Author Topic: One Year On- a Stock Photography Experiment (Read 11627 times)

FiledIMAGE · « **on:** April 04, 2014, 17:08 »

Hi All,

So I just clocked my first year and I thought id post my experiences up which might help others. Ive had lots of help on here including reading Steheap's excellent book on my kindle. Ive been shooting images for 8 or so years all over the world thanks to my day job. Im also pretty competitive so I always aimed as high as I could. Getting up for sunrise and doing sunsets is the norm for me on vacation. Family or not. It wasn't until I read this book that I realised potential of selling images that really were just on Facebook as a portfolio and on my site (www.filedimage.com) doing nothing. So after a monster roadtrip across the US with my young family, I decided to give this a go. A really good go. SO I set about signing up to the big libraries with a portfolio. Had trouble with Alamy and Shutterstock at first but fine with about another 5. I have since added BigStock, Veer and Photodune to varying successes. So as to not to wabble Ill do some dotpoint findings:

-I have between 400 and 800 files online. Fotolia the worst and DepositPhotos the best. iStock and Shutterstock hovering around 600 mark.

-I was uploading around 100 images a month at the start which is back to about 50, but shooting more so not concerned. I aim for an image a day minimum and upload in batches of 5-10 in a similar topic for easy metadating.

-Overall sales has risen gradually and I $400-$600 a month. Nov was high at $965. My first month was $1.03, then $14.75, then $145 etc etc

-Shutterstock is the booming library. About 50% of overall income comes from them. iStock is maybe 15% and Photodune another $15%. Alamy kicking on now to at perhaps 10%. All other libraries make up 10%.

-$ per downlaod is easily highest with Alamy, then PhotoDune, then Canstock. Shutterstock is $0.66 and respectable.

-Not sure on Symbiostock which ive got installed. Had no success but also havent put much time lately into it. I feel like i need to remove that part of my site as its confusing for custoemrs of other parts of my business.

My concern is that my sales are skewed towards a key few images. Maybe half of my collection has sold, and half hasnt. 20 images sell very well. I have one clothing image that sells maybe 5 shots per day. Was taken as part of a corporate shoot so that extra income on that job is nice.

I am continuing to push thru and trying not to get too hung up on think conceptually for stock. I find when it comes to family holidays this ruins your photos a bit. I love moody black and white portaits of my children for example and need to shoot that for me/wife. Shooting the children with 'child on beach during summer' is not good for me. Becomes more robotic and less arty. Occasionally Ill shoot my city and think stock wise.

Ive also given up removing logos etc on city skylines. I just upload as editorial to iStock and Shutterstock now. Not sure if that's right approach or not but I hate fine editing.

That's all I can think of for now. Thanks for help everyone and ill keep on uploading!

Chris

Goofy · « **Reply #1 on:** April 04, 2014, 17:11 »

"My concern is that my sales are skewed towards a key few images."

Those are referred to as "Gems" - 20% of your images will bring in 80% of your revenue. Welcome to the club on trying to figure out how to produce more "Gems"

gloch · « **Reply #2 on:** April 04, 2014, 17:46 »

Which book are you referring to? Thanks for sharing.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #3 on:** April 04, 2014, 18:16 »

"Becomes more robotic and less arty. "

Stock isn't about satisfying your need to shoot "art".

steheap · « **Reply #4 on:** April 04, 2014, 19:12 »

Quote

Which book are you referring to? Thanks for sharing.

If I may be so bold as to link to my book...
http://www.backyardsilver.com/2011/03/how-can-i-sell-my-photos-and-make-some-money/

Steve

Goofy · « **Reply #5 on:** April 04, 2014, 20:15 »

Quote from: steheap on April 04, 2014, 19:12

Quote
Which book are you referring to? Thanks for sharing.

If I may be so bold as to link to my book...
http://www.backyardsilver.com/2011/03/how-can-i-sell-my-photos-and-make-some-money/

Steve

The book helped me a lot- I am one of Steve's Disciples

FiledIMAGE · « **Reply #6 on:** April 04, 2014, 20:26 »

Thats the one and excellent reading:)

It just broke things down nicely and made me see the bigger picture. About 5 years ago I joined iStock, uploaded maybe 20 images. I gave up cos I only made $17 in about a year. One of the worst decision I ever made photographically speaking. $17 obviously doesnt pay the mortgage but year on year for the same effort (initial uplaod) this would have been way more. Upload many more images and you get it. The beauty of stock is that its uploaded once and that it. It can earn till you die technically. You only need one $28 sale for shooting and editing that image to be worthwhile long term. All about quality AND quantity!

So any tips on how to get those big money sales? I cant see any way of improving that. I sell loads of smaller images with occasional $28 and $80 sale on Shutterstock. I sold 6 of these in Nov and none last month. All over the place. I did have a $242 image sold of Chicago on Alamy which gave me a warm fuzzy feeling in March. Just takes ages to pay out on Alamy. Over 6 months im finding.

shudderstok · « **Reply #7 on:** April 04, 2014, 23:24 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on April 04, 2014, 18:16

"Becomes more robotic and less arty. "

Stock isn't about satisfying your need to shoot "art".

speak for yourself sean, not everyone shoots "set up" ahem real life situations. you are good at what you do and the man, but if i shot that kind of work suicide would be an option.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #8 on:** April 05, 2014, 07:29 »

Beat me to it. I was going to quote this part. "My concern is that my sales are skewed towards a key few images. Maybe half of my collection has sold, and half hasnt. 20 images sell very well."

That's the way it goes. Doesn't the book explain that?

Most of your sales will come from some small portion, more like 4% is what I see, and then there will be one, best seller that gets a DL almost every day.

The interesting part is, people who can make more of these, will have better success. I wish I could predict in advance, but I can't.

Nice collection of Travel Images, FiledIMAGE.

Quote from: Goofy on April 04, 2014, 17:11

"My concern is that my sales are skewed towards a key few images."

Those are referred to as "Gems" - 20% of your images will bring in 80% of your revenue. Welcome to the club on trying to figure out how to produce more "Gems"

Cesar · « **Reply #9 on:** April 05, 2014, 18:24 »

Quote from: FiledIMAGE on April 04, 2014, 20:26

Thats the one and excellent reading:)

It just broke things down nicely and made me see the bigger picture. About 5 years ago I joined iStock, uploaded maybe 20 images. I gave up cos I only made $17 in about a year. One of the worst decision I ever made photographically speaking. $17 obviously doesnt pay the mortgage but year on year for the same effort (initial uplaod) this would have been way more. Upload many more images and you get it. The beauty of stock is that its uploaded once and that it. It can earn till you die technically. You only need one $28 sale for shooting and editing that image to be worthwhile long term. All about quality AND quantity!

So any tips on how to get those big money sales? I cant see any way of improving that. I sell loads of smaller images with occasional $28 and $80 sale on Shutterstock. I sold 6 of these in Nov and none last month. All over the place. I did have a $242 image sold of Chicago on Alamy which gave me a warm fuzzy feeling in March. Just takes ages to pay out on Alamy. Over 6 months im finding.

You have very nice images, good quality, but with this portfolio i dont believe you earn every month 400-600$ sorry. maybe in march, was very good month. i dont upload to Fine Art America, hard to believe that in november you earn 1000$.

fritz · « **Reply #10 on:** April 05, 2014, 18:59 »

Quote from: shudderstok on April 04, 2014, 23:24

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on April 04, 2014, 18:16
"Becomes more robotic and less arty. "

Stock isn't about satisfying your need to shoot "art".

speak for yourself sean, not everyone shoots "set up" ahem real life situations. you are good at what you do and the man, but if i shot that kind of work suicide would be an option.

For the first time I agree with Sean! Stock in general is about fake models, fake food, fake fake fake.... only $ are real but sadly that's market demand, of course there are some really good images there but stupid concepts are still selling like hot cakes.When I started photography 25 years ago my hero was Jan Saudek. Now I see no heroes! Art? Who cares about art? Art is dead, long live Stock!

shudderstok · « **Reply #11 on:** April 05, 2014, 20:05 »

Quote from: fritz on April 05, 2014, 18:59

Quote from: shudderstok on April 04, 2014, 23:24
Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on April 04, 2014, 18:16
"Becomes more robotic and less arty. "

Stock isn't about satisfying your need to shoot "art".

speak for yourself sean, not everyone shoots "set up" ahem real life situations. you are good at what you do and the man, but if i shot that kind of work suicide would be an option.

For the first time I agree with Sean! Stock in general is about fake models, fake food, fake fake fake.... only $ are real but sadly that's market demand, of course there are some really good images there but stupid concepts are still selling like hot cakes.When I started photography 25 years ago my hero was Jan Saudek. Now I see no heroes! Art? Who cares about art? Art is dead, long live Stock!

25 years ago those photos were masterfully crafted. One shot with no wiggle room. And you needed quality like that to get into any stock agency. Today's hero?

topol · « **Reply #12 on:** April 06, 2014, 04:12 »

Quote from: Cesar on April 05, 2014, 18:24

Quote from: FiledIMAGE on April 04, 2014, 20:26
Thats the one and excellent reading:)

It just broke things down nicely and made me see the bigger picture. About 5 years ago I joined iStock, uploaded maybe 20 images. I gave up cos I only made $17 in about a year. One of the worst decision I ever made photographically speaking. $17 obviously doesnt pay the mortgage but year on year for the same effort (initial uplaod) this would have been way more. Upload many more images and you get it. The beauty of stock is that its uploaded once and that it. It can earn till you die technically. You only need one $28 sale for shooting and editing that image to be worthwhile long term. All about quality AND quantity!

So any tips on how to get those big money sales? I cant see any way of improving that. I sell loads of smaller images with occasional $28 and $80 sale on Shutterstock. I sold 6 of these in Nov and none last month. All over the place. I did have a $242 image sold of Chicago on Alamy which gave me a warm fuzzy feeling in March. Just takes ages to pay out on Alamy. Over 6 months im finding.

You have very nice images, good quality, but with this portfolio i dont believe you earn every month 400-600$ sorry. maybe in march, was very good month. i dont upload to Fine Art America, hard to believe that in november you earn 1000$.

Yeap, it's bs, his stuff is mostly snapshots, that kind of port hardly makes any money. I don't see the claim for the 1000$ on FAA, that would be really outstanding bs.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #13 on:** April 06, 2014, 05:19 »

it's quite fun being anonymous, you guys are a JOKE

Mantis · « **Reply #14 on:** April 06, 2014, 10:21 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on April 06, 2014, 05:19

it's quite fun being anonymous, you guys are a JOKE

The only thing I disagree with you on, Luis, is that you added the smily face.

Cesar · « **Reply #15 on:** April 06, 2014, 13:45 »

he said peak of earnings was in november with sum of 1000$.

on photo dune he have 100 images sold, dreamstime 200, canstockphoto 93, other i didnt look, it is not possible that he earned 3000-4000$ overall in one year

dingles · « **Reply #16 on:** April 06, 2014, 14:01 »

Why would he lie? I for appreciated this post and info.

Gino · « **Reply #17 on:** April 06, 2014, 14:08 »

I also like his post. Don't think he is lying. Good post.

Nikovsk · « **Reply #18 on:** April 06, 2014, 18:24 »

Great post, Photodune makes up for 15% of your income?

That's odd... thinking about uploading there but not sure if it's really worth it.

steheap · « **Reply #19 on:** April 07, 2014, 14:10 »

This discussion reminded me that I hadn't calculated my percentage of earnings from the various stock sites recently, and so I did that for 2012 - 2013. A bit of discussion about the results for March on my blog, but here is the chart. Sorry it is going to be big, but it would be hard to see it any other way. The best way to work out which color belongs to which agency is to count up from the bottom - the bars are displayed in order from bottom to top.

Steve

PS - and thanks to those who have just found my site and bought my book!

EmberMike · « **Reply #20 on:** April 07, 2014, 15:06 »

Quote from: fritz on April 05, 2014, 18:59

For the first time I agree with Sean! Stock in general is about fake models, fake food, fake fake fake.... only $ are real but sadly that's market demand, of course there are some really good images there but stupid concepts are still selling like hot cakes.When I started photography 25 years ago my hero was Jan Saudek. Now I see no heroes! Art? Who cares about art? Art is dead, long live Stock!

And yet stock companies are making bigger pushes towards more artistic imagery these days (think Offset). So how would you explain that?

FiledIMAGE · « **Reply #21 on:** April 13, 2014, 01:57 »

Yeah im not sure why I would want to lie either? Odd responses from some. Worth noting that the $400-$600 has only occurred for last 6 months or so. Thanks for some of the nice comments about images. I dont go out of my way to look for the perfect stock, just upload what I normally shoot.

PhotoDune was pumped up because I had an image in a bundle. I was going to pull that money out of my stats but it was from my stock images so left in there.

now to get onto some Singapore images that I shot this week. Really happy with them but probably mostly editorial.

MichaelJayFoto · « **Reply #22 on:** April 13, 2014, 05:39 »

Quote from: Cesar on April 06, 2014, 13:45

he said peak of earnings was in november with sum of 1000$.
on photo dune he have 100 images sold, dreamstime 200, canstockphoto 93, other i didnt look, it is not possible that he earned 3000-4000$ overall in one year

Some 200+ downloads on iStock make about $200 for me. I get roughly the same amount added through the PP for my images, would be another $200 = total from iStock alone $400. According to the OP that is about 15% which I find reasonable. So that would put the overall income into the range of $2500, maybe add a bit for error tolerance.

I'd call that a overall a reasonable claim and wouldn't know why you would doubt that.

MichaelJayFoto · « **Reply #23 on:** April 13, 2014, 05:40 »

Oh, thanks for sharing the detailed information.

Pixart · « **Reply #24 on:** April 14, 2014, 22:46 »

Holy crap, your most popular on Dreamstime is a skyline of Winnipeg? I live here. Maybe I am missing out on a whole revenue stream on this boring location. And the Manitoba Leg (But isn't Golden Boy on top protected?) You are not from here are you?

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: One Year On- a Stock Photography Experiment (Read 11627 times)

FiledIMAGE

Goofy

gloch

Sean Locke Photography

steheap

Goofy

FiledIMAGE

shudderstok

Uncle Pete

Cesar

fritz

shudderstok

topol

luissantos84

Mantis

Cesar

dingles

Gino

Nikovsk

steheap

EmberMike

FiledIMAGE

MichaelJayFoto

MichaelJayFoto

Pixart

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors