Does anyone know if there is any decent money that can be made in doing product photography for clients directly? And what would one charge that is typical for a medium size US city of 0.5 million? I'm thinking of branching out from stock photos. I've never tested the waters of photography outside of stock photos, so I'm not sure what to expect. I fear product photography is also low margin and low paying, like photography is in general. For stock photos, at least that is a one to many relationship. I would dread low margins on a one to one relationship.

EDIT: I did a google search after posting, and saw the earnings were very average. https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/product-photographer-salary-SRCH_KO0,20.htm

Does isolated on white video sell much? I'm not a video guy and don't know how do shoot video nor have any constant video lights. I do know how to shoot isolated on white photos. Those are easy, and I sell enough to make it worth my while. I've resisted doing learning to shoot videos because I just have so little knowledge, that I've always thought my time is better spent taking photos. The reason I'm asking now is because a friend of mine wants to come to my studio to shoot video on white. I told him I don't know how to do it and it will likely turn out kind of ugly looking but since he is my friend, I'm willing to spend a little time for him if he really wants to come do it at my space. Another video friend of mine explained that shooting video on white is similar to shooting photos on white. The back lights need to be brighter than the front lights on the model, and that this is usually a 6 light setup.

Anyway I'm asking now if isolated on white video sell much because it seems like I maybe learning how to shoot isolated on white video by default. I would be shooting people doing all the usual stocky looking things.

On a tangent....

As an iStock exclusive, it is painful to see how much difference there is between istock and shutterstock on that chart. Despite the constant drop in sales, I still make an okay living there. But I have a feeling this maybe my last year as an exclusive there. At the current rate of sales drop, I would imagine by December 2015, the sales will be at an unsustainable rate for me to stay exclusive. It is a pity iStock destroy so much good will with their various policies in recent years. 

The folks at Fstoppers thinks this whole original photo thing is a fake. They go through step by step about the bad photoshop work done to make the fake original image.

https://fstoppers.com/fashion/justin-bieber-supposed-major-photoshop-treatment-latest-calvin-klein-ad-appears-53866

What is everyone's break even point on a per file basis? No doubt it is different for everyone. I was trying to work it out on a spreadsheet today. If I looked at my expenses for 2014, I need every file that I upload to earn around $10 before I can break even on my costs. This does not count whatever my own time is worth. It does count studio rent, equipment purchase, props, travel, models, etc. Probably like many other contributors, most of my files never sell once, so which means the ones do sell need to work much harder to help me reach overall break even point.

As an iStock exclusive, it definitely concerns me that I might not be able to break even on newer work, because the sales keep disappearing. Overall I'm still profitable, largely because files from previous years still sell. But it is definitely important to me that all new files pull their own weight and pay for themselves over time. Too bad it will take a number of years before I find out if recently uploaded files are successful or not.

Edit: Break even point might be more around $6 for 2015 because there were a lot of one time costs in 2014.

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/istockphoto.com

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/shutterstock.com

Looks like in October both sites took a huge dive in web traffic ranking. Does any one have any theory on why this is? Also is there some way to see some educated guess on how many visitors each site gets? It looks like Shutterstock is visited a lot more than iStock by a long shot.

On an unrelated note. Does anyone know if customers who buy the cheaper subscription package on iStock, are they denied the ability to get any exclusive images, other than buying it with credits? I'm exclusive and I'm just wondering if I'm locked out from those customers.

I am wondering where most Stock Photographers live, in and around a Large City or Small Town?

I recently moved from a large city to a smaller city and am thinking about moving back to a larger metropolis.

Currently I do all my photos in the studio but soon I want to start moving into photographing people and I think a large city will be important!

What do you think?

Where would you live if you could move for Photography?

I live in a medium size US city. Big enough to have an endless supply of good looking people to photograph, small enough to have affordable rent for my photo studio.

Sales are so bad now. I've lost the motivation to submit anymore. My income has probably plunged another 30% since the pricing change. About 60-70% down from their peak a couple of years ago.

Before and after the recent credit changes, my RPD stayed more or less the same. But my income dropped. On average about 30%. I don't keep track of downloads on a day to day basis, so I can only imagine that is what happened. I think the problem it seems is that I no longer get the big sales of XXXL images, at the same time I can only imagine some of the small size buyers have disappeared. So I'm guessing I've lost income on both ends of the sales spectrum. I used to sell a meaningful amount of XXXL images, so the changes in credits are noticeable.

Being an iStock exclusive, it is quite demotivating to see sales month after month get smaller and smaller. I'm definitely now wondering why Yuri and Andres went exclusive with iStock. The grass does not seem greener on this side of the fence, especially after reading other posts about what people's RPI on shutterstock.

I wonder what people's rough guess of their net return per $ for each hour of work is? Say over a 18 month period. Be it on all the sites or as istock exclusive. I wonder if this might be the equalizer between someone who shoots fruits on white background versus someone who does extensive and highly technical composites. I picked 18 months because that is what I've read previously some where that some have speculated that is the typical life of each image in the search engine before it is mostly forgotten by the search engine.

Stock is mostly my only income. It was more difficult to work out what my hourly earn might be because there were so many variables.

I spent a lot of time doing prep work that is used across multiple shoots. I spend a lot of time doing R&D. I spent a lot of time building sets. I've spent a lot of money on studio lighting. I spend money on models. I have an assistant who helps me. I spend a lot of time working out how to do more with less time.

At this point, most of the heavy one time spending for my photographic needs are done. Most of the set building are done. So the cost of doing each shoot drops when I don't count all these costs anymore. I do cash based accounting. So I only count it when the money enters or leaves my pocket and not when they are actually earned, nor do I spread out costs over it's expected life time. Though when averaged over 18 months, I don't think it matters what type of accounting one does.

My net income before taxes is probably between $25-$40 for each hour that I work over a 18 month period. This is a very rough guess. And could be possibly wildly inaccurate.

EDIT: I do out source keywording, so that saves time. And since I have an assistant who helps me during shoots, the shoots moves much faster and smoother than if it was just me alone. So some of these variables complicate the calculation of what 1 hour of work actually really means.

*** Please add a vote for "I'm not an exclusive" so we can view the results? ***

Added.
(I thought I had set it up so people could view without voting, guess not)

I'm around there, currently.  I had hoped for better.

$0.60 per image per month? Just clarifying.