Microstock sees it�s first major setback in 6 years and here is why:

http://arcurs.com/2013/07/microstock-sees-its-first-major-setback-in-6-years-and-here-is-why/

Here are some statistics from our backend at PeopleImages.com from today :. Just wanted to celebrate a bit, since my sales are down on almost all other sites.
Peopleimages.com: 5 months in, $0 spent on marketing (to come later) and increases in sales by almost 100% per month. (Still low actual monthly sales, but with days like today, getting much closer to something that might actually go into profit one day)

Clients report two things they like:
The site is super fast and userfriendly. They are tired of waiting for pages to load on fotolia, dreamstime, istock, shutterstock, etc.
Customer support is extremely helpful and friendly.

Anyway. A little celebration. Y

Read this thread...
http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_32460

Surprisingly it looks like that my income for Sep this year will be below my Mar sales this year. This is the first time in five years of production and certainly not due to me not uploading enough images. I have asked around and the trend seems to be the same for most contributors, especially Istock exclusives. Istock seems very affected in both sales and overall income.
Shutterstock has gone up it seems but has the same low "per-item" commission. Fotolia is about equal and DT seems to go a little below (Probably because of the upload limit they have there)
What are your experiences..And explanations...

The monopod of totalawesomeness has finally been finalized and is for sale now. Back seven months ago, I teamed up with Custom Brackets to create the perfect tool for high demand shooting. Long shooting days, high requirement for sharpness and very high degree of ease of use. I took my cut out to lower the price, so don't complain. This is for the professional shooter.

http://www.steady-pod.com/scripts/prodViewnew.asp?idproduct=217

You like? I love it.

Y

HI guys. I just did this post on your buyers... (Geeks). Perhaps it is a little above what most people in microstock like to consider before going to a shoot, but here it is anyway. Hope you enjoy.

And buy the way: Subscribe to my blog or you wont see this kind of stuff:  www.arcurs.com

Here goes:


Have you ever stopped to really think about who your buyers are? Well I have and guess what�they�re design geeks. Design geeks are a breed of their own. They care more than you can imagine about small details, and they love images with subtle messages that don�t bonk them over the head. If you can learn how to give design geeks what they want, microstock will be very kind to you.
I have a "test group" of some of my most prominent buyers. I often discuss specific shoots with them and I sometimes like to pick their brains in general interviews. The info they give me is crucial and very very very (very) helpful. In this post I�ll give you an overview of things they�ve told me that initially came as a surprise.

1. Subtle is better then loud... (Yes....we get it, alright!)
When it comes to a really great stock image, less is more. Let me just say that again: less is more. Really. Have you never done a shoot and thought, "I nailed it! This will sell like hotcakes," but when you got it online sales were dismal? In this case, maybe your images were too literal. Designers will often provide comments like: "no no no... this is too corny, too bold, or too straight forward." Translation: if you spell a concept out too plainly, your image has no magic. Subtlety equals sophistication.
Consider the shot above of the couple holding hands. We don't need any more information to understand that this is two young people in love relaxing on the beach. Because the image is subtle, it appeals and actually speaks volumes. In it there hints of things we don't see but are led to imagine, which is great.
You know how when you read a great book and then see the movie, it�s the movie that often disappoints? Well, why were you disappointed? Because the literal interpretation wasn�t anything like what your imagination could cook up. The subtle images I�m talking about are more like the intriguing book and less like the literal spell-it-out movie.
An image where less is more screams "fill in the missing slots yourself" and suddenly you�re involved and you love it.... Well no wonder! You designed it in your own imagination.



2. It�s about the story
In microstock everybody tries to make blockbuster superhit images (me included) but lately I�ve come to realize that if I want to be a step ahead I need to shift gears... downward. Today my shootplan is nearly empty. It contains hardly any pictures that I want to redo. What is does contain is a lot of text. Now in my planning, I focus on telling the story of a shot. How did the people get here? What are the still-life images in the environment that support the story? What are the props needed for making the shot look real? With this kind of planning I can shoot a concept and end up with many images that will convey a running story using the same subject matter.
Why do I do this? It�s because my buyers constantly keep saying the same thing: "when we find an image we like, we will most often need more then one image from that shoot and we often cannot find even the most simple images from such shoots." My buyers say they will pass on a great image if the rest of the images from that shoot are missing or not usable for some reason.



3. Be different or be dead
My buyers tell me they are simply sooooooo tired of seeing the same shots over and over again. They say microstock lacks creativity. I will rephrase this, because I personally don�t think microstock lacks creativity, however I do agree that it�s missing a certain something. That �something� is shots done outside the photographer�s comfort zone.
When big traditional agencies talk about the characteristics of great stock photographers, they don�t mention the ability to create stunning photos. They do mention the ability to create rare shots. If you want to stand out from the crowd instantly, execute shoots that are hard to plan, hard to shoot and hard to do.
Many microstock photographers have had their photographic self-esteem shoot through the roof over the last couple of years. They�ve jumped from amateur to pro, and they�ll often approach traditional agencies with gusto and then be baffled as to why their application was turned town.
Well, the bad news for these photographers is that the big agencies do not consider them to be true professionals. They are "comfort" shooters, and these are a dime a dozen. There will be very little room for comfort shooters in the future of microstock and I predict we will see a lot of forum whining as these kinds of shooters start losing income, fast. The good news is that if you�re willing to go the extra mile, you will be one of the few and you�ll face less competition.

4. The devil is in the details
Often, buyers say: "I was just about to download this perfect business shoot and when I looked closer, the girl had a freaking tattoo on her neck!" In a way we�ve never seen before, microstock is the "handyman, improvised, mixed together, do-it-yourself" of stock photography. Tennis socks showing under business suits, overt sexuality in the wrong context, inappropriately young businesspeople, weird looking clothes, weird looking models, weird location, weird haristyle. etc. are a huge turnoff to buyers. Be critical of your pictures. Scrutinize them and decide what does and doesn�t belong.
And speaking of leaving a little to the imagination�The biggest and most ironic error I see all the time is the cleavage mistake. While shooting serious subject matter a photographer gets carried away a little and thinks "well if I like what I�m seeing, chances are that other people will too!"... Um, NOOOOOOOO! They won't! EVER! I have seen so many micro photographers' shoots start out really neat and professional, and then step-by-step denigrate into what looks like a softporn covershoot. Sheesh. Keep it inside your pants and focus on what you�re doing!



6. Too "model looking"
An interesting trend I�ve noticed is that when it comes to models, there can be too much of a good thing. Contrary to what you might think, models with the widest appeal are not of the uber-high-end-four-coats-of-varnish variety. In fact, real, down-to-earth, everyday people are what sell. Our buyers want healthy, friendly and energetic models with a genuine warmth and a personality we can all relate to. The quintessential girl or boy next door with a twinkle in their eye. These people translate as more real and they naturally bring an open warmth that everyone can feel.
Look at the couple on the beach below. Does this look real? These two people just look like two models on a beach in my eyes....which they are. They are toooooo good looking to be real, approachable and genuine.
Think about beauty campaigns put on by big cosmetic companies. Who are their models? Scary looking runway vixens? Uh, no. More like real people that you or I would love to hang out with. When you�re sourcing your models, keep this in mind. And when you�re shooting, remember that this natural genuine energy is what you�re going for. If your model starts with the plastic fake posing, stop them, engage them (get them relaxed and comfortable), re-set, and start again.



So, to recap, put yourself in the (stylish, high-end patent leather) shoes of your design-geek buyer friends. Give them intriguing images that hint at a story. Give them rare shots they haven�t seen a million times. Consider and tend to all the little details that might ruin an otherwise great picture. And give them warm, friendly, down-to-earth models. Give them what they want wrapped up in a nice package and you�ll not only stand out, you�ll become indispensable.

After a devastating three days of failure on our keywording site we have now managed to fix it and it is running again and is ready to use.

Sorry for the delay.

Please include any new years wishes for the keywording service and I will see what we can do.

Best Yuri

As you can see from this survey (http://www.arcurs.com/uploading-time-average) there are quit a few agencies I don't have any data on, so please help me out.

Next time you upload to one of these agencies, time it, and post your result here or as a comment on the post. Once we have 3-5 independent results there should be enough for a good average calculation for that agency. I am looking for time in seconds/file for both with and with-out model releases.

Swing me some numbers! Yuri

What�s your experience? Are things going well in microstock?
Here is an honest breakdown from my perspective:
Over the last three months I have produced over 2000 images of the highest quality I have ever made. They are bright, colourful, super sharp and ultra high res, all with new faces - professional models and new locations. It has cost me over 40000USD to produce these images and three months of 60 hours a week. 

Now this is the problem:
I have had no increase in income for the last four months. None. I am actually down with about 5%

Doing this kind of production for microstock is not worth it, and looking at it from an investment point of view, it is time to downscale or find new waters�with higher prices. I am in particular losing revenue on the subscription sites. SS, 123RF and StockXpert.