I am new to the microstock world and am doing everything I can to learn the business.  Forums, books, photo study, etc.  You could say that I'm a bit of a planner, which has hindered my start, but I expect it to help me in the long run.

Anyway, as I learn more about the industry, I'm starting to draw a conclusion that I wanted to run by you.  To be successful (I define successful as being able to make a living, say $3000/month for the purposes of this thread) a microstock photographer will most likely have to shoot models.  Granted, there's always 3D, vectors, etc, but sticking with photography (because I lack some of those other talents), it seems like there's only so much you can shoot before you run out of material that is of benefit to the industry.  However, people are always changing and therefore they will always sell.

Am I on to something here, or is this conclusion a stretch?  I know that there are always extraordinary circumstances, so let's assume that I'm just your average photographer in an average situation.

Thanks for the feedback!

Probably most of the really successful microstockers use models. Just check out Yuri, for example. On the other hand, there are some high flyers with very few models, but carefully lit and arranged 'articles' arranged to fit popular concepts. I've also seen some people who are able to find models but whose work has been unsuccessful. Generally, there's a stock 'look' and 'style' (clue: the US is by far the biggest market), and you need to know what you're doing.

Agreed but I think that it should read 'Good' people shots as I have seen many portfolios full of average people shots that rarely sell.

Overall, it seems People Shots and Good Vectors seem to be the "Money". Anything else is hit or miss. JMO.

You may find this posting from Ellen Boughn interesting.

If you're very good at what you do, you'll be successful.  Models, or no models, concepts or no.

Being all analytical and trying to roll out theories and such takes all the fun out of it.

Ha!  You bring up a good point.  It's a flaw of mine, however, if you ask my employer they would consider it a positive trait   With that being said, I am looking at microstock as a business rather than a hobby, so I am working through my business case.  Granted, it does take some of the fun out of it, but I hope that by doing this up front work I am preparing myself for years of "work" that I can consider fun.

Regarding the 'very good', I agree.  I just wonder if I'll be 'very good' or just 'good'.  I tend to lean towards 'good', so I'll have to let hard work make up for the 'very'.

You may find this posting [nofollow] from Ellen Boughn interesting.

Great link, thanks!