Author Topic: Transparent png vs. clipping path (Read 6619 times)

calcaneus10 · « **on:** April 03, 2014, 19:18 »

I've been thinking about taking the top 10 popular pictures (of models isolated on white background) from SS and either creating a transparent png or a clipping path for these. Is anyone seeing any increase in sales doing a strategy like this? On Yuri's site, he offers transparent png...

http://peopleimages.com/image/new-custom-retouching-transparent-png-file-ready-for-download-denmark-serbia-czech-republic

I saw a few posts about clipping path by Jo Ann, but not sure if she thought sales had increased because of them.

Mantis · « **Reply #1 on:** April 03, 2014, 22:01 »

It's never worked for me. I used to take the time to put in clipping paths but never saw any sales pick up, so I stopped wasting my time.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #2 on:** April 04, 2014, 00:28 »

Quote from: calcaneus10 on April 03, 2014, 19:18

I've been thinking about taking the top 10 popular pictures (of models isolated on white background) from SS and either creating a transparent png or a clipping path for these. Is anyone seeing any increase in sales doing a strategy like this? On Yuri's site, he offers transparent png...

http://peopleimages.com/image/new-custom-retouching-transparent-png-file-ready-for-download-denmark-serbia-czech-republic

I saw a few posts about clipping path by Jo Ann, but not sure if she thought sales had increased because of them.

I put clipping paths into certain images where it seems to make sense - for example for an image of someone at a desk with something on the monitor, I include a clipping path so they can easily slip in their own screen image if needed. I have no clue if it helps with sales and I'm not sure how you'd ever really track that down. I think everyone who has been selling a while will have a puzzle of one or two images from a series are much more popular than the others, not always for any reason we can fathom. So even if you had some with and without for similar images, I don't know you could be sure about the influence of the clipping path vs. the image itself.

Given the time involved in making the paths, I'm guessing you wouldn't see as much return as working on more images. For a photo, a 24 bit PNG is much larger than the equivalent JPEG. I just saved a recent 21 MP image (this one) which was 8.8 MB as a JPEG (Maximum quality 12 in Photoshop) and it was 23 MB as a PNG - about 3x the size.

Given that you were planning to take a top 10 to work on-selling well without a clipping path- did you have any reason to believe you'd sell even more? Had a designer contacted you to ask about PNG?

rimglow · « **Reply #3 on:** April 04, 2014, 08:49 »

The clipping path argument is old, and no one knows how it affects sales. 90% of my stuff has clipping paths and they sell well. When I buy stock photos, and have the choice of similar images, I will choose the one with the clipping path, to save time. That said, a buyer never really knows the quality of the clipping path he just purchased.

The PNG issue is a little different. Where are you going to sell PNGs? Dreamstime, PNGStock (a new start-up), or your own website are the only three places I know of. On Dreamstime, only about one in twenty of my downloads are in the PNG (additional) format. On the other hand, if Yuri is offering it, then maybe he knows something about the future of Stock photography.

All of my isolations are on layers, so saving to PNG format is easy. Also, I am very fast at doing clipping paths to assure complete isolation, so saving them is a no brainer. I always include the words "clipping path" in my keywords and description.

calcaneus10 · « **Reply #4 on:** April 04, 2014, 11:53 »

Thanks for the comments everyone.

JoAnn, in response to your question, no, there have not been any designers contacting me about PNG. The only reason I brought this topic up was because Yuri had offered PNG transparent background service on his website, so I assumed if he was dedicating a chunk of time to this, there must be some commercial value to it. I had not realized (as rimglow) pointed out that only Dreamstime and PNGStock sold PNG. I thought maybe there were others doing it as well.

As far as the clipping path question, I remember reading on a few forums on different stock sites, how designers wished that photographers would include clipping paths in their pictures so that it would make it easier for them to manipulate in their projects. It is only speculation on my part that perhaps adding clipping paths to popular files might make them sell better. At least I can experiment, and let everyone know if I see an increase in sales. If I add the word clipping path to my new clipping path photos, and all of a sudden start seeing that in my keyword searches, I will know that it has resulted in increased sales.

lbarn · « **Reply #5 on:** April 04, 2014, 15:13 »

Did anyone ever prove or disapprove the theory that a clipping path was only viable if the largest/native size was purchased? Supposedly the image processor that creates the smaller sizes "damages the clipping path".

This theory came up again recently on Symbio, but I never saw the outcome.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #6 on:** April 04, 2014, 15:17 »

Quote from: lbarn on April 04, 2014, 15:13

Did anyone ever prove or disapprove the theory that a clipping path was only viable if the largest/native size was purchased? Supposedly the image processor that creates the smaller sizes "damages the clipping path".

This theory came up again recently on Symbio, but I never saw the outcome.

I don't remember whatever conversation it is you're referring to, but I did download a test purchase from my own site in a medium size (i.e. not the largest) and, using ImageMagick as the image processor both paths in the file were preserved correctly

Ava Glass · « **Reply #7 on:** April 04, 2014, 15:37 »

Quote from: rimglow on April 04, 2014, 08:49

The PNG issue is a little different. Where are you going to sell PNGs? Dreamstime, PNGStock (a new start-up), or your own website are the only three places I know of.

Solid Stock Art sells PNGs. I don't know how well they sell.

http://www.solidstockart.com/power-of-the-png

heywoody · « **Reply #8 on:** April 04, 2014, 16:04 »

I sell reasonable volumes of pngs on DT but virtually always a sub (the exception a rare EL) - none of these delivers extra commission. Possibly these are sales I wouldn't have made otherwise but who knows?

rimglow · « **Reply #9 on:** April 04, 2014, 16:17 »

Quote from: lbarn on April 04, 2014, 15:13

Did anyone ever prove or disapprove the theory that a clipping path was only viable if the largest/native size was purchased? Supposedly the image processor that creates the smaller sizes "damages the clipping path".

This theory came up again recently on Symbio, but I never saw the outcome.

Dreamstime only includes clipping paths at Maximum size. That means they strip them out of smaller sizes. (to insure biggest profit?) Kinda sucks.

cuppacoffee · « **Reply #10 on:** April 04, 2014, 16:30 »

Nope, that changed. If you look under your images there is a note saying "Name of Image isolated on white with a clipping path (at ALL sizes)." It was instituted some time last year on DT.

rimglow · « **Reply #11 on:** April 04, 2014, 16:58 »

Quote from: cuppacoffee on April 04, 2014, 16:30

Nope, that changed. If you look under your images there is a note saying "Name of Image isolated on white with a clipping path (at ALL sizes)." It was instituted some time last year on DT.

Hooray!!!