Author Topic: 48000000 images (Read 30613 times)

dpimborough · « **Reply #25 on:** February 10, 2015, 12:41 »

Quote from: Semmick Photo on February 10, 2015, 09:50

Quote from: ShadySue on February 10, 2015, 09:43
Quote from: Semmick Photo on February 10, 2015, 09:33
I am the only one with a particular photo of a certain structure in the SS library. Its not selling, even though its not an uncommon or rare place. There is a reason why there are gaps, some stuff has no demand.
But how could you know something wouldn't sell before you uploaded it?

I am sure you can find a photo of everything, a gap doesnt mean zero images, it means its not well covered. If I search for something and I find 3 photos, I get suspicious. Why are there only 3 images? The image I was talking about proved it. I searched the library and found zero images, I wondered why and thought my image would be downloaded by the bucket-loads. So I uploaded my image, waited in great anticipation for the flood of DLs, and nope. Sold 5 times or so.

Nope don't agree I check for lots of items and there are zero photos.

So I shoot them and they start selling especially the local stuff suited to certain geographical regions .

Lots of chumps out there copying the "best sellers" and they just bury themselves with similar submissions from their competitors.
1,420,590 business man shots
1,066,326 business woman shots
657,158 coffee (single keyword) shots
74,000 latte coffee shots
84,000 pizza shots
53,000 hamburger shots and so on and so forth

Plus the quality of a lot of submissions are poor or dire and doomed to be undiscovered .

trek · « **Reply #26 on:** February 10, 2015, 12:55 »

In 6 or 7 years some of the sites listed to the right will be boasting billion image libraries. The race is on. I expect most contributors return per upload stats will reflect changing market conditions...

Red Dove · « **Reply #27 on:** February 10, 2015, 13:06 »

Quote from: BrianM on February 10, 2015, 11:08

The rate of growth may level off, but growth is a given. What's everyone doing to pivot?

Now THAT is the question.

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #28 on:** February 10, 2015, 13:09 »

Quote from: Teddy the Cat on February 10, 2015, 12:41

Quote from: Semmick Photo on February 10, 2015, 09:50
Quote from: ShadySue on February 10, 2015, 09:43
Quote from: Semmick Photo on February 10, 2015, 09:33
I am the only one with a particular photo of a certain structure in the SS library. Its not selling, even though its not an uncommon or rare place. There is a reason why there are gaps, some stuff has no demand.
But how could you know something wouldn't sell before you uploaded it?

I am sure you can find a photo of everything, a gap doesnt mean zero images, it means its not well covered. If I search for something and I find 3 photos, I get suspicious. Why are there only 3 images? The image I was talking about proved it. I searched the library and found zero images, I wondered why and thought my image would be downloaded by the bucket-loads. So I uploaded my image, waited in great anticipation for the flood of DLs, and nope. Sold 5 times or so.

Nope don't agree I check for lots of items and there are zero photos.

So I shoot them and they start selling especially the local stuff suited to certain geographical regions .

I have plenty of local geographical stuff, and they are good images, but what is the demand for View from Slievebawn to Croaghaun, or Road passing Maamturks and Killary Harbour, or Stone steps on Diamond Hill. I am the only one with these images. They dont sell. But the Giants Causeway is covered plenty, because it is in demand.

cobalt · « **Reply #29 on:** February 10, 2015, 14:16 »

Quote from: Semmick Photo on February 10, 2015, 09:33

Quote from: cobalt on February 10, 2015, 09:29
Inspite of the volume a lot of content is still missing. I tried to find images of the local beer and i think only two pictures were apprpriate. Once you drill down to more speliazed and local stuff there are huge gaps in the collection.

Also many subjects need to be reshoot in regular intervals, think of all the business images with brick like mobile phones. Or business meetings with tablets instead of laptops, mobile fitness gadgets etc...

so there is still is hope for us if you don´t specialize in sunsets.

I am the only one with a particular photo of a certain structure in the SS library. Its not selling, even though its not an uncommon or rare place. There is a reason why there are gaps, some stuff has no demand.

I agree that all large libraries need much better subdivisions of their content, done by humans, not software. It is the next challenge in the industry and those that do it best and first will have a living, breathing in and outflow of content that is generated, curated and bought by the crowd.

Cesar · « **Reply #30 on:** February 10, 2015, 14:59 »

old images are not shown, if u write sunset and you go page 4000 or 6000, they show alot of new images. there is no "old" images, at least on popular,

i also notice if u browse category, there is image shown on page 4 then is shown again on page 17, am i correct?

leaf · « **Reply #31 on:** February 10, 2015, 15:04 »

Quote from: cobalt on February 10, 2015, 09:29

Inspite of the volume a lot of content is still missing. I tried to find images of the local beer and i think only two pictures were apprpriate. Once you drill down to more speliazed and local stuff there are huge gaps in the collection.

Also many subjects need to be reshoot in regular intervals, think of all the business images with brick like mobile phones. Or business meetings with tablets instead of laptops, mobile fitness gadgets etc...

so there is still is hope for us if you don´t specialize in sunsets.

Agreed, there are still some serious holes. I also agree with Uncle Pete that some holes just are worth filling, but there are still lots of potential for good images of missing subjects.

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #32 on:** February 10, 2015, 15:19 »

I can assure that I wont be any competition, but what are those serious gaps? What subject matter is high in demand and not covered well? I am not asking to give away your secrets but I find it hard to believe that there are high demand subjects which are not covered. Unless it is a inaccessible niche, like diamond cutting, which I doubt will be high in demand either.

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #33 on:** February 10, 2015, 15:25 »

Funny, I just checked "diamond cutting" on Shutterstock and it pulls up 12,229 images, of which there are 7 images of diamond cutting, the rest is spam.

cobalt · « **Reply #34 on:** February 10, 2015, 15:41 »

One of the biggest differences between Fotolia and Shutterstock is that Fotolia has a much, much bigger library of local european content. Food, workplaces, the right mix of ethnic groups in business images. styling, or simply that we simply don´t smile as brightly at the camera the way our US counterparts do. And I am sure if you try to find genuine, localized asian or oriental content, or south america, you will find similar huge gaps.

Just think of how many different recipes does the whole world have? There must be millions of local dishes and variations. How many jobs exist on the globe? etc...

Of course some markets will grow slowly, I don´t know how many people in china and India are active stock buyers, but I am sure the market in china alone will outstrip anything else. Or japan? 130 million, big market? does shutterstock really have enough content to fill the japanese market? And you can hire japanese, ethnic indian or african models anywhere, you might not have the right outdoor location, but there is always enough that can be done indoors or studio.

Many artists also have a portfolio mix with everything from handshakes, travel images, a few models etc...but I am sure if someone does a lightbox with 1000 handshakes really well, he or she will make more money. There are so many variations on that simple theme - old and young people, children with adults, doctors with patient etc...but most portfolios that I see are not specialized enough. This means they get less repeat traffic.

The strategy to work in a library with maybe a billion files one day has to be different to the strategy you use when the agency just had 1 million images.

repeat traffic is what you want, so you need to decide on a few main subjects and become king or queen of that very specific niche, whatever it is.

the agencies have to encourage that as well. Some agencies still reject saying "you already have too much of that content in your portfolio". which is really stupid. they should do all they can to encourage specialization.

Shelma1 · « **Reply #35 on:** February 10, 2015, 15:46 »

I've found a few niches. Sometimes it's because I read an article about the dearth of certain images in stock, or images that are unsuitable, or there's a topic that interests me and when I look it up I'm surprised to see how few images there are. But I find that those subjects are not super popular, though there is enough demand for me to sell a decent number of images sometimes. Sometimes it's a complete waste of time, though.

One thing I avoid is drawing images the stock sites say they need...because thousands of others are reading that same blog post, and then that subject is flooded with images. I had a whole bunch of good-selling images on page 1 of a certain subject, and then SS noticed they didn't have a whole bunch of images in that subject matter and blogged about it, which led to a big influx of images, which pushed me off the first page. GRRRRRRRRR.

Kinda wanted to slap them for that.

Rinderart · « **Reply #36 on:** February 10, 2015, 16:11 »

Quote from: cobalt on February 10, 2015, 14:16

Quote from: Semmick Photo on February 10, 2015, 09:33
Quote from: cobalt on February 10, 2015, 09:29
Inspite of the volume a lot of content is still missing. I tried to find images of the local beer and i think only two pictures were apprpriate. Once you drill down to more speliazed and local stuff there are huge gaps in the collection.

Also many subjects need to be reshoot in regular intervals, think of all the business images with brick like mobile phones. Or business meetings with tablets instead of laptops, mobile fitness gadgets etc...

so there is still is hope for us if you don´t specialize in sunsets.

I am the only one with a particular photo of a certain structure in the SS library. Its not selling, even though its not an uncommon or rare place. There is a reason why there are gaps, some stuff has no demand.

I agree that all large libraries need much better subdivisions of their content, done by humans, not software. It is the next challenge in the industry and those that do it best and first will have a living, breathing in and outflow of content that is generated, curated and bought by the crowd.

+1000

cobalt · « **Reply #37 on:** February 10, 2015, 16:29 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on February 10, 2015, 15:46

One thing I avoid is drawing images the stock sites say they need...because thousands of others are reading that same blog post, and then that subject is flooded with images. I had a whole bunch of good-selling images on page 1 of a certain subject, and then SS noticed they didn't have a whole bunch of images in that subject matter and blogged about it, which led to a big influx of images, which pushed me off the first page. GRRRRRRRRR. Kinda wanted to slap them for that.

I read them, but I create the content maybe 6 months after that blog post. So you avoid the first rush but of course if it is really a needed theme it is worth looking at.

The other option: read it on a huge micro agency...then upload your content to a high quality small macro agency

jefftakespics2 · « **Reply #38 on:** February 10, 2015, 16:48 »

Out of all those images only 69 pages are "crap". Literally or course.

Batman · « **Reply #39 on:** February 10, 2015, 18:05 »

Quote from: Semmick Photo on February 10, 2015, 10:28

Quote from: Uncle Pete on February 10, 2015, 10:01

You drive your VW Jetta in a competition and someone else has an Audi Quatro. Tell me who has the advantage?
Depends on the competition, if its about mileage per gallon the VW might actually win it

You bought a 6D and shoot raw because it doesn't make a difference?

dirkr · « **Reply #40 on:** February 10, 2015, 18:07 »

The issue with many of those unfilled niches is not that they do not exist, but that the demand for those images is only small.

It's nice to have the only 10 images for a specific topic - so you can get all the five sales per year they generate.

That simply does not make economical sense at microstock prices.

Batman · « **Reply #41 on:** February 10, 2015, 18:07 »

Quote from: cobalt on February 10, 2015, 14:16

Quote from: Semmick Photo on February 10, 2015, 09:33
Quote from: cobalt on February 10, 2015, 09:29
Inspite of the volume a lot of content is still missing. I tried to find images of the local beer and i think only two pictures were apprpriate. Once you drill down to more speliazed and local stuff there are huge gaps in the collection.

Also many subjects need to be reshoot in regular intervals, think of all the business images with brick like mobile phones. Or business meetings with tablets instead of laptops, mobile fitness gadgets etc...

so there is still is hope for us if you don´t specialize in sunsets.

I am the only one with a particular photo of a certain structure in the SS library. Its not selling, even though its not an uncommon or rare place. There is a reason why there are gaps, some stuff has no demand.

I agree that all large libraries need much better subdivisions of their content, done by humans, not software. It is the next challenge in the industry and those that do it best and first will have a living, breathing in and outflow of content that is generated, curated and bought by the crowd.

+10,000

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #42 on:** February 10, 2015, 18:55 »

Look, it wasn't a personal attack on anyone, and that's what you've turned this into. I'd bet you added new equipment and better lighting and shoot better work, than you did when you started. Is that some kind of insult?

Well the competition, aside from adding half a million new images a month is also taking it up a notch. That's an observation, not an insult. Heck most of the people on this thread are anonymous. You could have 100 photos or 10,000 I don't know. You could be doing this since May of 2014 (or not at all, just writing on a forum) no one knows. Or you could have been with Micro since 2005?

As for "speak for yourself" I do. Who do you speak for? It's an open forum, or am I not allowed to have a free will and personal opinion of anything, unless it's approved by you? (and the Princess gbalex) So you two start twisting what I wrote, making personal attacks instead of discussion the opinion?

Quote from: Snow on February 10, 2015, 10:15

Quote from: Uncle Pete on February 10, 2015, 10:01
It's the competition and the number of photos. I didn't write that it was all about gear. Read it again please.

There are 40 million new images, which by the way, are taken on newer cameras, better equipment and with better setups. You can try to discount that fact but it's real. I didn't say anyone had to use bigger equipment or have a studio... just that our competition does.

You drive your VW Jetta in a competition and someone else has an Audi Quatro. Tell me who has the advantage?

Oh so an experienced contributor has ancient gear then? We don't upgrade?
New contributors either found the secret formula or have access to high tech gear we don't know about yet?
With all due respect but I think "speak for yourself" is the more appropriate thing for me to say to you then.

gbalex · « **Reply #43 on:** February 10, 2015, 23:14 »

I would call it a personal attack when you call a grown man a princess! You never miss an opportunity to sneak in those sideways jabs do you.

Give it a rest Pete, I have grown weary of your games and insults.

marthamarks · « **Reply #44 on:** February 10, 2015, 23:27 »

Quote from: Red Dove on February 10, 2015, 09:18

… but less than 10 images of the Duck Billed Platypus.

And only two images of the Olive-sided Flycatcher. Both of them mine.

http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-77146492/stock-photo-olive-sided-flycatcher-during-spring-migration-in-the-texas-panhandle.html?src=&ws=1

And they actually do sell every once in a while, too!

PixelBytes · « **Reply #45 on:** February 11, 2015, 01:14 »

Uncle Pete, I don't feel insulted when you say the newbies have stepped it up a notch, but I also have not seen that. Mostly the new works looks like the same amateurish junk lots of us started with.

Difference is that us who stuck with it have grown and got better skill and equipments and the beginners won't probly make enough money to help them upgrade and get better, or even keep interested.

leaf · « **Reply #46 on:** February 11, 2015, 01:15 »

Quote from: Semmick Photo on February 10, 2015, 15:19

I can assure that I wont be any competition, but what are those serious gaps? What subject matter is high in demand and not covered well? I am not asking to give away your secrets but I find it hard to believe that there are high demand subjects which are not covered. Unless it is a inaccessible niche, like diamond cutting, which I doubt will be high in demand either.

There doesn't have to be a high demand, just a little demand. When you are the only person with images you'll get all the sales.
Even a very simple subject like a male flipping a pancake, there is only 4 photos of this (flipping an american fluffy pancake) search terms: man flip pancake
If you take 15-20 shots on that subject, it isn't going to earn you $10,000 but I'm guessing it would pay back your time and model fee investment + a decent amount on top of that if it was aprt of a larger shoot where you did 10 other similar subjects.

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #47 on:** February 11, 2015, 04:22 »

Quote from: cobalt on February 10, 2015, 15:41

the agencies have to encourage that as well. Some agencies still reject saying "you already have too much of that content in your portfolio". which is really stupid. they should do all they can to encourage specialization.

Photodune told me exactly that, and basically killed off my landscape submissions. Funny coz I shoot landscapes. Basically I have no content for them any more. For them a photo of Connemara or Wicklow are the same, for locals its the east or west of the country. Completely different areas, Photodune didnt want to hear it.

dpimborough · « **Reply #48 on:** February 11, 2015, 04:33 »

There is more to Ireland than landscapes Ron, I guess you live in Ireland and have access to all things Irish bearing in mind there is a huge ex-pat Irish community in the U.S.

There's more to Ireland than leprechauns guiness and the giants causeway

But anyhoo before I shoot anything I always check to see what's available if it's more than a couple of hundred images (disregarding the spam) then I don't bother shooting.

Cripes some of the subjects I shot were so blatantly obvious I could not believe no one had ever shot them! Not a single one! So yes they don't make $10,000 but a couple of 1000 images making sales through the year all adds up.

Snow · « **Reply #49 on:** February 11, 2015, 05:20 »

Quote from: Uncle Pete on February 10, 2015, 18:55

Look, it wasn't a personal attack on anyone, and that's what you've turned this into. I'd bet you added new equipment and better lighting and shoot better work, than you did when you started. Is that some kind of insult?

Well the competition, aside from adding half a million new images a month is also taking it up a notch. That's an observation, not an insult. Heck most of the people on this thread are anonymous. You could have 100 photos or 10,000 I don't know. You could be doing this since May of 2014 (or not at all, just writing on a forum) no one knows. Or you could have been with Micro since 2005?

As for "speak for yourself" I do. Who do you speak for? It's an open forum, or am I not allowed to have a free will and personal opinion of anything, unless it's approved by you? (and the Princess gbalex) So you two start twisting what I wrote, making personal attacks instead of discussion the opinion?

Quote from: Snow on February 10, 2015, 10:15
Quote from: Uncle Pete on February 10, 2015, 10:01
It's the competition and the number of photos. I didn't write that it was all about gear. Read it again please.

There are 40 million new images, which by the way, are taken on newer cameras, better equipment and with better setups. You can try to discount that fact but it's real. I didn't say anyone had to use bigger equipment or have a studio... just that our competition does.

You drive your VW Jetta in a competition and someone else has an Audi Quatro. Tell me who has the advantage?

Oh so an experienced contributor has ancient gear then? We don't upgrade?
New contributors either found the secret formula or have access to high tech gear we don't know about yet?
With all due respect but I think "speak for yourself" is the more appropriate thing for me to say to you then.

Keep your knickers on Pete, no personal attack and I respect your work.
It is far too easy to blame it on the competition and that is what concerns me. If you have been doing this full-time (+10h a day) for many years you know there is a lot more to it.
But I will leave it at that if this upsets you too much.

ps. thanks for letting me be the prince in this play, I hate wearing a dress.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: 48000000 images (Read 30613 times)

dpimborough

trek

Red Dove

Semmick Photo

cobalt

Cesar

leaf

Semmick Photo

Semmick Photo

cobalt

Shelma1

Rinderart

cobalt

jefftakespics2

Batman

dirkr

Batman

Uncle Pete

gbalex

marthamarks

PixelBytes

leaf

Semmick Photo

dpimborough

Snow

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors