Author Topic: Selling at Own Website (Read 16920 times)

lowbouncerate · « **on:** May 15, 2021, 19:58 »

Hi,
Anyone have experience selling digital downloads thru Own custom website?
Please share the experince, have you ever spent on Google Ads for selling Vector / illustration / icons etc..

Thanks,

Noedelhap · « **Reply #1 on:** May 16, 2021, 06:24 »

I once built my own stock website, using a purchased webshop template which I heavily customized. Worked fine in practice, but resulted in zero sales. Maybe it was the small size of my portfolio, maybe the lack of advertising, people not wanting to create an account for 1 vector purchase.
It's very hard to get traffic in the first place, but steadily converting this traffic into buyers is especially difficult.

With the big microstock agencies spending millions on ads and market analysis, you simply don't stand a chance.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #2 on:** May 16, 2021, 19:54 »

You need to have a strategy. Just dumping your existing micro work on your own website will likely be a waste of time. You need to have something unique that's different from what's sold in micro. Otherwise, if you offer the same thing as micro why would anyone want to go to your site over just using micro? Offering lower price won't matter. You need unique content buyers cant get on micro. You also need to be an SEO expert to get traffic. A few years ago I created a completely new style of work just for me own site. I use Photodeck and have had decent results. I'm looking into creating a new site with Shopify.

I tried Google, Facebook and other ads and for me it was a waste of time and money. I'm sure other people have had success but not me. Same thing with social media as a whole. Some people are great at using it for marketing and I've had no success with it. If you're a social media expert that's great. Otherwise it's SEO.

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #3 on:** May 16, 2021, 23:58 »

Last time I did googleads (I think about 6-7 years ago), it was very expensive and ineffective. A lot of (larger) companies use very sophisticated software that literally bids on 10's of thousands of keyword variations of ads, steals/monitors "success" of competitors, and adapts their ads to yours to try and steal your customers.

If you are a single person trying google ads and have no experience with backend sales/marketing, you'd have a better chance at winning $10,000 at the slot machines, than you would be profitable via google ads.

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #4 on:** May 17, 2021, 04:34 »

Quote from: SuperPhoto on May 16, 2021, 23:58

Last time I did googleads (I think about 6-7 years ago), it was very expensive and ineffective. A lot of (larger) companies use very sophisticated software that literally bids on 10's of thousands of keyword variations of ads, steals/monitors "success" of competitors, and adapts their ads to yours to try and steal your customers.

If you are a single person trying google ads and have no experience with backend sales/marketing, you'd have a better chance at winning $10,000 at the slot machines, than you would be profitable via google ads.

You are so true! Google just promises you visitors, not sales. And you can get ton of visitors who are not buyers but clickers. Google takes the money for non valuable visits. I will never experiment this again.

KimC · « **Reply #5 on:** October 01, 2021, 10:04 »

Back in the late 1990's I had my own little stock agency. A lot of work, and many difficult customers. One customer used my photos via remote file access, so that my site carried the load. I gladly surrender those protection and legal issues to a stock agency, so that I can now use my time to make pictures.

marthamarks · « **Reply #6 on:** October 02, 2021, 18:36 »

Quote from: Noedelhap on May 16, 2021, 06:24

I once built my own stock website, using a purchased webshop template which I heavily customized. Worked fine in practice, but resulted in zero sales. Maybe it was the small size of my portfolio, maybe the lack of advertising, people not wanting to create an account for 1 vector purchase.
It's very hard to get traffic in the first place, but steadily converting this traffic into buyers is especially difficult.

With the big microstock agencies spending millions on ads and market analysis, you simply don't stand a chance.

Many of us had exactly this same experience. Look up "Symbiostock" on this forum and see what you find.

For Real · « **Reply #7 on:** October 03, 2021, 08:24 »

Quote from: marthamarks on October 02, 2021, 18:36

Quote from: Noedelhap on May 16, 2021, 06:24
I once built my own stock website, using a purchased webshop template which I heavily customized. Worked fine in practice, but resulted in zero sales. Maybe it was the small size of my portfolio, maybe the lack of advertising, people not wanting to create an account for 1 vector purchase.
It's very hard to get traffic in the first place, but steadily converting this traffic into buyers is especially difficult.

With the big microstock agencies spending millions on ads and market analysis, you simply don't stand a chance.

Many of us had exactly this same experience. Look up "Symbiostock" on this forum and see what you find.

I almost jumped into Symbiostock. Looked promising at one time. Thought I would be come rich overnight

Chroma · « **Reply #8 on:** October 08, 2021, 17:04 »

I was one of the original site owners of the original symbiostock. I fought hard for it to succeed and paid dearly here at microstock group for it. FWIW I still have 2 original symbiostock sites that work and still generate sales. That's almost a decade of sales for a few months worth of work. (Note: I haven't updated anything on them since 2014 because I know if I do they will almost certainly crash forever.) At one point I had 5 symbiostock sites. 3 of them just stopped working for any number of reasons. I am sure the other 2 will also just stop at some point but for me they were well worth the effort.

Symbiostock was a good idea that couldn't work for all sorts of reasons. Regardless, of how people here feel about symbiostock I can honestly say that self hosting does work if you have the right images and a unique niche.

Here is why it works for me and how I am doing it.

I currently have 9 sites live (7 of which I still upload to, in addition the 2 I mentioned earlier)- approx 800-1500 images per site
• I sell vectors. (which allows me to heavily watermark them and I charge a premium price for them)
• I price my images just below the hourly rate it would take for someone to steal or trace my images.
• The 7 modern sites are all woo-commerce based.
• I use Elementor which gives me unlimited control over the front end which helps with similars and content location.
• I use Yoast for SEO
• I have a unique target audience and I have not uploaded any new images to the micros in 6 years.
• I am very careful with my keywords (I use phrases not words) and my keyword phrases are unique for that image on all 7 sites.
• I spend most of my uploading time optimizing my content based on the Yoast criteria.
• Every image (on every site) I upload has a unique file name and metadata which matches the Yoast Focus Keyphrase exactly.
• I will also flip images or put them on different colored backgrounds for each my different sites.

I have spent a good amount of time automating the upload process and can upload an image from start to finish at an average of about 4 minutes per image per site.

Unlike symbiostock my current sites are no longer developer dependent. WooCommerce and Elementor aren't going anywhere and I host them myself. As long as I update from time to time my sites are all stable and will probably be that way forever. Hosting does cost a bit a month but for me it is absolutely worth it. My sites outsell all of the micros combined about three to one and I only work on them when I have the time. I make daily sales and one sale is the equivalent to around 40 sales at the major micros.

By uploading only to my own sites my images tend to appear on free sites was less frequently than the ones that I uploaded to the micros. I sell way less volume but at a much higher price and considering what happened in microstock in the last 6-8 years that seems to be a much more sustainable way to go.

Originally I assumed my sales would soften the older the images became. What I am finding is that my older images are just as likely to sell today as they were 5 years ago. Based on this info I anticipate selling images I made 5 years ago 20 years from now.

I am certain there are a lot of people who will disagree with me or for whom self hosting was a dismal failure. I get it and I won't even try to argue those points. It works for me and for me it is far better than continuing to upload hundreds of images a month for .38 cents per sale or to dozens of sites who may or may not be around next year.

bpawesome · « **Reply #9 on:** December 11, 2022, 06:08 »

There are a few factors to consider, there is a reason why stock sites exist...
Marketing, hosting, employees, accounting, development and the list goes on, starting a big enough service will take a lot of recourses and knowledge, even if you get some sales, it will take years before you can make real money...
That's why Adobe got into stock images (IMO), they already have everything needed to start quick, private photographer/designer/3D artist, even with all the skills needed, has a very low chance of success...

20 years ago you could do it (from experience), not today...

lowbouncerate · « **Reply #10 on:** December 13, 2022, 10:37 »

Please share websiste url, if possible.

Quote from: Chroma on October 08, 2021, 17:04

I was one of the original site owners of the original symbiostock. I fought hard for it to succeed and paid dearly here at microstock group for it. FWIW I still have 2 original symbiostock sites that work and still generate sales. That's almost a decade of sales for a few months worth of work. (Note: I haven't updated anything on them since 2014 because I know if I do they will almost certainly crash forever.) At one point I had 5 symbiostock sites. 3 of them just stopped working for any number of reasons. I am sure the other 2 will also just stop at some point but for me they were well worth the effort.

Symbiostock was a good idea that couldn't work for all sorts of reasons. Regardless, of how people here feel about symbiostock I can honestly say that self hosting does work if you have the right images and a unique niche.

Here is why it works for me and how I am doing it.

I currently have 9 sites live (7 of which I still upload to, in addition the 2 I mentioned earlier)- approx 800-1500 images per site
• I sell vectors. (which allows me to heavily watermark them and I charge a premium price for them)
• I price my images just below the hourly rate it would take for someone to steal or trace my images.
• The 7 modern sites are all woo-commerce based.
• I use Elementor which gives me unlimited control over the front end which helps with similars and content location.
• I use Yoast for SEO
• I have a unique target audience and I have not uploaded any new images to the micros in 6 years.
• I am very careful with my keywords (I use phrases not words) and my keyword phrases are unique for that image on all 7 sites.
• I spend most of my uploading time optimizing my content based on the Yoast criteria.
• Every image (on every site) I upload has a unique file name and metadata which matches the Yoast Focus Keyphrase exactly.
• I will also flip images or put them on different colored backgrounds for each my different sites.

I have spent a good amount of time automating the upload process and can upload an image from start to finish at an average of about 4 minutes per image per site.

Unlike symbiostock my current sites are no longer developer dependent. WooCommerce and Elementor aren't going anywhere and I host them myself. As long as I update from time to time my sites are all stable and will probably be that way forever. Hosting does cost a bit a month but for me it is absolutely worth it. My sites outsell all of the micros combined about three to one and I only work on them when I have the time. I make daily sales and one sale is the equivalent to around 40 sales at the major micros.

By uploading only to my own sites my images tend to appear on free sites was less frequently than the ones that I uploaded to the micros. I sell way less volume but at a much higher price and considering what happened in microstock in the last 6-8 years that seems to be a much more sustainable way to go.

Originally I assumed my sales would soften the older the images became. What I am finding is that my older images are just as likely to sell today as they were 5 years ago. Based on this info I anticipate selling images I made 5 years ago 20 years from now.

I am certain there are a lot of people who will disagree with me or for whom self hosting was a dismal failure. I get it and I won't even try to argue those points. It works for me and for me it is far better than continuing to upload hundreds of images a month for .38 cents per sale or to dozens of sites who may or may not be around next year.

gameover · « **Reply #11 on:** December 13, 2022, 12:27 »

Quote from: Chroma on October 08, 2021, 17:04

I was one of the original site owners of the original symbiostock. I fought hard for it to succeed and paid dearly here at microstock group for it. FWIW I still have 2 original symbiostock sites that work and still generate sales. That's almost a decade of sales for a few months worth of work. (Note: I haven't updated anything on them since 2014 because I know if I do they will almost certainly crash forever.) At one point I had 5 symbiostock sites. 3 of them just stopped working for any number of reasons. I am sure the other 2 will also just stop at some point but for me they were well worth the effort.

Symbiostock was a good idea that couldn't work for all sorts of reasons. Regardless, of how people here feel about symbiostock I can honestly say that self hosting does work if you have the right images and a unique niche.

Here is why it works for me and how I am doing it.

I currently have 9 sites live (7 of which I still upload to, in addition the 2 I mentioned earlier)- approx 800-1500 images per site
• I sell vectors. (which allows me to heavily watermark them and I charge a premium price for them)
• I price my images just below the hourly rate it would take for someone to steal or trace my images.
• The 7 modern sites are all woo-commerce based.
• I use Elementor which gives me unlimited control over the front end which helps with similars and content location.
• I use Yoast for SEO
• I have a unique target audience and I have not uploaded any new images to the micros in 6 years.
• I am very careful with my keywords (I use phrases not words) and my keyword phrases are unique for that image on all 7 sites.
• I spend most of my uploading time optimizing my content based on the Yoast criteria.
• Every image (on every site) I upload has a unique file name and metadata which matches the Yoast Focus Keyphrase exactly.
• I will also flip images or put them on different colored backgrounds for each my different sites.

I have spent a good amount of time automating the upload process and can upload an image from start to finish at an average of about 4 minutes per image per site.

Unlike symbiostock my current sites are no longer developer dependent. WooCommerce and Elementor aren't going anywhere and I host them myself. As long as I update from time to time my sites are all stable and will probably be that way forever. Hosting does cost a bit a month but for me it is absolutely worth it. My sites outsell all of the micros combined about three to one and I only work on them when I have the time. I make daily sales and one sale is the equivalent to around 40 sales at the major micros.

By uploading only to my own sites my images tend to appear on free sites was less frequently than the ones that I uploaded to the micros. I sell way less volume but at a much higher price and considering what happened in microstock in the last 6-8 years that seems to be a much more sustainable way to go.

Originally I assumed my sales would soften the older the images became. What I am finding is that my older images are just as likely to sell today as they were 5 years ago. Based on this info I anticipate selling images I made 5 years ago 20 years from now.

I am certain there are a lot of people who will disagree with me or for whom self hosting was a dismal failure. I get it and I won't even try to argue those points. It works for me and for me it is far better than continuing to upload hundreds of images a month for .38 cents per sale or to dozens of sites who may or may not be around next year.

Thank you very much for sharing! I find very interesting your point of view and your experience. I think too that a very good niche and relatively few images may be more fruitful than thousands generic ones. Keep up the good work!

wordplanet · « **Reply #12 on:** December 13, 2022, 15:56 »

I still have my site set up for digital downloads but it's pretty rare that I license from my site anymore, and when I do, I usually get a phone call or email from the buyer and there's some back and forth - usually with web designers or magazine photo editors. My prices reflect that. Licenses were more common some years back when Photoshelter (which hosts my site) used to attract photo editors. Most recent sales were people looking for a location that they didn't find elsewhere and they are rare and for maybe $15-30 rather than $200-300 which used to be more standard. As prices have come down everywhere, including Getty and Alamy, the volume I'd need to make any effort worthwhile can't possibly happen. I'm more likely to sell prints from my site, but even then there's contact from the buyer first. They want that personal experience and if you're licensing images for small amounts, it's not worth your time.

This is just my experience. Others may have different ones. These days, it makes more sense to have an agency do the marketing & advertising.

@gameover obviously knows more about running a successful site than I do. I wish I'd worked harder to establish my site 10-15 years ago, but assignments and other things kept me too busy.

These days my aim is to slant it toward print sales, where prices have held steady, if I can find the time. I'm finding more success selling through agents even if they do take a big cut. I'd rather spend my time taking photos. The business end of things already takes so much time.

But it's sure nice to sell direct and keep the entire price!

chillbilldill · « **Reply #13 on:** February 19, 2023, 16:22 »

It would be extremely hard to sell stock from your own website. You are competing against massive corporations like AdobeStock and ShutterStock. They have large teams of content writers, social media teams, huge advertising budgets, massive portfolios, dirt cheap consumer pricing, etc.

You would be better off going in the artistic print direction if you wanted to sell from your own site. Using a print-on-demand service to dropship niche art prints of your work. While simultaneously displaying your work at local art shows or small businesses.

Beazy · « **Reply #14 on:** November 27, 2023, 01:47 »

I personally use WordPress on my own domains. I'm no web guru but once I got it set up it's very easy to maintain.

I also leverage Sunshine Photo Cart if I need to do a simple sellable gallery, and WooCommerce for adding an actual shopping cart for things that need a checkout flow.

And, if I want to reskin and redesign it all, I can do that without losing all of the content I've built.

I have it hosted on a shared hosting account, which also has a free SSL cert. It sounds crazy and hairy, but it's simple, and works well.

Also, you may find wordpress development services [nofollow] helpful if you're not a pro.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Selling at Own Website (Read 16920 times)

lowbouncerate

Noedelhap

PaulieWalnuts

SuperPhoto

DiscreetDuck

KimC

marthamarks

For Real

Chroma

bpawesome

lowbouncerate

gameover

wordplanet

chillbilldill

Beazy

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors