Author Topic: Time to cull your portfolio's.. (Read 13548 times)

shank_ali · « **on:** January 04, 2009, 02:43 »

If and when i can post again on the istock forum my first post will to ask the contributors to cull their respective portfolios by at least 1%-5%.
The istock library is growing too fast and we have literally 1000's of images that will never see the light of day or a sale.
It is difficult for a pro who has spent time and money on a model and wants as many photos from the shoot in his/her portfolio but they must realise the actually harm it is having on the library and the search function for the buyers.
eg...more of this model here...20-60 images with "0" sales Cull them please.
Holiday photos with no sales after a year...Cull them.
Food photos Cull the ones that have not sold.
Old photos...You know you can shoot better now.
All contributors to look at the first 5 pages of their portfolios and cringe

then Cull.
If we can cull/remove 100,000 files this year i think the buyers and istockphoto would be happy.

bittersweet · « **Reply #1 on:** January 04, 2009, 03:01 »

Time to cull your apostrophes.

Graffoto · « **Reply #2 on:** January 04, 2009, 03:06 »

I have had several old images sell recently that I would not have had a sale for if I had culled them.

IS does cull old non-selling images; it is called the Dollar Bin.
And now with the new three tier system coming out, I think I will take a wait and see attitude.

Could be the majority of so-so stuff winds up in the bottom rung and will sell for peanuts, but at least they will sell.

I will admit that I have a couple of old stinkers in my port, I have been waiting for them to go to the dollar bin for quite some time now.

sharply_done · « **Reply #3 on:** January 04, 2009, 03:08 »

I think you are failing to realize, shank_ali, that (older) non-sellers show up at the very bottom of search queries, and are thereby automatically culled: taking the time to eliminate them from your portfolio is doing nothing but wasting time.

hoi ha · « **Reply #4 on:** January 04, 2009, 06:36 »

Quote from: shank_ali on January 04, 2009, 02:43

If and when i can post again on the istock forum my first post will to ask the contributors to cull their respective portfolios by at least 1%-5%.

So why did they boot you from the forums anyway Shank? Do they suspend people for a period of time or just boot them altogether?

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #5 on:** January 04, 2009, 08:47 »

IS looks like they'll be starting to cull images with the new tiered pricing model in Q1 2009. And besides, the new best match is getting rolled out so a 0 seller could turn into a good seller overnight.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #6 on:** January 04, 2009, 09:11 »

Quote from: whatalife on January 04, 2009, 03:01

Time to cull your apostrophes.

Heh-heh.

With the new relevancy factor in the best match sort, it doesn't really matter. Unpurchased files should slide to the back of appropriate keyword searches anyways.

shank_ali · « **Reply #7 on:** January 04, 2009, 09:44 »

Quote from: hoi ha on January 04, 2009, 06:36

Quote from: shank_ali on January 04, 2009, 02:43
If and when i can post again on the istock forum my first post will to ask the contributors to cull their respective portfolios by at least 1%-5%.

So why did they boot you from the forums anyway Shank? Do they suspend people for a period of time or just boot them altogether?

I had a very bad habit of site -mailing all the female contributors on istockphoto enquiring about the color of their knickers!
I have had extensive therapy in the past two months and feel cured and ready to post again.

hoi ha · « **Reply #8 on:** January 04, 2009, 10:25 »

Quote from: shank_ali on January 04, 2009, 09:44

Quote from: hoi ha on January 04, 2009, 06:36
Quote from: shank_ali on January 04, 2009, 02:43
If and when i can post again on the istock forum my first post will to ask the contributors to cull their respective portfolios by at least 1%-5%.

So why did they boot you from the forums anyway Shank? Do they suspend people for a period of time or just boot them altogether?
I had a very bad habit of site -mailing all the female contributors on istockphoto enquiring about the color of their knickers!
I have had extensive therapy in the past two months and feel cured and ready to post again.

Oh I am not sure about that - takes years of therapy to effect the kind of cure i am sure IS would find necessary ...

shank_ali · « **Reply #9 on:** January 04, 2009, 15:30 »

The relevancy factor still depends on the small matter of a file being keyworded correctly.If and when the keywords are sorted then perhaps the best match might work as the new directive intends until that time i remain sceptical.
BTW i keyworded welder and chose best match.It's getting better but still on page one we have a welding screen and welding gauntlets on white background.I wikied the file but it's getting tiresome doing istock's job for them!

Fran · « **Reply #10 on:** January 05, 2009, 08:00 »

Quote from: sharply_done on January 04, 2009, 03:08

I think you are failing to realize, shank_ali, that (older) non-sellers show up at the very bottom of search queries, and are thereby automatically culled: taking the time to eliminate them from your portfolio is doing nothing but wasting time.

I agree. The reason I see to cull my old images is purely personal: since I have improved in a year I want to present a better portfolio.

shank_ali · « **Reply #11 on:** January 19, 2009, 17:21 »

Well i went and de-activated some files this evening and found it quite hard.I found myself remembering where i took the shots.The magic of photography i suppose capturing moments in time....
The reasons i stated on the 8 de-activated files ranged from not suitable as stock,i can shoot better and there are far more better photos of flowers in the collection than mine.
I shall review my portfolio on a regular basis from now on and trim the fat !

photoagogo · « **Reply #12 on:** January 19, 2009, 17:41 »

Quote from: shank_ali on January 19, 2009, 17:21

Well i went and de-activated some files this evening and found it quite hard.I found myself remembering where i took the shots.The magic of photography i suppose capturing moments in time....
The reasons i stated on the 8 de-activated files ranged from not suitable as stock,i can shoot better and there are far more better photos of flowers in the collection than mine.
I shall review my portfolio on a regular basis from now on and trim the fat !

You've only got 522 to go, keep at it...

shank_ali · « **Reply #13 on:** January 20, 2009, 02:01 »

Quote from: photoagogo on January 19, 2009, 17:41

Quote from: shank_ali on January 19, 2009, 17:21
Well i went and de-activated some files this evening and found it quite hard.I found myself remembering where i took the shots.The magic of photography i suppose capturing moments in time....
The reasons i stated on the 8 de-activated files ranged from not suitable as stock,i can shoot better and there are far more better photos of flowers in the collection than mine.
I shall review my portfolio on a regular basis from now on and trim the fat !

You've only got 522 to go, keep at it...

Thanks for taking the time to click on the link and looking at my istock portfolio.

jeffclow · « **Reply #14 on:** January 28, 2009, 11:51 »

I could not readily find the answer (I promise - I looked and looked).....but since I've never deactivated a photo on IS, can someone explain how one goes about deactivating a file that isn't selling? Maybe I'm just not going to the correct screen.

I looked for a place to do so at the site, and I can't seem to locate it.

Thanks.

thesentinel · « **Reply #15 on:** January 28, 2009, 11:59 »

Quote from: jeffclow on January 28, 2009, 11:51

I could not readily find the answer (I promise - I looked and looked).....but since I've never deactivated a photo on IS, can someone explain how one goes about deactivating a file that isn't selling? Maybe I'm just not going to the correct screen.

I looked for a place to do so at the site, and I can't seem to locate it.

Thanks.

Click on "Administration" on the file page, then type in your reason into the Change File Status box and click the deactivate file button, et viola!

jeffclow · « **Reply #16 on:** January 28, 2009, 12:01 »

Thanks for the quick response - much appreciated.

yecatsdoherty · « **Reply #17 on:** February 03, 2009, 17:46 »

I just finished culling close to 400 images. ego is the reason for me too. I want my best work up, and I don't want zero sellers up. I give files a year, then I pull them. a year should be long enough to measure their saleability over a number of best match shifts.

bittersweet · « **Reply #18 on:** February 03, 2009, 18:19 »

Quote from: yecatsdoherty on February 03, 2009, 17:46

I just finished culling close to 400 images.

And there can't possibly be any correlation between this and your drastic drop in sales?

cmcderm1 · « **Reply #19 on:** February 03, 2009, 18:39 »

Bad Idea.

Just had a zero seller, oldie garner a $31 Enhanced License. I think I'll keep the oldies around awhile.

Besides, oldies get "pushed to the back" eventually and don't get much attention under the best match at IS.

My two cents, or $31 !!!

m@m · « **Reply #20 on:** February 03, 2009, 19:41 »

I agree with you cmcderm1...anyhow IS (the dollar bin) and other sites sell older pictures for cheapper prices once they stopped selling or have not sold at all after a couple of years, so why would I take my photos out, specially after I went to all the trouble of uploading them in the first place, I think NOT!

yecatsdoherty · « **Reply #21 on:** February 03, 2009, 19:53 »

Quote from: whatalife on February 03, 2009, 18:19

Quote from: yecatsdoherty on February 03, 2009, 17:46
I just finished culling close to 400 images.

And there can't possibly be any correlation between this and your drastic drop in sales?

I only did it yesterday......old files of mine are selling too and I have left those ones...I want my best work in my portfolio, not files that might get one or two more dls, if any at all

helix7 · « **Reply #22 on:** February 03, 2009, 23:02 »

For 20% of each sale, I'm not spending one minute culling my istock portfolio. If they want to, they can to it themselves. And if there was an excess of images that was causing some problems for buyers, you know they would do it too.

shank_ali · « **Reply #23 on:** February 04, 2009, 02:12 »

Quote from: yecatsdoherty on February 03, 2009, 17:46

I just finished culling close to 400 images. ego is the reason for me too. I want my best work up, and I don't want zero sellers up. I give files a year, then I pull them. a year should be long enough to measure their saleability over a number of best match shifts.

tut tut you could of uploaded those to shutterstock and see how they panned out......

Graffoto · « **Reply #24 on:** February 20, 2009, 17:33 »

Well, IS 'culled' four of my images yesterday for the new Dollar Bin (or whatever they finally decide to call it).

I knew they would get around to this sooner than later, so I saw no reason to cull this stuff myself. At least know these old stinkers have a second chance to be seen and maybe make a few pennies before there are completely discarded

Any one else have images pulled to the new bin?

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Time to cull your portfolio's.. (Read 13548 times)

shank_ali

bittersweet

Graffoto

sharply_done

hoi ha

PaulieWalnuts

Sean Locke Photography

shank_ali

hoi ha

shank_ali

Fran

shank_ali

photoagogo

shank_ali

jeffclow

thesentinel

jeffclow

yecatsdoherty

bittersweet

cmcderm1

m@m

yecatsdoherty

helix7

shank_ali

Graffoto

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors