Author Topic: Is selling photos in the low earners worth it? (Read 6207 times)

Will Dutt · « **on:** July 14, 2011, 18:34 »

Hi All,

I am planing to start selling some of my photos soon. I was wondering if selling photos in the lower earning tier is worth it? and which lower earning microstock sites are best to upload and sell on?

Kind Regards
-WD

traveler1116 · « **Reply #1 on:** July 14, 2011, 18:59 »

The poll results on the right side of the screen show how people here rank the sites.

Will Dutt · « **Reply #2 on:** July 14, 2011, 19:02 »

Quote from: traveler1116 on July 14, 2011, 18:59

The poll results on the right side of the screen show how people here rank the sites.

Yeah, that's kinda hard not to notice. Once again just wanting to hear personal thoughts/experiences.

disorderly · « **Reply #3 on:** July 14, 2011, 19:03 »

Get yourself on the top tier site first. Then see how much time you want to spend on the middle tier. If you can get an efficient submission process, you may decide the small incremental revenue is worth it. Of course, your mileage may vary; you may have better success at some of the middle tier sites than others do at the top tier. You can't know until you try.

Mantis · « **Reply #4 on:** July 14, 2011, 19:04 »

Quote from: Will Dutt on July 14, 2011, 18:34

Hi All,

I am planing to start selling some of my photos soon. I was wondering if selling photos in the lower earning tier is worth it? and which lower earning microstock sites are best to upload and sell on?

Kind Regards
-WD

If you are going independent then you need to decide if all the upload work is worth your time for a few buck a month. You need EXCELLENT images with large volume to make a nickle on these low tier sites. Start out with the top 3-5 first then when you have nothing to do, upload to low tier sites. Be careful which sites you upload to. Deposit Photos, for example, doesn't rub right with some folks. All up to you.

Will Dutt · « **Reply #5 on:** July 14, 2011, 19:08 »

Great replies disorderly and mantis. I think your right, I shall start with the more popular Top Tiers and maybe try one or two lower tiers once I have gained some experience with agencies.

Thanks

luissantos84 · « **Reply #6 on:** July 14, 2011, 20:02 »

some numbers for you, 85% of my income come from the top5

Will Dutt · « **Reply #7 on:** July 14, 2011, 20:19 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on July 14, 2011, 20:02

some numbers for you, 85% of my income come from the top5

Finally some figures! The Top Tier really does dominate the majority of sales

stockastic · « **Reply #8 on:** July 14, 2011, 20:28 »

With my small portfolio and low rate of production, I've made enough money on SS, DT and IS that it's at least fun. On GL I make only a very occassional sale and on CC, nothing. Really the only reason to contribute to low earners like GL and CC is to help them develop into alternatives for the future. Looked at strictly in terms of current sales they're a total waste of time unless maybe you're lucky and have some material that just 'clicks' with particular buyers at those sites.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #9 on:** July 14, 2011, 20:32 »

Quote from: Will Dutt on July 14, 2011, 20:19

Quote from: luissantos84 on July 14, 2011, 20:02
some numbers for you, 85% of my income come from the top5
Finally some figures! The Top Tier really does dominate the majority of sales

I don´t know what is your main shooting "object" but I would say enter SS.. They seem to be the only agency really selling stuff (maybe because of all the subscriptios etc and buyers get 750 pics per month and always looking for new content), of course you cannot forget all the other.. but SS seem to be the only one that don´t dissapoint month after month

deyu16 · « **Reply #10 on:** August 23, 2011, 18:44 »

Quote from: traveler1116 on July 14, 2011, 18:59

The poll results on the right side of the screen show how people here rank the sites.

For me it's not worth the effort to upload them

microstockphoto.co.uk · « **Reply #11 on:** August 24, 2011, 06:11 »

I used not to upload to low earners, considering it basically a waste of time.

I changed my policy recently, mainly as a result of disappointment with a couple of major sites lowering commissions.

luissantos84 is right that 85% is in the top 5 (same results for me); but the rest is 10% in remaining middle tier, and 5% in low earners; not much but in the current situation I am not going to throw it away. And especially it's a form of insurance against the future: things are changing so rapidly here in microstock - who knows which will be the big ones in a year or two? In case things change, it's better to be there already.

Now I upload to a site - regardless of immediate potential - if:
- uploading is easy (IPTC, FTP and no categories or useless clicks);
- commissions are acceptable;
- I trust owners: not that I trust they will treat us properly forever - that's beyond hope - but at least that they are a real agency with real people in a real place (not always the case) and not just an internet scam.

oboy · « **Reply #12 on:** August 24, 2011, 10:04 »

I would say so too. Always start with the top earner first and then work your way down, but ...

you may also include all the mid and lower earner that have FTP upload. Why? If you only start with the top right now, you take your image the first time in you hands, in a few month you 2 more agencies, and you take the same images again in you hands and upload then, 2 month later ... you get the point. It takes time to upload the same images over and over again.

I use in the moment http://lightburner.com/ to upload my images to most of the agencies I work with ( List of agencies I work with (list is re-sorted every month by income)). With this I have one upload and LightBurner does the upload to the agencies. Big time saver. Then I have all my agencies bookmarked in the browser and opening the on different taps at the same time. Now I go though every agency and submit the uploaded images. (if you don't like Lightburner there are other option out there, like CushyStock, ProStockMaster, FileZilla, PicWorkFlow ...)

Well this system only works if you upload in small increments of image every time. If you produce like 50 or more images per week then it maybe better to stay only with the biggest 6 agencies. That is something you have to try out.

In the moment I actively upload to 28 agencies. Take a look at my pie charts at http://stock.hlehnerer.com/Stats.html Which one should I drop? Yes quite a few low earners, but then there are the times where these spike, and all the time spend is then paid for (well...). Take for example Zoonar, low earner but in March I had a pig spike with 3-4 well paid sales. I also submit to StockFresh, a non-earner in the moment. But they are the maker of StockXpert, so they know what they are doing. Will they ever take off? I don't know, but I think they have a good change. And when they do, I want to be part of it. The newest agency I started uploading is Photodune. Why did I started uploading there? Because they have already an established customer base with their other outlets. So there is a good potential of income. But only time will show.

There is also the problem that it becomes increasingly more difficult to get at some of the big agencies images accepted. And you do need to get an portfolio established with them to have sales.

Hmmm... more to think about for you now. Well, I with you good luck!

PixelsAway · « **Reply #13 on:** August 24, 2011, 11:41 »

I am posting some real earning numbers time to time in my blog.
E.g., my June 2011 post shows RPI (return per image) from my top 4 (IS, SS, DT, FF) and all others lumped together over 3+ years:

Return Per Image (RPI) from My Microstock Portfolio – 3 Year Trends

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Is selling photos in the low earners worth it? (Read 6207 times)

Will Dutt

traveler1116

Will Dutt

disorderly

Mantis

Will Dutt

luissantos84

Will Dutt

stockastic

luissantos84

deyu16

microstockphoto.co.uk

oboy

PixelsAway

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors