MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Are new images selling on Shutterstock?  (Read 7178 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: May 07, 2012, 10:12 »
0
My recent batches accepted during last month are not selling at all on SS.  They do sell well on all my other agencies. What's your experience - do new files have a chance of making it on SS these days? I still have very nice overall sales there, but it's all my old portfolio...


lagereek

« Reply #1 on: May 07, 2012, 10:14 »
0
Sometimes yes, sometimes no,  I dont really know how they work it?

rubyroo

« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2012, 11:17 »
0
I'm having a very strange experience with that Elena.  I tend to have  one or two sales on new files straight away, and then they just stop and become slow and sporadic, but the older stuff keeps churning out sales at a regular rate.

wut

« Reply #3 on: May 07, 2012, 11:32 »
0
They sell like they always did for me. One is selling no other ever has, I've uploaded it 2 months ago. But yes, the first week or two sales are a bit slower, but it's like that for a year now, no push for new images like we were used to see

« Reply #4 on: May 07, 2012, 11:50 »
0
Thanks - I guess I'll have to wait another month and see. I haven't been uploading much recently, was concentrating on other work, maybe that's why this seems unusual to me. Hopefully these images will get picked up in time.

« Reply #5 on: May 07, 2012, 12:29 »
0
My experience is the same as yours, Elena. New batches sell very poorly in the last 3-4 weeks or so. It's quite weird to see these photos selling at Fotolia, Depositphotos and others and not on SS. I have uploaded in separate days, at least twice per week, with a good degree of variety of subjects in each batch. I think they've changed something in the search algorithm, or the buyers aren't interested in the new content like they used to. Or too much dillution?

lisafx

« Reply #6 on: May 07, 2012, 12:54 »
0
I'm having a very strange experience with that Elena.  I tend to have  one or two sales on new files straight away, and then they just stop and become slow and sporadic, but the older stuff keeps churning out sales at a regular rate.

This is my experience too.  A few downloads on new files right after acceptance and then sort of dies out.  But unlike Elena, my new stuff isn't selling on FT either.  Not even any views.  I think it's more to do with the search algorithms than anything else.  I like selling the older stuff - a sale is a sale.  But would be nice to give a fair shot to new stuff too, to keep us motivated. 

« Reply #7 on: May 07, 2012, 13:15 »
0
I'm having a very strange experience with that Elena.  I tend to have  one or two sales on new files straight away, and then they just stop and become slow and sporadic, but the older stuff keeps churning out sales at a regular rate.

I had a batch of 40 accepted and the next day I sold one for 18 bucks, then nothing else since...7days.

rubyroo

« Reply #8 on: May 07, 2012, 13:22 »
0
@ Lisa, although your news isn't good either (and I'm so sorry for that), it's sort of a relief to know we're in the same boat with new images at SS.  I do agree that it hampers motivation.  The 'thrill of the new' at SS used to be the driving force for my enthusiasm.

FT's a lousy performer for me too - has been for a long time.

@Mantis, glad to know you managed to pull a big sale before they dropped of, at least.

Perhaps we should all hold hands across the Web, close our eyes, focus, and wish really hard for a change of algorithm!  ;)
« Last Edit: May 07, 2012, 13:26 by rubyroo »

« Reply #9 on: May 07, 2012, 14:12 »
0
No my new images are not selling at anything like the rate they did a year ago. 

« Reply #10 on: May 07, 2012, 14:29 »
0
So far this month I have 5 sales of the last images I uploaded, which was in March. Nothing to write home about, but I guess it answers your question about new images selling.

« Reply #11 on: May 07, 2012, 16:32 »
0
Well I did have a few sales from the new batches on SS, but it's weird to see that I have more sales on FT than on SS from that set. Usually it was the other way around - new files picked up sales much faster on SS.
And yeah I agree - the fast sales used to be a great motivator to upload new content... Not anymore.

« Reply #12 on: May 07, 2012, 17:33 »
0
5 of the last 32 sales for me have been from photos uploaded in the last 2-1/2 months so I'm seeing some activity and it's been an increase over the rate I'd seen on new files the last 4 or 5 months of last year.

WarrenPrice

« Reply #13 on: May 07, 2012, 18:03 »
0


It is totally unpredictable for me.  This editorial image was uploaded last week, approved recently, and sold today.  It may never sell again. 

Other non-editorial, non-time sensitive "new" images have sold up to 3 times in a week and continue to sell.  Absolutely no way to get a rope around it.  :-)

PS: @ Pete -- the image was taken with the 100-400 Rental.  I think it was backed off to 330mm.

« Reply #14 on: May 07, 2012, 18:10 »
0
Possibly buyers are searching by relevancy whereas before by popularity which does / did seem to favour newer stuff??

« Reply #15 on: May 07, 2012, 18:42 »
0
My new images seem to be doing barely better now than they were a few months ago - but maybe I have more new images lately?

I think that the old SS had images indexed once or twice a day and If they had more than a few sales the first day they would show up fairly high in a general search - not just newest. Now they get indexed to newest almost immediately but it can take at least a few days before they get indexed into the general search - by that time unless they have been racking up sales the whole time or they are in a tiny niche they are buried.

In a popular subject an image can get buried in the newest search in hours - there is no chance to be at the top of that search long enough to get a decent position in the general search. Before if you got some lucky timing with the indexing then that image might make a decent placement with the general search. If it was good enough it might stay there. Your image also might get buried on arrival with unlucky index timing though and never see the light of day and sales. Perhaps luck in the timing still makes a difference, but now the luck is to get images accepted at the beginning of the work day where your images might sell - before it was to get accepted right before an indexing. With the long lag in review times I don't think there is much we can do about it other than upload a lot in the hopes that some of them get the lucky timing.

Ideally your images are in high demand low supply niches and none of this matters to you. Feel free to PM me with these niches.

I do miss the surge of uploads with a newly accepted batch of images, but I think it is probably better for me to get the sales I do with old images - although it does hurt my motivation to produce and upload as many images as I might if the new images sold like they used to.

« Reply #16 on: May 07, 2012, 18:59 »
0
Yes,my last new images is selling on SS well.Not really on FT


RacePhoto

« Reply #17 on: May 07, 2012, 23:51 »
0
Funny thing, I went and checked, 48% for the last six months New Images vs total sales, 49% for the last year New Sales vs Total sales. I don't know if that answers any questions?

Now here's my question, which no one on SS forums has answered, so I'll see if anyone here knows.

When SS says, income from "new images" what's a new image? One month, 3 months, 6 months? What is NEW? People debate this and look at the numbers and it seems no one can say what it is or where SS tells us how they get this number?  ???

And as long as I'm asking. When people write here, "are new images selling" what is new? When does a new image become and old image?  ;D

lagereek

« Reply #18 on: May 08, 2012, 00:06 »
0
Well if they search by "relevancy"  we are all in trouble. Relevancy and Best-Match,  are the two searches which are really non existant and brings out and includes more spamming then any other search-technique.
Relevancy, is what?  relevant to what?  a made up word or phrase by contributors, who really can keyword an image to whatever they wish. As an example, the IS, best-match search, take a profession like a, Geodetist,  their CV, is so limited, it doesnt even recognize this word, profession but instead stamps it as a "worker", instead of a civil-engineer.
Thats relevancy and best match, for you.  just an example ofcourse.

traveler1116

« Reply #19 on: May 08, 2012, 00:16 »
0
Well if they search by "relevancy"  we are all in trouble. Relevancy and Best-Match,  are the two searches which are really non existant and brings out and includes more spamming then any other search-technique.
Relevancy, is what?  relevant to what?  a made up word or phrase by contributors, who really can keyword an image to whatever they wish. As an example, the IS, best-match search, take a profession like a, Geodetist,  their CV, is so limited, it doesnt even recognize this word, profession but instead stamps it as a "worker", instead of a civil-engineer.
Thats relevancy and best match, for you.  just an example ofcourse.

"Geodetist" is a good word, the dictionary hasn't even heard of it yet.  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/geodetist

lagereek

« Reply #20 on: May 08, 2012, 00:24 »
0
Well if they search by "relevancy"  we are all in trouble. Relevancy and Best-Match,  are the two searches which are really non existant and brings out and includes more spamming then any other search-technique.
Relevancy, is what?  relevant to what?  a made up word or phrase by contributors, who really can keyword an image to whatever they wish. As an example, the IS, best-match search, take a profession like a, Geodetist,  their CV, is so limited, it doesnt even recognize this word, profession but instead stamps it as a "worker", instead of a civil-engineer.
Thats relevancy and best match, for you.  just an example ofcourse.

"Geodetist" is a good word, the dictionary hasn't even heard of it yet.  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/geodetist


Geodetist,  is doing geodesy, a civil engineering profession.  Geodesy is the technique, geodetist, is the man doing it.

Anyway, that wasnt the importance, just an example. The post was meant to inform that the searches, such as relevancy and best match,  are at best, not working at all, not with anything.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2012, 00:26 by lagereek »

« Reply #21 on: May 08, 2012, 00:27 »
0
If my image sales for new content for the last 6 months = x,  the total sales = 24.5 x

new images in last 6 months y, total images = about 15y

So, I'd say new images aren't selling as well as old ones - in marked contrast to SS selling patterns 2 or so years ago (or maybe I am just making crapstock for the last 6 months - not entirely impossible).

I think when they list "Earnings from New Content" that means all the content that was uploaded in the specified time period ie. 6 months in the above example.

RacePhoto

« Reply #22 on: May 08, 2012, 00:38 »
0
If my image sales for new content for the last 6 months = x,  the total sales = 24.5 x

new images in last 6 months y, total images = about 15y

So, I'd say new images aren't selling as well as old ones - in marked contrast to SS selling patterns 2 or so years ago (or maybe I am just making crapstock for the last 6 months - not entirely impossible).

I think when they list "Earnings from New Content" that means all the content that was uploaded in the specified time period ie. 6 months in the above example.

Good theory, so when I hit 6 months as Earnings from new images, and compare to total sales for the last six months, it's picking that as "new" and if I take the last one, two years compared to two years, anything uploaded new within the last two years is "new"?

Hey, you are the first one to explain it. Thanks.

OK then for two years, earnings from new content is 39%, one year 49%, six months 46% and three months 39%. Hey that was fun! Nat that I'm sure it means anything because the recent is the same as two years.  ;D

Microstock Man

  • microstockman.com

« Reply #23 on: May 08, 2012, 02:44 »
0
New files definitely not selling like they used to. It's kind of disheartening. At least the older stuff still keeps churning away.

« Reply #24 on: May 08, 2012, 03:03 »
0
New images don't sell as well but I seem to get more downloads from similar older images when I upload new ones.  It's funny but people used to complain that old images didn't sell with SS, only new stuff.  I'm happy with how it is now and hope they don't change anything for a long time.  Monthly earnings are my main concern and they're doing great, compared to the other sites.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
2432 Views
Last post March 13, 2013, 20:27
by dbvirago
10 Replies
2558 Views
Last post January 07, 2014, 03:39
by mtkang
19 Replies
34519 Views
Last post January 20, 2015, 16:39
by etudiante_rapide
49 Replies
9425 Views
Last post August 03, 2018, 05:42
by gnirtS
6 Replies
1866 Views
Last post September 27, 2019, 06:55
by Lola Ginabrigeta

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results