MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => Off Topic => Topic started by: Pixart on April 01, 2008, 21:18
-
Do you keep the poor performers in your portfolio, the photos with no sales and few views? And what is your reason for deleting/not deleting them.
DT for instance, calculates your downloads per image - anyone know if they use this calculation for their search placment? Do the poor sellers drag your search placement down at all? Or does the size of your portfolio boost your placement?
-
I think when in September this year I will be one year at my first site that is FT I will go and delete non sellers. One year is a long time ...
-
yeah it would be interesting to know if the low sellers drag the portfolio down or not.
I have thought once in a while that it might be a good thing, and I did delete a number of old useless images i had at istock. But then the other day I sold an extended license of one of those old poor images from shutterstock.... hmm..
-
I never delete old photos I have been with Dreamstime for 4 years and just now I am selling some of the old 5 megapixel photos that never sold.
-
Only 17 voters, but it seems clear that most don't delete!
I guess no one knows for sure how RPI factors in search placement?
-
I've written about this on my blog in the past and the core piece of evidence in the 'against' case was one of the top-selling microstock contributors once deleted 600 of his poor performing images from iStock and noticed an instant and significant drop in revenue.
Of course that only demonstrates it's a bad idea at iStock, so it could still be helpful at other agencies.
Also, since I started monitoring my sell-through rate I've been noticing many sales in the recent sales pages at iStock, Fotolia and Dreamstime where the download count is 1 - indicating it's the first sale of that image. Some are new and many are old. It's the long tail at work. The image might only sell once in it's lifetime, but if your portfolio is large enough this can add up.