 10:53 »
0
Good to know there are people with worse results than me.   ;)

shame on you!! eheh

« Reply #22 on: October 27, 2010, 10:54 »
0

WarrenPrice

« Reply #23 on: October 27, 2010, 11:02 »
0
WOW!  had no idea all that was there.
New Toy! ;D

Haven't been w/iStock long enough to have anything meaningful, but do appreciate the info.  Thanks.

« Reply #24 on: October 27, 2010, 12:19 »
0
nice infos... mines mostly vectors but heres mine

36.7
30.9
27.4
26.3
21.3

« Reply #25 on: October 27, 2010, 13:27 »
0
I should also add that of my top 10 earners, 7 almost never or never sold at other sites, and vice versa. Which leads to think the best match is hugely manipulated, much more than on DT and SS since the overlap between good sellers is much larger there. This far-off best match plus the fact that recent files (of 2010) sink to the bottom and never sell at all made me stop uploading even before the royalty cut announcement.

« Reply #26 on: October 27, 2010, 13:45 »
0
I should also add that of my top 10 earners, 7 almost never or never sold at other sites, and vice versa. Which leads to think the best match is hugely manipulated, much more than on DT and SS since the overlap between good sellers is much larger there. This far-off best match plus the fact that recent files (of 2010) sink to the bottom and never sell at all made me stop uploading even before the royalty cut announcement.

I hate to see such speculation regarding Best Match formulas. My mind hurts trying to assign reasons why they do what they do. My experience is that each site caters to different buyers and needs. Some of my best sellers on IS are rarely, if ever, sold at FT. And FT sells only a few of my categories but sells them often. No rhyme or reason. If every site had identical best match formulas I'd wager that my images would sell about the same on every site as they do now.

I'd much rather shoot some more instead of incurring further brain pain.


« Reply #27 on: October 27, 2010, 15:27 »
0
Quote
I should also add that of my top 10 earners, 7 almost never or never sold at other sites, and vice versa.
same here, weird business this is......

« Reply #28 on: October 27, 2010, 16:02 »
0
36.7
30.9
27.5
26.3
21.3

« Reply #29 on: October 27, 2010, 19:36 »
0
One thing I have learned is that different sites sometimes cater to different types of buyers.  Of the 40ish images common between DT and SS, different images seem to sell on the two sites with maybe 1 common image selling on both sites.

This is especially true on footage...  I have my top 100 selling video clips from Pond5 on every agency I sell video through, except iStock, and most of it doesn't do nearly as well. My top selling clip on SS sells considerably less on Pond5.  My best selling clip on Revo has only sold a couple of times on Pond5.

So, when I'm out taking pictures or shooting video I don't think about what any one site sells more of because what's popular on one site may not be on another...


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
8 Replies
4305 Views
Last post October 02, 2007, 05:59
by Peter
0 Replies
2350 Views
Last post August 13, 2008, 11:30
by News Feed
16 Replies
7140 Views
Last post May 10, 2011, 14:49
by Microstock Posts
11 Replies
2705 Views
Last post October 06, 2012, 13:04
by cascoly

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors