MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: PaulieWalnuts on February 26, 2012, 10:57
-
It doesn't look like one of these has been done in a while so here it is. The ever popular RPI statistic.
For those of you not familiar, RPI is Return Per Image and for this poll we're doing monthly. Why is this important? For a lot of people it's not. Higher RPI means you're making more money per image. This can be helpful to see how your portfolio is performing against other contributors.
So...
If you have an average of 1,000 images across all sites and make $1,000 per month, your RPI is $1.00
If you have an average of 1,000 images across all sites and make $500 per month, your RPI is $.50
If you have an average of 1,000 images across all sites and make $100 per month, your RPI is $.10 and so on
-
Looking at the results so far, I think you have too few choices in the lower earnings bracket and too many at the high end. Mine was 70c per image per month, and that gets absorbed into a much bigger group of 50 - 75c
Steve
{although I have just noticed only 6 people have voted!}
{ and is it worth splitting between vectors and photographs?}
-
If you have an average of x images at some sites, <x at istock and dreamstime (due tu upload limits and "similars" policy), and >x at some minor sites that accept all cr*p, how do you calculate rpi?
I know, a weighted mean - but it's a huge work if the sites are 20+... so my answer is: I don't know (and don't even care too much)
-
If you have an average of x images at some sites, <x at istock and dreamstime (due tu upload limits and "similars" policy), and >x at some minor sites that accept all cr*p, how do you calculate rpi?
Then maybe your RPI could, and probably would, indicate that you shouldn't be submitting crap or submitting to minor sites.
I know, a weighted mean - but it's a huge work if the sites are 20+... so my answer is: I don't know (and don't even care too much)
As stated at the beginning, some people don't think it's important, and that's fine. I used to track RPI per site and on average as a whole. I still do for IS and for me it's important.
-
I tend to go by total number of images submitted/ produced as I submit everything to every site.
Even if the image is rejected by some or all of the sites or I later remove it, I have still payed out to produce it so this RPI of total potential portfolio is the most useful to me.
-
Looking at the results so far, I think you have too few choices in the lower earnings bracket and too many at the high end. Mine was 70c per image per month, and that gets absorbed into a much bigger group of 50 - 75c
Steve
{although I have just noticed only 6 people have voted!}
{ and is it worth splitting between vectors and photographs?}
So what would you suggest? 5 or 10 cent increments?
-
I tend to go by total number of images submitted/ produced as I submit everything to every site.
Even if the image is rejected by some or all of the sites or I later remove it, I have still payed out to produce it so this RPI of total potential portfolio is the most useful to me.
+1
Exactly how I do it.
If I create 99 pieces of crap that don't get accepted anywhere and 1 great pic that sells like hotcakes, I should divide my sales by 100. Otherwise, if I just divide by 1, I'd distort things so I feel like a genius when in reality I'm pretty lousy.
-
Why is this important? all I care about is the monthly net pay, sod the rest.
-
Why is this important? all I care about is the monthly net pay, sod the rest.
So if you had 100 images and made $10,000 per month or had 10,000 images and made $100 per month this would mean nothing to you?
-
There are just to many variables for me in this one to make the result worthwhile. Number of low earner sites one contributes to is one. It takes a few seconds longer to submit to 2 or 3 sites more, but according to my understanding of your calculation it will have an effect on the RPI if you do. Further there is the huge difference between Vector and JPG income at certain sites (your poll does not distinguish). Then there is "big site" non accepted "crap" which do sell at quite nice pricing at some of the lower earner sites.
All just to confusing to try and make sense of this in a single poll imo.
I have income per image sold per site I submit to as well as a combined average, as well as a distinction between my Dollar, Pound and Euro income sites. I also keep a thumb of every image sold at every site (yes my sales allow it still at this time), which give me an instant glance of what sells where and what sells everywhere. Think I am OK with my info without this one.
-
It's very simple, it tells you how good (or bad) stock photographer you really are. If that's important to you, than this stat is important to you, if it's not, you don't bother with it anyway
-
Why is this important? all I care about is the monthly net pay, sod the rest.
So if you had 100 images and made $10,000 per month or had 10,000 images and made $100 per month this would mean nothing to you?
You could also have 10,000 images making $10,000 or 100 making $1,000. I would rather have the lower RPI and more money.
-
Why is this important? all I care about is the monthly net pay, sod the rest.
So if you had 100 images and made $10,000 per month or had 10,000 images and made $100 per month this would mean nothing to you?
You could also have 10,000 images making $10,000 or 100 making $1,000. I would rather have the lower RPI and more money.
You've gotta be kidding, right? So, if there was a way to make a higher $10 RPI, you would rather not stop at making 1,000 images to make $10,000, but keep going to make 10,000 images to make $10,000? Work harder and longer for the same money? And if you had 10,000 images you would not want the $10 RPI and make $100,000 per month?
I'm speechless.
-
My RPI is somewhere in the $0.80 region. Photos, no people shots. I spend very little money on my shoots, only a cheap prop now and then (and very often the prop is something that I can use late on!)
-
I am sure most of us can delete half port and have the exact same earnings, the point is how much have we spent to produce those pictures and if we could have been shooting a much better subject, per example if there are no props/models is kind of hard to produce good stock pictures.. (yes there are many subjects that sell very nice such as concepts on corkboard/chalkboard, cute charts and words, etc)
RPI is very relative because we can do 15k in a year but have spent 5k in models/props/other.. and some other guy may earn perhaps a little less but without spending the 5k, basically its very hard to define a "good" RPI, every case is a case
-
It's very simple, it tells you how good (or bad) stock photographer you really are. If that's important to you, than this stat is important to you, if it's not, you don't bother with it anyway
You think this is the only way you can establish it? :D
So if you happen to support a few to many low earners you might be bad, but if you did not you might be good.....?
This is not a race for me, it is a way to earn extra income I really need. If I reach my personal sales target, I am good, if I did not, the industry is bad! Does it not work for most of you that way? ;D
Oh yes, and my congratulations to the big winners! ;)
PS wut I am rooting for you, are you the hat or the iron?
-
Why is this important? all I care about is the monthly net pay, sod the rest.
So if you had 100 images and made $10,000 per month or had 10,000 images and made $100 per month this would mean nothing to you?
You could also have 10,000 images making $10,000 or 100 making $1,000. I would rather have the lower RPI and more money.
You've gotta be kidding, right? So, if there was a way to make a higher $10 RPI, you would rather not stop at making 1,000 images to make $10,000, but keep going to make 10,000 images to make $10,000? Work harder and longer for the same money? And if you had 10,000 images you would not want the $10 RPI and make $100,000 per month?
I'm speechless.
That's too simplistic. It's not easy to get $10 RPI. If I concentrated on doing that, I would be producing very few images. A few people can do big portfolios and high RPI but I'm not one of them. They spend far less time on this forum :) It's probably going to get harder in microstock, with increased competition, higher review standards and commissions being cut.
-
-- Delete this ---
-
It's very simple, it tells you how good (or bad) stock photographer you really are. If that's important to you, than this stat is important to you, if it's not, you don't bother with it anyway
You think this is the only way you can establish it? :D
So if you happen to support a few to many low earners you might be bad, but if you did not you might be good.....?
This is not a race for me, it is a way to earn extra income I really need. If I reach my personal sales target, I am good, if I did not, the industry is bad! Does it not work for most of you that way? ;D
Oh yes, and my congratulations to the big winners! ;)
PS wut I am rooting for you, are you the hat or the iron?
I don't see the relation with low earners. RPI has nothing to do with the number of sites you sell your photos on.
Indeed it's not a race. I didn't even define my view on RPI, just mentioned the 2 possibilities and what I thing RPI really tells. But I gotta admit reaching my personal targets is the most important thing to me as well. If I wouldn't reach at least some of them I'd already quit. Though to be honest I can't see why anyone, who wants to live off of MS, would do that if his RPI is below 1$. Well it would work if you either have a big port or live in a country with a low standard of living.
Tnx for rooting for me. I guess, since I don't know what you meant by iron/hat (since I'm not a native speaker)
-
Native growler? :o
Or you do not have to do this for a living but only for an extra income OR your exchange rate make a big difference in what you can do with your earnings OR you have a physical disability and this is one of a few methods to get extra cash OR you are so self opinionated that you think that you can think of all the possible scenarios which might make it worth someones while (even if others might think you are bad :"it tells you how good (or bad) stock photographer you really are").
PS Monopoly is a very old western money/property game. Some of the players pieces are a hat, iron, racing car, etc. Better known in more modern societies, so you are excused.... ;)
-
I fall in the $3-4 category; for me its important... i cant stand feeling ripped off and abused. (although i know its not only or totally what this poll reflects, still, a good part of this RPI comes from ditching the a-holes)
If there was a site that payed 5 cents per sold image but had huuuuge sales volume, i still would NOT submit to it. The idea that only what you get at the end of the month counts is what keeps us getting screwed and the" take whatever pennies you can get" attitude makes me cringe. I know im losing money over it (definitly by ditching istock and FT), and i do regret that, but its not worth the constant bitter taste in my mouth. I know many will disagree, but to each its own i guess.
-
Native growler? :o
Or you do not have to do this for a living but only for an extra income OR your exchange rate make a big difference in what you can do with your earnings OR you have a physical disability and this is one of a few methods to get extra cash OR you are so self opinionated that you think that you can think of all the possible scenarios which might make it worth someones while (even if others might think you are bad :"it tells you how good (or bad) stock photographer you really are").
PS Monopoly is a very old western money/property game. Some of the players pieces are a hat, iron, racing car, etc. Better known in more modern societies, so you are excused.... ;)
Some nerve I've hit, you must be in that 0-0,25$ category ;D
-
I care about RPI for two reasons:
1. It helps me project. If RPI is steady (and it has been for me for nearly four years) I can set up a simple formula on an Excel sheet and see what my earnings will be a year from now if I upload a certain number of shots per day. So a year ago, I predicted almost to the dollar what I am earning today. Who wouldn't like an earnings crystal ball? For me, RPI is that crystal ball, and a shockingly reliable one at that.
2. If I see a fall in RPI, I will know something is wrong. It won't tell me the cause, but it will set off an alarm and tell me to dig for an answer. Maybe my OLD stuff has stopped selling, in which case there's not much I can do about it. Or maybe my NEW stuff isn't selling... which tells me that I need to reassess what I'm doing and change course.
-
PS Monopoly is a very old western money/property game. Some of the players pieces are a hat, iron, racing car, etc. Better known in more modern societies, so you are excused.... ;)
my old monopoly havenīt got those >:(
-
So glad for every person this info helps. We need all the help we can! Personally, I find the site specific info I have, plus the combination of it quite adequate for my needs. As mentioned, I am also not convinced of this poll's accuracy, but if it help you, go for it!
Oh wut, the only nerve around is still yours and even if I earned $0.0.1 on this scale it would not have worried me for one moment. You are clearly struggling with the race, but maybe if you behave a bit better, some of the bigger guys will also allow you a bit of their shine. That is why I am rooting for you. The poor underdog must get his day some day..... ;)
Show them wut, show them wut, wut, wut, wut, hooray!!!! (oh, forgot to ask, you are a "good" stock photographer aren't you?)
-
It's very simple, it tells you how good (or bad) stock photographer you really are. If that's important to you, than this stat is important to you, if it's not, you don't bother with it anyway
You think this is the only way you can establish it? :D
So if you happen to support a few to many low earners you might be bad, but if you did not you might be good.....?
This is not a race for me, it is a way to earn extra income I really need. If I reach my personal sales target, I am good, if I did not, the industry is bad! Does it not work for most of you that way? ;D
Oh yes, and my congratulations to the big winners! ;)
PS wut I am rooting for you, are you the hat or the iron?
The race car! ;D (http://s5.postimage.org/t3ca8q1d3/monopoly_race_car.jpg) (http://postimage.org/)
jpg image hosting (http://postimage.org/)
There are people with a $10 a month RPI? WOW, that's fantastic. Is there some reason why I shouldn't believe that?
Lets see 3000 images, x $10 = $30,000 a month? Please buy one of the agencies and change the commission to 50% for all of us. (exclusive only of course) so we can "punish" the low pay/percentage sites. At $360,000 a year, someone could afford to make an artist friendly agency.
$10 a month and 200 pictures? Dang, that person needs to have 2000 photos and bank it.
Of course if it's someone with one photo on Alamy that sells once a year, their RPI is easily $10 a month.
And there lies the flaw in RPI. How many pictures, how much did they cost, how many agencies. The obvious also is I have some photos that have never sold in five years and probably never will. Best thing for me to do is remove them and make my RPI better. ::)
Still not a fan of RPI, but a huge fan of bottom line.
-
Why is this important? all I care about is the monthly net pay, sod the rest.
So if you had 100 images and made $10,000 per month or had 10,000 images and made $100 per month this would mean nothing to you?
Sure! it will give an indication, I agree but in the end of the day, its the net result that counts. Here is an example: I have certain images in my port, that are always selling for extremely good money, now if I were to include these in the overall RPI, it would be slightly misleading, since they would increase the RPI by a huge amount. See what I mean?
best.
-
Why is this important? all I care about is the monthly net pay, sod the rest.
So if you had 100 images and made $10,000 per month or had 10,000 images and made $100 per month this would mean nothing to you?
Sure! it will give an indication, I agree but in the end of the day, its the net result that counts. Here is an example: I have certain images in my port, that are always selling for extremely good money, now if I were to include these in the overall RPI, it would be slightly misleading, since they would increase the RPI by a huge amount. See what I mean?
best.
Yes, I see what you mean. This isn't a scientific poll meant to figure in all of the variables. It's a loose ballpark to get a basic idea on trending and I think it does the job.
-
It's very simple, it tells you how good (or bad) stock photographer you really are. If that's important to you, than this stat is important to you, if it's not, you don't bother with it anyway
You think this is the only way you can establish it? :D
So if you happen to support a few to many low earners you might be bad, but if you did not you might be good.....?
This is not a race for me, it is a way to earn extra income I really need. If I reach my personal sales target, I am good, if I did not, the industry is bad! Does it not work for most of you that way? ;D
Oh yes, and my congratulations to the big winners! ;)
PS wut I am rooting for you, are you the hat or the iron?
There are people with a $10 a month RPI? WOW, that's fantastic. Is there some reason why I shouldn't believe that?
Lets see 3000 images, x $10 = $30,000 a month? Please buy one of the agencies and change the commission to 50% for all of us. (exclusive only of course) so we can "punish" the low pay/percentage sites. At $360,000 a year, someone could afford to make an artist friendly agency.
$10 a month and 200 pictures? Dang, that person needs to have 2000 photos and bank it.
Of course if it's someone with one photo on Alamy that sells once a year, their RPI is easily $10 a month.
And there lies the flaw in RPI. How many pictures, how much did they cost, how many agencies. The obvious also is I have some photos that have never sold in five years and probably never will. Best thing for me to do is remove them and make my RPI better. ::)
Still not a fan of RPI, but a huge fan of bottom line.
I believe it. Why do I believe it? Because a few years ago I used to get well over $10 RPI on my macro stuff but not anymore. So, it's possible. While a lot of people think RPI is useless it has helped me track trending on my performance and make adjustments to where I spend my time. I've seen people who have a couple hundred images in their portfolio and tens of thousands of downloads. I'm guessing their RPI is a lot higher than the average showing in the poll.
-
.....
There are people with a $10 a month RPI? WOW, that's fantastic. Is there some reason why I shouldn't believe that?
You are correct that it seems there is little point just asking what people's RPI is in a thread like this unless you also specify how it is to be calculated.
I have already said how I calculate mine. If others delete low earners and then don't take them into account, or only take into account images accepted etc. etc. they will get wildly different results.
Results that are of very little use from a business perspective, though they may be good for an ego boost if that kind of thing floats your boat.
This seems to be the source of the arguments on this thread.
-
And there lies the flaw in RPI. How many pictures, how much did they cost, how many agencies. The obvious also is I have some photos that have never sold in five years and probably never will. Best thing for me to do is remove them and make my RPI better. ::)
There's really no flaw in RPI if you calculate it correctly. TOTAL income across all agencies divided by TOTAL images in your port (every image you've created for the purpose of microstock).
Playing with the numbers (not counting the poor selling or rejected shots) is like saying "I make $50,000 a year at my job, but about half the time I sit around doing nothing, so I really make $100,000!"
An intelligent forecaster and analyst knows how to calculate an honest RPI and use it to his/her advantage. Someone with a shrinking RPI may try justifying a poor number by claiming it's unimportant or deceptive, but those folks are shooting themselves in the foot. The truth is it's an honest number (if calculated correctly!) that will tell you which direction you're REALLY going and if it's time to alter what you're doing.
-
^^lol, what I was trying to say but failed to!
-
Of course if it's someone with one photo on Alamy that sells once a year, their RPI is easily $10 a month.
Not quite: their RPI could be $10 a month, or it could be much less. Depends.
-
does low earners/new agencies enter here?
they should but then it would bring RPI way lower..
-
For me the analysis is more valuable in comparing my own images - for example Editorial with Creative content on IS, I find that m RPI is about 2.5 times higher on creative images. What would be more interesting would be matching RPI figures with portfolios, but I suspect not too many are going to volunteer that info!
-
Just to reiterate, the "honest" way to track RPI is: TOTAL income across all agencies divided by TOTAL images in your port (every image you've created for the purpose of microstock).
Adding results from more agencies, no matter how large or small, will only drive RPI higher. It would not decrease it.
-
Just to reiterate, the "honest" way to track RPI is: TOTAL income across all agencies divided by TOTAL images in your port (every image you've created for the purpose of microstock).
Yep. That's exactly how I calculated mine. If anyone's doing it differently to that, it might be worth re-starting the poll with the desired calculation at the top, so that all entries are truly comparable.
-
Just to reiterate, the "honest" way to track RPI is: TOTAL income across all agencies divided by TOTAL images in your port (every image you've created for the purpose of microstock).
Adding results from more agencies, no matter how large or small, will only drive RPI higher. It would not decrease it.
only if you do as you say its correct which I agree
-
Just to reiterate, the "honest" way to track RPI is: TOTAL income across all agencies divided by TOTAL images in your port (every image you've created for the purpose of microstock).
Adding results from more agencies, no matter how large or small, will only drive RPI higher. It would not decrease it.
Total or average? It's a bit confusing, because if you add the numbers (IS 908+SS 1022+CS 4569 etc) the number becomes huge. And your next sentence contradicts that. It makes some sense to me to either count for every image you've ever created for MS, but not really, since you don't even postprocess, keyword and upload 90%+ of them (at least I don't), it would make most sense to take into account every image you've ever submitted. Or even the average or the agency with the biggest port isn't so bad either
-
yep total submitted sounds the more accurate, not every single frame we have shoot
-
Interesting question about how to do this!
I have a separate set of folders of images I have uploaded somewhere (not necessarily to all sites), and that contains 3784 images. My largest portfolio actually for sale on a site is about 3000. I had worked out RPI on a site by site basis last year by looking at the online files on each site and dividing that into the earnings from that site, so it told me how much each site was contributing in terms of revenue per image online - the answer was $0.70 per online image per month. If I take the earnings in January ($1144) divided by the total set of images I have created and uploaded at least once (3784) I get $0.30 per created image per month.
Now the big question is - does any of this help us very much???
Steve
PS - if you want to see the details per site it is here: http://www.backyardsilver.com/2011/12/earnings-per-image-what-can-you-make-from-each-photo/ (http://www.backyardsilver.com/2011/12/earnings-per-image-what-can-you-make-from-each-photo/)
-
Now the big question is - does any of this help us very much???
it does if you can change (if needed) the subjects you are approaching, basically if you are willing to change the way you do stock, overall it makes a lot of sense but it combines a lot stuff such as: money, time, gear, props, research, skills, keywording etc..
-
It's very simple, it tells you how good (or bad) stock photographer you really are. If that's important to you, than this stat is important to you, if it's not, you don't bother with it anyway
It doesn't really tell you that. It might tell you how large your sensor is, or that you are not favoured in iStock's search engine or that your preferred subjects aren't "HCV" or lots of other stuff that isn't immediately apparent.
-
It's very simple, it tells you how good (or bad) stock photographer you really are. If that's important to you, than this stat is important to you, if it's not, you don't bother with it anyway
It doesn't really tell you that. It might tell you how large your sensor is, or that you are not favoured in iStock's search engine or that your preferred subjects aren't "HCV" or lots of other stuff that isn't immediately apparent.
But isn't it your fault that your subjects are not HCV? And IS, the way it is now for most indies, can't affect RPI much ;)
-
I got 24c per online image per month on Shutterstock and 19c per online image on iStock. Earnings on iStock are lower in total because I don't have as many online images, so I think both ways of analysis (by site and overall) are interesting and perhaps useful.
If only I could work out before I take the shot which ones are going to be successful, I could be really efficient!! ;D
I see this sort of thing as interesting, but not particularly useful in terms of what I do next, to be honest.
Steve
-
I see this sort of thing as interesting, but not particularly useful in terms of what I do next, to be honest.
me too unless I start shooting a lot less and spending a lot more
-
^^lol, what I was trying to say but failed to!
Here's what I'm trying to get at: "I believe it. Why do I believe it? Because a few years ago I used to get well over $10 RPI on my macro stuff but not anymore. So, it's possible." Hey but isn't Macro, this a MICROSTOCK site and Microstock pole? If not then I can understand, but someone getting a monthly Return Per Image of $10 on Microstock is fairly difficult to believe, unless they have maybe 30 agencies and that's how they get to five times higher than the high, $2 a month claims!
Am I reading this wrong? $10 a month per image, every month? Darn that's amazing. That's $120 a year, per image! I guess there is big money in microstock after all?
Of course if it's someone with one photo on Alamy that sells once a year, their RPI is easily $10 a month.
Not quite: their RPI could be $10 a month, or it could be much less. Depends.
Sorry again but numbers are numbers and math isn't an opinion or depends. It either IS or ISN'T. One sale per year for $120 commission, with only one image, is $10 RPI per month. Pretty much as easy as it gets?
I know Paulie is trying to ask a nice simple question and see what's up with the marketplace, but how it's calculated needs to be explained and I'm skeptical that so many people are making big numbers Per Month, Per Image, on micro alone.
Even using Paulie's nice clear math explanation, someone with 1000 images is making $10,000 a month, $120 grand a year, on Micro? Really? Darn I'm impressed! One person says they do? Even the $7 RPI per month is something worth an award. $84,000 a year on Micro. That's super! Nice work.
-
Of course if it's someone with one photo on Alamy that sells once a year, their RPI is easily $10 a month.
Not quite: their RPI could be $10 a month, or it could be much less. Depends.
Sorry again but numbers are numbers and math isn't an opinion or depends. It either IS or ISN'T. One sale per year for $120 commission, with only one image, is $10 RPI per month. Pretty much as easy as it gets?
You didn't say anything in your original post about $120 commission. You seemed to imply that that was a fixed amount, which it certainly isn't. You can get well over $120 for a commisssion, or much, must less. The latter, sadly, seems more common nowadays, at least for those frequenting the forums.
-
Of course if it's someone with one photo on Alamy that sells once a year, their RPI is easily $10 a month.
Not quite: their RPI could be $10 a month, or it could be much less. Depends.
Sorry again but numbers are numbers and math isn't an opinion or depends. It either IS or ISN'T. One sale per year for $120 commission, with only one image, is $10 RPI per month. Pretty much as easy as it gets?
You didn't say anything in your original post about $120 commission. You seemed to imply that that was a fixed amount, which it certainly isn't. You can get well over $120 for a commisssion, or much, must less. The latter, sadly, seems more common nowadays, at least for those frequenting the forums.
Yes you are correct, it was about, one image, one sale, RPI = 1/12th of that. Plus I used Alamy and that contradicted my own arguments because Alamy isn't microstock.
Obviously the person with a $10 a month, per image RPI isn't selling on SS or ThinkStock where it would take 40 downlaods of every image they own, on average, ever month, to make $10 RPI. (extend that out and it means every single image, gets downloaded on an average of 480 times a year!) Now you see why I'm skeptical of the poll and the $10 a month RPI?
We're also assuming Dollars. I remember a few years back when someone said their knew someone making five figures on Microstock and when we pushed for facts, it was South African Rands or something. 8 per dollar, 12 per Pound. And for all I know, some people include the two decimal places when they are talking five figure incomes. ::)
Sometimes there are things lost in the translation. Like what is a RPI per month? (not year) And if I remember right the usual claim is an average of $2 beck when Micro was hot and sales were good before subs and price cutting everywhere took over. $1 a month would be pretty hot if you ask me. I can see an IS exclusive getting more. Someone with a bunch of agencies doing what's normal would be $3 a month, average, for their whole collection.
$10 a month RPI? Microstock only? I'm finding it difficult to accept.
-
Of course if it's someone with one photo on Alamy that sells once a year, their RPI is easily $10 a month.
Not quite: their RPI could be $10 a month, or it could be much less. Depends.
Sorry again but numbers are numbers and math isn't an opinion or depends. It either IS or ISN'T. One sale per year for $120 commission, with only one image, is $10 RPI per month. Pretty much as easy as it gets?
You didn't say anything in your original post about $120 commission. You seemed to imply that that was a fixed amount, which it certainly isn't. You can get well over $120 for a commisssion, or much, must less. The latter, sadly, seems more common nowadays, at least for those frequenting the forums.
Yes you are correct, it was about, one image, one sale, RPI = 1/12th of that. Plus I used Alamy and that contradicted my own arguments because Alamy isn't microstock.
Obviously the person with a $10 a month, per image RPI isn't selling on SS or ThinkStock where it would take 40 downlaods of every image they own, on average, ever month, to make $10 RPI. (extend that out and it means every single image, gets downloaded on an average of 480 times a year!) Now you see why I'm skeptical of the poll and the $10 a month RPI?
We're also assuming Dollars. I remember a few years back when someone said their knew someone making five figures on Microstock and when we pushed for facts, it was South African Rands or something. 8 per dollar, 12 per Pound. And for all I know, some people include the two decimal places when they are talking five figure incomes. ::)
Sometimes there are things lost in the translation. Like what is a RPI per month? (not year) And if I remember right the usual claim is an average of $2 beck when Micro was hot and sales were good before subs and price cutting everywhere took over. $1 a month would be pretty hot if you ask me. I can see an IS exclusive getting more. Someone with a bunch of agencies doing what's normal would be $3 a month, average, for their whole collection.
$10 a month RPI? Microstock only? I'm finding it difficult to accept.
I recently saw a contributor that has a couple hundred images and over 100,000 downloads. I wouldn't call that average. I'd say that's some spectacular performance and exponentially above average. Could they have deleted thousands of images? Maybe. Looking at their work, I doubt it. Excellent, well edited, highly sellable stuff. I'd guess they have a massively high RPI and $10 wouldn't surprise me.
-
I recently saw a contributor that has a couple hundred images and over 100,000 downloads. I wouldn't call that average. I'd say that's some spectacular performance and exponentially above average. Could they have deleted thousands of images? Maybe. Looking at their work, I doubt it. Excellent, well edited, highly sellable stuff. I'd guess they have a massively high RPI and $10 wouldn't surprise me.
Above average and exceptional work.
So what's the average RPI? ;D (devils question because we don't know who or what or how many images, but I suppose on the large scale, the survey could come up with an average, average?)
If I was getting $1 a month I'd be exceptionally happy. Keep in mind that I'm only with SS and IS now. Some people are marketing through 25 or more agencies, maybe their own sites? It's a tangled web for such a simple appearing question.
So far 52% of the people who answered make under 75c RPI per month. We don't know if those same people have 300 images on two sites or 3000 images on ten sites.