Author Topic: Quantity never beats quality (Read 29968 times)

wut · « **Reply #75 on:** May 11, 2012, 10:30 »

Fu*k me!!! I found a niche at IS, more than half of my sales in the last couple of days are coming from that series. Recently uploaded series of less than 10 photos. Quality wins over and over and over again!

RT · « **Reply #76 on:** May 11, 2012, 10:48 »

Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 10:30

Fu*k me!!! I found a niche at IS, more than half of my sales in the last couple of days are coming from that series.

Congratulations, to be honest though no matter how desperate I was for sales I wouldn't have had my photo taken in that situation let alone upload them

Ed · « **Reply #77 on:** May 11, 2012, 10:49 »

Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 10:30

Fu*k me!!! I found a niche at IS, more than half of my sales in the last couple of days are coming from that series. Recently uploaded series of less than 10 photos. Quality wins over and over and over again!

Not sure how that relates to quality....if you aren't competing against anything else remotely similar, then it simply means it's the only option.

In that instance - you need to change your phrase to "Monopoly wins over and over and over again!"

heywoody · « **Reply #78 on:** May 11, 2012, 11:00 »

Quote from: Ed on May 11, 2012, 10:49

Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 10:30
Fu*k me!!! I found a niche at IS, more than half of my sales in the last couple of days are coming from that series. Recently uploaded series of less than 10 photos. Quality wins over and over and over again!

Not sure how that relates to quality....if you aren't competing against anything else remotely similar, then it simply means it's the only option.

In that instance - you need to change your phrase to "Monopoly wins over and over and over again!"

Not really, no point (well no commercial point) in having unique images that nobody is looking for (believe me, I have tons of those) - the secret is to have rare subjects that people are looking for

Again though, nothing to do with quality as such.

wut · « **Reply #79 on:** May 11, 2012, 11:01 »

Quote from: Ed on May 11, 2012, 10:49

Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 10:30
Fu*k me!!! I found a niche at IS, more than half of my sales in the last couple of days are coming from that series. Recently uploaded series of less than 10 photos. Quality wins over and over and over again!

Not sure how that relates to quality....if you aren't competing against anything else remotely similar, then it simply means it's the only option.

In that instance - you need to change your phrase to "Monopoly wins over and over and over again!"

Oh come on!! There's always a ton of images that compete against yours, finding a niche means there's a lot less of competition. Lack of competition exists in certain areas for a reason; because no one needs it, therefor buys it.

It relates to quality, because I took my time to carefully execute each and every photo and not just snap away to get a ton of sheatty images. They stand out, that's why they sell

wut · « **Reply #80 on:** May 11, 2012, 11:03 »

Quote from: RT on May 11, 2012, 10:48

Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 10:30
Fu*k me!!! I found a niche at IS, more than half of my sales in the last couple of days are coming from that series.

Congratulations, to be honest though no matter how desperate I was for sales I wouldn't have had my photo taken in that situation let alone upload them

Sry, but I don't get what you're trying to say

oxman · « **Reply #81 on:** May 11, 2012, 11:29 »

Quote from: Perry on May 10, 2012, 07:35

Quote from: pancaketom on May 09, 2012, 16:24
I am a rock climber and as far as I can tell the best selling rock climbing picture on SS is completely laughable as far as rock climbing goes. So having knowledge and access isn't necessarily what is required.

You are right. But I personally wouldn't spend time shooting images that are "wrong", it just doesn't make sense because everything could be done "correctly" just by asking some specialist or by googling around.

We also don't know if a portion of buyers have noticed that the rock climbing pictures look "wrong" and they have searched for better ones, maybe even contacting a macrocstock site or some rock climbing photographer to get the needed images. We just don't know it. We only know that many of the buyers are totally clueless

About six months ago I designed a trade show exhibit for a tech company. They wanted a rock or ice climber for a metaphor concept. I sent them to iStock and they said the selection was pathetic and fake. They headed to Corbis and Getty RF and RM and bought from Getty RM. Price was not a concern.

Point - marketing managers and CEOs are not stupid. There are many more pragmatic and shrewd buyers out there than some here assume. Most of my clients fall into this group when it comes to images used in marketing.

lagereek · « **Reply #82 on:** May 11, 2012, 12:05 »

Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 10:30

Fu*k me!!! I found a niche at IS, more than half of my sales in the last couple of days are coming from that series. Recently uploaded series of less than 10 photos. Quality wins over and over and over again!

Splendid old chap! now would you be so kind as to inform us what kind of a nieche you have found. Please. We thank you! and wait in anticipation.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #83 on:** May 11, 2012, 14:22 »

Quote from: lagereek on May 11, 2012, 12:05

Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 10:30
Fu*k me!!! I found a niche at IS, more than half of my sales in the last couple of days are coming from that series. Recently uploaded series of less than 10 photos. Quality wins over and over and over again!

Splendid old chap! now would you be so kind as to inform us what kind of a nieche you have found. Please. We thank you! and wait in anticipation.

I hit one of those niches a while back. It was an istock search generated niche called "fish and chips". It just happened that at one of the moments when their search went crazy I uploaded a "fish and chips" pic, that became one of only about 30 that turned up in the search for that term (and 25 of them were spam rather than true "fish and chips"). It rapidly moved to the top of my personal "best match" and the sales that search generated put it into the first page of the "fish" search (at one time into the best five for "fish"). I've had hundreds of sales for a respectable but not incredible image.

That's what a "niche" is these days. A search glitch.

wut · « **Reply #84 on:** May 11, 2012, 14:24 »

Quote from: lagereek on May 11, 2012, 12:05

Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 10:30
Fu*k me!!! I found a niche at IS, more than half of my sales in the last couple of days are coming from that series. Recently uploaded series of less than 10 photos. Quality wins over and over and over again!

Splendid old chap! now would you be so kind as to inform us what kind of a nieche you have found. Please. We thank you! and wait in anticipation.

Well you already said it last time, what brings in serious cash

wut · « **Reply #85 on:** May 11, 2012, 14:28 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on May 11, 2012, 14:22

Quote from: lagereek on May 11, 2012, 12:05
Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 10:30
Fu*k me!!! I found a niche at IS, more than half of my sales in the last couple of days are coming from that series. Recently uploaded series of less than 10 photos. Quality wins over and over and over again!

Splendid old chap! now would you be so kind as to inform us what kind of a nieche you have found. Please. We thank you! and wait in anticipation.

I hit one of those niches a while back. It was an istock search generated niche called "fish and chips". It just happened that at one of the moments when their search went crazy I uploaded a "fish and chips" pic, that became one of only about 30 that turned up in the search for that term (and 25 of them were spam rather than true "fish and chips"). It rapidly moved to the top of my personal "best match" and the sales that search generated put it into the first page of the "fish" search (at one time into the best five for "fish"). I've had hundreds of sales for a respectable but not incredible image.

That's what a "niche" is these days. A search glitch.

Wow, if a glitch helped me, it would be like hitting the lottery!

(since there's almost 10 images and all sell) Well for me anyway

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #86 on:** May 11, 2012, 14:30 »

Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 14:28

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on May 11, 2012, 14:22
Quote from: lagereek on May 11, 2012, 12:05
Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 10:30
Fu*k me!!! I found a niche at IS, more than half of my sales in the last couple of days are coming from that series. Recently uploaded series of less than 10 photos. Quality wins over and over and over again!

Splendid old chap! now would you be so kind as to inform us what kind of a nieche you have found. Please. We thank you! and wait in anticipation.

I hit one of those niches a while back. It was an istock search generated niche called "fish and chips". It just happened that at one of the moments when their search went crazy I uploaded a "fish and chips" pic, that became one of only about 30 that turned up in the search for that term (and 25 of them were spam rather than true "fish and chips"). It rapidly moved to the top of my personal "best match" and the sales that search generated put it into the first page of the "fish" search (at one time into the best five for "fish"). I've had hundreds of sales for a respectable but not incredible image.

That's what a "niche" is these days. A search glitch.

Wow, if a glitch helped me, it would be like hitting the lottery! (since there's almost 10 images and all sell) Well for me anyway

I'm sorry, I thought it was an accident rather than an appropriate expression of your inate brilliance. I stand corrected.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #87 on:** May 11, 2012, 14:36 »

Seriously, the "fish and chips" glitch showed me just how much the cheats who gamed the rating system a few years back must have profited from their actions and continued to profit for a very, very long time after it was stopped. Not everyone with a big iStock canister must have got it through fair dealing.

wut · « **Reply #88 on:** May 11, 2012, 14:54 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on May 11, 2012, 14:36

Seriously, the "fish and chips" glitch showed me just how much the cheats who gamed the rating system a few years back must have profited from their actions and continued to profit for a very, very long time after it was stopped. Not everyone with a big iStock canister must have got it through fair dealing.

Cheats? Would you mind dropping another line or 2, this is interesting

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #89 on:** May 11, 2012, 15:11 »

A few years back people discovered that by giving each other "5" ratings on istock they propelled each other's images to the top of the search, where buyer lethargy kept the images indefinitely. When iStock caught on, it removed the public rating system from the search algorithm and it may also have cancelled the accounts of a handful of the worst culprits. But once an image is given real momentum it remains locked in to the top of the search for a long, long time, with buyers picking it up just because it is on the first seach page, and so keeping it there.

Just as a number of us are top contributers for not much better reason that that we have been pushing images through for eight years, so there are images that remain popular because their search ranking was falsely inflated and have been stuck high in searches for years.

wut · « **Reply #90 on:** May 11, 2012, 15:25 »

Wow, now I'm really sorry I didn't start back in 06 when a few ppl were trying to convince me to start doing it (one is a 130K+ diamond now, the other is at around 90k). If I had gambled the system, I'd probably be a diamond now. Well most definitely. Starting in 2010 really makes you struggling and no one will ever get to 1 mil DLs at IS if he's going to start doing MS today. Even Yuri would need at least 15 years to get to current numbers (now that photos don't cost 1-4$ anymore, the volume is a LOT lower). But I don't think there will still be MS in 15 years, well not in this current form, I'm sure quality will start falling if there are going to be more cuts and no price rises. With libraries getting bigger and bigger you really need great stuff to stick out in the searches, but that usually costs a lot to produce. So lower earnings, higher expenses will bring MS to where it was when it started, a place for amateurs to sell their images, mostly really poorly executed.

lagereek · « **Reply #91 on:** May 11, 2012, 15:41 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on May 11, 2012, 15:11

A few years back people discovered that by giving each other "5" ratings on istock they propelled each other's images to the top of the search, where buyer lethargy kept the images indefinitely. When iStock caught on, it removed the public rating system from the search algorithm and it may also have cancelled the accounts of a handful of the worst culprits. But once an image is given real momentum it remains locked in to the top of the search for a long, long time, with buyers picking it up just because it is on the first seach page, and so keeping it there.

Just as a number of us are top contributers for not much better reason that that we have been pushing images through for eight years, so there are images that remain popular because their search ranking was falsely inflated and have been stuck high in searches for years.

Yeah I remember this incident well, it was a small gang rating each other, later they got booted out, accounts closed.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #92 on:** May 11, 2012, 16:15 »

Quote from: lagereek on May 11, 2012, 15:41

Yeah I remember this incident well, it was a small gang rating each other, later they got booted out, accounts closed.

One small gang? All booted? Really? My impression was that it was commonplace and most offenders were overlooked to avoid too much embarrassment. Maybe some others from that time could clarify things.

pancaketom · « **Reply #93 on:** May 11, 2012, 16:21 »

Quote from: lagereek on May 11, 2012, 15:41

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on May 11, 2012, 15:11
A few years back people discovered that by giving each other "5" ratings on istock they propelled each other's images to the top of the search, where buyer lethargy kept the images indefinitely. When iStock caught on, it removed the public rating system from the search algorithm and it may also have cancelled the accounts of a handful of the worst culprits. But once an image is given real momentum it remains locked in to the top of the search for a long, long time, with buyers picking it up just because it is on the first seach page, and so keeping it there.

Just as a number of us are top contributers for not much better reason that that we have been pushing images through for eight years, so there are images that remain popular because their search ranking was falsely inflated and have been stuck high in searches for years.

Yeah I remember this incident well, it was a small gang rating each other, later they got booted out, accounts closed.

I seem to recall there were groups that bought each other's images when they first appeared - this was after the user ratings were removed from the search but when initial sales were key. I think eventually they got a slap on the wrist - sort of like their big campaign against spam - a lot of talk and not much action. I think that IS has always paid out a higher percentage of payments to a fairly small number of producers and in general IS has always been a bit of a positive feedback system (like many MS sites). I had a few images that started looking promising but got hit by a best match switch and that was the end of them.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #94 on:** May 11, 2012, 16:26 »

Quote from: pancaketom on May 11, 2012, 16:21

Quote from: lagereek on May 11, 2012, 15:41
Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on May 11, 2012, 15:11
A few years back people discovered that by giving each other "5" ratings on istock they propelled each other's images to the top of the search, where buyer lethargy kept the images indefinitely. When iStock caught on, it removed the public rating system from the search algorithm and it may also have cancelled the accounts of a handful of the worst culprits. But once an image is given real momentum it remains locked in to the top of the search for a long, long time, with buyers picking it up just because it is on the first seach page, and so keeping it there.

Just as a number of us are top contributers for not much better reason that that we have been pushing images through for eight years, so there are images that remain popular because their search ranking was falsely inflated and have been stuck high in searches for years.

Yeah I remember this incident well, it was a small gang rating each other, later they got booted out, accounts closed.

I seem to recall there were groups that bought each other's images when they first appeared - this was after the user ratings were removed from the search but when initial sales were key. I think eventually they got a slap on the wrist - sort of like their big campaign against spam - a lot of talk and not much action. I think that IS has always paid out a higher percentage of payments to a fairly small number of producers and in general IS has always been a bit of a positive feedback system (like many MS sites). I had a few images that started looking promising but got hit by a best match switch and that was the end of them.

Yes, that's right. I had forgotten the details.

wut · « **Reply #95 on:** May 11, 2012, 16:33 »

Quote from: pancaketom on May 11, 2012, 16:21

I seem to recall there were groups that bought each other's images when they first appeared - this was after the user ratings were removed from the search but when initial sales were key. I think eventually they got a slap on the wrist - sort of like their big campaign against spam - a lot of talk and not much action. I think that IS has always paid out a higher percentage of payments to a fairly small number of producers and in general IS has always been a bit of a positive feedback system (like many MS sites). I had a few images that started looking promising but got hit by a best match switch and that was the end of them.

I can't see this working/paying out unless you were already getting 40% royalties. You had to sell 2,5 more after buying the photos just to break even. But then again, if you get on top, you probably earn up to 10x more. It would be a risky business for indies (leaving aside you could be banned of course)

RT · « **Reply #96 on:** May 11, 2012, 16:36 »

Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 11:03

Quote from: RT on May 11, 2012, 10:48
Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 10:30
Fu*k me!!! I found a niche at IS, more than half of my sales in the last couple of days are coming from that series.

Congratulations, to be honest though no matter how desperate I was for sales I wouldn't have had my photo taken in that situation let alone upload them

Sry, but I don't get what you're trying to say

"Fu*k me!!! I found a niche at IS, more than half of my sales in the last couple of days are coming from that series. "

Sorry my mistake I thought that was the title of your series

Noodles · « **Reply #97 on:** May 11, 2012, 16:36 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on May 11, 2012, 14:22

That's what a "niche" is these days. A search glitch.

Yes, that is highly plausible. Something that puzzles me is often after having an image/illustration accepted, it receives a few views within minutes/hours. These often go on to be good sellers. The ones that get no views have less chance of being a good seller.

Are the inspectors recognizing a potential good seller and forwarding these links to their friends (contributors) before they are available to be viewed by everyone (I wonder)?

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #98 on:** May 11, 2012, 17:03 »

Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 16:33

I can't see this working/paying out unless you were already getting 40% royalties. You had to sell 2,5 more after buying the photos just to break even. But then again, if you get on top, you probably earn up to 10x more. It would be a risky business for indies (leaving aside you could be banned of course)

It worked because you could buy an XS and the effect on the search was the same as buying an XXL. And it only took one sale to keep you up in the top couple of pages of the search for quite some time, by which time you had probably picked up a real sale. Positive feedback mechanism.

wut · « **Reply #99 on:** May 11, 2012, 18:11 »

Quote from: RT on May 11, 2012, 16:36

Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 11:03
Quote from: RT on May 11, 2012, 10:48
Quote from: wut on May 11, 2012, 10:30
Fu*k me!!! I found a niche at IS, more than half of my sales in the last couple of days are coming from that series.

Congratulations, to be honest though no matter how desperate I was for sales I wouldn't have had my photo taken in that situation let alone upload them

Sry, but I don't get what you're trying to say

"Fu*k me!!! I found a niche at IS, more than half of my sales in the last couple of days are coming from that series. "

Sorry my mistake I thought that was the title of your series

Bwahahaha, ur crazy!

P.S. Ur obviously not a Brit (although you could be and you just couldn't help yourself). But ever since I've started watching Ramsay's kitchen nightmares and An idiot abroad, I've started using these Brit cuss words/expressions (besides that one, F*cking hell). The way they say it, it just gets under your skin. And both shows are uncensored, they're just cursing all the time. Fun to watch, topped with English humour, priceless. There's a US version of Ramsay's show, but it sucks, it's censored and they want to turn it into a Jerry Springer kind of show, adding drama, there's always a dramatic moment when a fight starts, then commercial break and then they show that dramatic moment all over again and it's 45 s or so long. And there were 2 moments/commercial breaks like that in the first episode. I was done with it right away.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Quantity never beats quality (Read 29968 times)

wut

RT

Ed

heywoody

wut

wut

oxman

lagereek

BaldricksTrousers

wut

wut

BaldricksTrousers

BaldricksTrousers

wut

BaldricksTrousers

wut

lagereek

BaldricksTrousers

pancaketom

BaldricksTrousers

wut

RT

Noodles

BaldricksTrousers

wut

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors