Fine Art America - sales increasing nicely since September

[Red On]

In one year of basic account I have sold only three original (BW silver gelatine Fine Art print, signed numbered and certified), then I have decide to invest 30$ and upload some color digital. I cannot sell low price because I'm represented by Saatchi art, too, and other "non web" places. The price could be a reason why I don't sell through FAA, but is the reason why I get money from Saatchi.

To be honest, when I open the account, and see the page of "What was sold today", I cry. Really. I can believe that they are selling so horrible paints and photographs (few). There are just a small percentage of artists, all the others are happy amateurs. I'm not artist and not amateur, but a reporter: niche of a niche of a niche....

[DF_Studios]

Recently Sean the owner spilled the beans on how the collections are done.  If the office ladies see something they like, they make a collection.  That's why you'll have weird things like "abstract concrete walls" or a certain artist's name as a collection.  I wonder if they have any arts backgrounds or are they some one's niece who need a job?

[stockastic]

I can't say I'm against 'curation' of some sort.    Part of the problem at FAA is the huge number of low-quality and derivative images.  But that's not what their Collections are addressing.   It's one thing to say - here is some work we think is good, or even to promote it in search, within reason.  But what they do is create a Collection for a particular subject, and then push that out in front of all the other search results for related subjects, thus effectively killing that niche for anyone else, no matter how good their work is.   And those Collections seem to be permanent, there's no rotation within them.

And after the Collections, the rest of the search results are often so bad that many people wouldn't even bother paging through them. 

For example, go to FAA and enter "kitchen" in the search box.  You get a couple of Kitchen Collections, which is not surprising. But after that, it's just chaos; many of the images on the first page (including the very first one) have nothing to do with 'kitchen' and don't even have that keyword.  They're just works by featured sellers that FAA hopes you will buy, after you forget what you were looking for in the first place. 

Obviously there's little motivation to improve the search results if what they really want to do is herd buyers into the featured artist Collections. 
 

[Painter]

Many of you complain about the search, but there are many ways to search, by recently added, recently sold, featured etc. I guess buyers might check collections, but if they do not find anything they really like they will search, and I guess many will check for latest uploads also. That is probably how I got my early sales. If you want to buy something for your wall, you will probably check around until you find something you really like, you will not buy the first best you see.

But I wonder about the difference between "featured" and" recently featured in groups". I think "featured" still means featured in groups by other members, not by FAA staff. FAA is very much a community, they let the members do the featuring, and members' actions and sales is what counts for the search if you search for "featured" etc. But still, buyers are always able to search for recent fresh uploads.

I have read there somewhere that the keywords are important when buyers search on the site, and the description is important for the internet search engines.

Some people on FAA seem to be very active with groups and contests and commenting etc on the site, I guess they would not if it would not increase sales. So FAA lets the members do the curating, and those who do seem to get more sales, at least I guess so. That curating is of course not professional, but sorts out the really bad images.

I guess most people on this forum are primarily photographers, and when you look at recent sales on FAA, the most part are illustrations, not photographs. I guess that is the main reason you do not get sales, there are so many good photographs on the site, but few buyers buying those.

I got new sales this week, once again paintings, not photographs. My best selling paintings at FAA have also sold OK as microstock.

[wordplanet]

At one point I'd been selling pretty regularly - then got involved in a bunch of groups and lowered my prices because mine were a lot higher, and the sales slowed down, so I raised them again and figure that way I don't have to sell as much and don't have to worry that I'm underselling what I have in galleries.

Paintings and drawings seem to sell more than photos, but I think some people who do art shows get their own stuff printed via FAA which would increase their "sales" that show up. Photographers are not as likely to use FAA to print their own work - too costly, though early on I ordered some of my own cards to check the quality and they showed as "sales." (I like redbubble's cards better - cheaper and better quality - they don't show as sales if you buy your own). I'm just glad to see their sales increasing - I've had a couple there in the past month. I'd given up on them, got a payout after selling a poster, and then sold a sticker the next day (made 35 cents so it'll be a while before the next payout, LOL). I joined redbubble because I loved the iPhone and iPad cases and originally bought some as gifts, it was a bonus when strangers bought them. They do take time to design right but I like that better than the randomness of the FAA cases.

[pkphotos]

FAA has become a complete sham. Just a subscription based site of hundreds of thousands of photographers buying memberships. There are just not enough print buyers to go around, and not all photographers get an equal chance on this platform.

[Mantis]

FAA has become a complete sham. Just a subscription based site of hundreds of thousands of photographers buying memberships. There are just not enough print buyers to go around, and not all photographers get an equal chance on this platform.

Very well stated.

[stockastic]

One of the moderators there said today that they're trying to cut down on "negative threads".   

[PaulieWalnuts]

FAA has become a complete sham. Just a subscription based site of hundreds of thousands of photographers buying memberships. There are just not enough print buyers to go around, and not all photographers get an equal chance on this platform.

They seem to give search preference to images, and maybe even people, that have repeat sales. That's the same thing every micro site does.

Not sure what you mean by equal chance. How are some people not getting a chance? I agree there probably aren't enough buyers to support the quantity of images and contributors.

I like FAA. It's not perfect but I think it's pretty amazing what one guy and a couple of support people have accomplished. Some other sites with dozens or hundreds of employees can't seem to keep a site running or add a feature without blowing something up.

[Painter]

FAA was originally made for selling paintings. My paintings sell well there, my photographs do not. It all depends on what the buyers want to buy, and how big the competition is for different kind of images. Buyers may search in many different ways.

I do think people get an equal chance.

I made a try and paid the fee, and it really was worth it for me. I guess the fee somewhat prevents some bad images to ever get uploaded. And the fee gives artists a website for showing and promoting their work, I guess it is worth it for some artists, even if you may do it for free on Behance for example. Painters may also sell their original paintings via FAA.

[JKB]

Just out of interest, does anyone know if paying the fee gives you any search advantage at all, or is the main benefit just being able to upload more files? I've had the free account for a while but have seen very few views - though that could be that I need to think more about the right type of photos/illustrations for FAA.

[Mantis]

Just out of interest, does anyone know if paying the fee gives you any search advantage at all, or is the main benefit just being able to upload more files? I've had the free account for a while but have seen very few views - though that could be that I need to think more about the right type of photos/illustrations for FAA.

hellllllll nooooo.

[Jo Ann Snover]

I decided to try FAA in January 2013 and figured that it'd be worth $30 to see if it was a useful site for me. If there was nothing sold, then I wouldn't renew. I renewed in Jan 2014 because the first sale had covered the $30 cost and it made sense to continue.

I don't sell a ton there, but, with a few exceptions each sale beats a month's income at a low earner like CanStock so I figure it's worth it.

I'll never get rich there, but I've made enough this year to renew in Jan 2015 (assuming things don't implode between now and then in some way). I sold one license via pixels.com not long after it went live, but nothing since, so I'm not looking to that for anything, but again, thought it was worth a try (and I priced it so it was approximately equal to the license prices on my own site).

I don't promote my portfolio there in any way, and other than one purchase as a gift, I don't do print fulfillment though them. If they stop earning their fee, I'll stop paying, but so far so good.

[JKB]

That makes a lot of sense Jo Ann, thanks. The $30 fee is quite reasonable so might be worth giving it a shot.

[stockastic]

As with the microstocks we have no way of knowing whether the search is 'fair'.   When Ann Geddes joined, an "Ann Geddes Collection" immediately appeared, and I know that didn't happen when I signed up. :-)     

It may be that I compete on an equal basis with this other guy named Getty, and that it's all based on previous sales, but he sure rose to the top of the searches in a hurry.

[DF_Studios]

The thing with an Anne Geddes collection is that it says a lot that she is exclusive with FAA and for mere mortals having a name brand helps to bring more buyers.

Every buyer who has a good experience buying the name brand stuff might come back and buy something from you.

The bigger issue is the reliability of the system which seems to have a lot of glitches and strange bugs from time to time.

[ShadySue]

The thing with an Anne Geddes collection is that it says a lot that she is exclusive with FAA and for mere mortals having a name brand helps to bring more buyers.

Exclusive? Not unless she has exclusive images on FAA.

http://www.allposters.co.uk/-st/Anne-Geddes-Posters_c24598_.htm

http://www.art.co.uk/gallery/id--a1674/anne-geddes-prints.htm

http://www.postershop.co.uk/Geddes-Anne-p.html

http://www.nurseryposters.com/anne-geddes-baby-photos.htm

etc

[Uncle Pete]

The actual wording of it is this: "Fine Art America is the official partner for Anne Geddes framed prints, posters and canvases. " Not exclusive.

Partnering with FAA marks a turning point for Geddes - the exclusive partnership extends both the reach of her work and her fan base. Effective immediately, Anne�s portfolio of iconic images can be purchased as canvas prints and framed prints by consumers all over the world via her FAA portfolio page. All prints ship within 3 � 4 business days and include a 30-day money-back guarantee.

http://www.ecommercebytes.com/pr/?id=793869

But still a nice deal that most here won't ever get.

The thing with an Anne Geddes collection is that it says a lot that she is exclusive with FAA and for mere mortals having a name brand helps to bring more buyers.

Exclusive? Not unless she has exclusive images on FAA.

[marthamarks]

My husband and I both offer our work on FAA.

I've been there about 1.5 years, offering nature photos, with no sales. No big surprise, actually. I renewed last summer but may not do so again. It will depend on how things go between now and next summer.

On the other hand, my husband set up his FAA "shop" last May (with my help) and has had several good sales this fall. The pace of his sales is accelerating, so something in the search algorithm must have kicked in for him. It will be a no-brainer for him to renew next spring, because in only half a year he's already made back the $30 investment many times over.

The difference, I believe, is that my husband is a very fine painter of iconic American scenes, offering unique works. He seems to be a really good fit for FAA.

If you'd like to see his FAA gallery, here it is:

http://fineartamerica.com/profiles/bernard-marks.html

[DF_Studios]

"share, promote, and interact with customers directly."  from the article.   Geddes got the share part right and maybe FAA promotes her work.    Not so sure about the "interact with customers directly" part unless that just means selling them something.    The artist has no connection with the customers other then seeing the city they live in.

[Mantis]

"share, promote, and interact with customers directly."  from the article.   Geddes got the share part right and maybe FAA promotes her work.    Not so sure about the "interact with customers directly" part unless that just means selling them something.    The artist has no connection with the customers other then seeing the city they live in.

Right. FAA is a smoke screen.

[landbysea]

From the Anne Geddes site: "Fine Art America is the official partner for Anne Geddes framed prints, posters and canvases."

Anne Geddes drives traffic to FAA via her own web site. Artists and galleries that do that and have a large following seem to get some preferential treatment. They could just as easily offer the same products and more by linking their sites to Society 6 (or other PODS)and many do. Off course FAA is going to offer incentives to high selling artists that direct traffic to FAA. That does not mean she is FAA exclusive . It means her web site exclusively uses FAA for order fulfillment. Some are fickle and will  link to FAA for a while and then flip a switch and link to another for better deals or more variety of product.
I would rather them use FAA and build the brand recognition.
http://www.annegeddes.com/prints-and-posters/

[stockastic]

Someone posted on the FAA forum today, asking about the 'collections' and why there was no way to submit photos for consideration, etc.  An admin came in and issued this proclamation:  "The site's owner is aware of the various suggestions about the collections. He will implement any changes he deems good for his business".  Then he closed the thread.

Wow.

[ShadySue]

Someone posted on the FAA forum today, asking about the 'collections' and why there was no way to submit photos for consideration, etc.  An admin came in and issued this proclamation:  "The site's owner is aware of the various suggestions about the collections. He will implement any changes he deems good for his business".  Then he closed the thread.

Wow.

Yup, it's his ball and he makes up the rules.

[PaulieWalnuts]

Someone posted on the FAA forum today, asking about the 'collections' and why there was no way to submit photos for consideration, etc.  An admin came in and issued this proclamation:  "The site's owner is aware of the various suggestions about the collections. He will implement any changes he deems good for his business".  Then he closed the thread.

Wow.

Yeah, in the past few weeks I've been checking out their forum I've noticed the FAA admins can be a bit abrupt. But I've also noticed they seem to be addressing the same topics over and over again from a lot of the same people. The people who don't sell anything are always looking for advice and a magic bullet but don't want to hear they're doing something wrong. They have an art degree, win ribbons at fairs, and have been an artist for a long time so they know they're not the problem. But they don't sell anything online. Or maybe they sell .50 cent refrigerator magnets at Zazzle and that means they should be able to sell $500 canvas wraps at FAA. "If I just got some work in the collections that would fix the problem". Maybe. Probably not.

FAA's magic formula is pretty simple and it's not much different from stock. Sell stuff, get benefits. That's it. Produce sellable work with good technical quality and good content. Work that sells gets a boost in the search and gets included in other stuff like collections, Amazon, etc. And artists who consistently sell probably get an overall boost in benefits. Stuff that doesn't sell gets pushed down in search. Artists who take blurry, noisy, pictures of telephone poles that have SEO titles like Wowzer#6 and no keywords will probably never sell anything but will think FAA is the problem and create posts like "What am I doing wrong"?

So they're not overly diplomatic but I'm not sure I can blame them.