Author Topic: Delete old crappy images? What do you think? (Read 10151 times)

hsfelix · « **on:** May 06, 2016, 04:59 »

Hey guys!

I'm on Shutterstock since 2005 and have a 23k images portfolio.
However, about 40 - 50% of it consists of crappy images, entire photoshoots that don't sell.

Do you think my sales could improve by deleting these photos (which would raise the sales %) or this is just a myth?

Best regards

anathaya · « **Reply #1 on:** May 06, 2016, 05:06 »

IMHO, it's just a myth.
Sorry, I cannot prove that.

Lana · « **Reply #2 on:** May 06, 2016, 05:25 »

I do delete the crappiest ones once in a while provided they never sold, usually just a couple at a time (I have a small port), don't think it would improve the sales, but it's like cleaning one's apartment

noodle · « **Reply #3 on:** May 06, 2016, 05:37 »

Why waste time deleting when theres no benefit in doing so?
Besides, you never know when it may sell

sharpshot · « **Reply #4 on:** May 06, 2016, 05:38 »

When you get one of those big single or other sales on an image that you were thinking of deleting, it puts you off. I think its a myth that deleting images will improve sales, unfortunately one that I listened to when I was in my early years doing this. There's so much duff information by some old timers that should be ignored.

Microstockphoto · « **Reply #5 on:** May 06, 2016, 06:49 »

dont delete images, i had countless EL and sod sales on old images i forgot existed

Microstockphoto · « **Reply #6 on:** May 06, 2016, 10:37 »

just had a $70+ sale on a horrific image, i think may have sold once or twice before, like i said, dont delete images

Noedelhap · « **Reply #7 on:** May 06, 2016, 11:27 »

I'd never delete old stuff, it doesn't improve sales.

Difydave · « **Reply #8 on:** May 06, 2016, 11:52 »

One things sure if it's never sold and you delete it, it never will sell. Loads of crap in my PF. (Some might say it's all crap!

) And I leave it there.

Had a sale on an ancient "non-seller" only a month or two back.

Dumc · « **Reply #9 on:** May 06, 2016, 12:11 »

I agree with others. Some time ago I had EL sale on Bigstock for a file, that never sold before on any of the agencies.

LDV81 · « **Reply #10 on:** May 06, 2016, 12:17 »

I'd say everybody should clean up and delete at least 50% of their portfolios.
That would definitely improve my sales.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #11 on:** May 06, 2016, 13:14 »

in microstock, i learn one thing...
what you think is the most amazing photograph and what the clients think is crappy are two different things.
a look at my best sellers, ie. a download every to every other day from day 1...
i would consider them crappy. in fact, when i shot them, i just threw them in for fun,
and today, i have earned over 500 dollars from these handful of crap.

as for deleting old non-sellers.
well, in ss case, the ones that do not sell on day 1, or after a month, is most likely not going to suddenly be a top seller. top sellers remain topsellers in ss.

but my single single of 28,85, 102 dollars have never sold more than 3 times historically.

so, to agree with the person who say, i don't delete anything,,, because it never sold.
once you delete, it's the only time you know it won't sell.

finally, deleting non-sellers will improve sales??? don't ever believe that;
the person who profess to know that as the truth, is like the shaman who profess to know
where the grass is going to grow next, or the next hair that will be coming out of his head

Dumc · « **Reply #12 on:** May 06, 2016, 13:17 »

Why would deleting old crappy non-sellers improve your sales anyway? What's the logic behind it?

Microstockphoto · « **Reply #13 on:** May 06, 2016, 13:43 »

if you have a shiny port, buyers might come back, or follow you, if there is enough crap to wade through, they might not

Pauws99 · « **Reply #14 on:** May 06, 2016, 16:13 »

Quote from: Microstockphoto on May 06, 2016, 13:43

if you have a shiny port, buyers might come back, or follow you, if there is enough crap to wade through, they might not

Or they might not....unless you are in the top 5% I doubt it and I'm pretty sure I'm not what is more certain is that I've sold old pics recently which I would be too embarrassed to upload these days!

Firewall · « **Reply #15 on:** May 06, 2016, 16:27 »

I don't delete, since I don't decide what is crap or not. Ultimately the customer decides if it's crappy by not buying.

hairybiker777 · « **Reply #16 on:** May 06, 2016, 17:04 »

If your concern is that people browsing your port will never get to your better stuff because of your weaker stuff, maybe use the Catalog Manager to break your port down into sets. The thing is, you never know when the search algorithm is going to change and maybe all of a sudden, some of those images will start appearing higher up in searches and start selling. I've had some very old images that have never ever sold suddenly start selling for me in the past couple of weeks... microstock is a black art...

Pauws99 · « **Reply #17 on:** May 07, 2016, 02:11 »

I have noticed a trend of late of my older stuff selling.....particularly on SS.

danielsbfoto · « **Reply #18 on:** May 07, 2016, 03:29 »

Before to delete old stuff I try to give them an opportunity reviewing old keywords remove or add new tags.

RapidEye · « **Reply #19 on:** May 07, 2016, 04:29 »

I've wondered about this often.

If I were the agencies, trying to give buyers the most appealing search results, one of the factors I'd use would be a weighting per photographer based on sales success.

Now, you couldn't use gross sales because that would vary with portfolio size. You'd have to use a ratio, and the most obvious one would be total sales divided by portfolio size.

This is total speculation, of course, but if it's true then you might improve your search ranking if you reduced the size of your portfolio.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #20 on:** May 07, 2016, 04:44 »

Quote from: RapidEye on May 07, 2016, 04:29

I've wondered about this often.

If I were the agencies, trying to give buyers the most appealing search results, one of the factors I'd use would be a weighting per photographer based on sales success.

Now, you couldn't use gross sales because that would vary with portfolio size. You'd have to use a ratio, and the most obvious one would be total sales divided by portfolio size.

This is total speculation, of course, but if it's true then you might improve your search ranking if you reduced the size of your portfolio.

Possibly but I prefer facts such as selling images rather than trying to second guess the mysterious dark art of sites search engines

fotografer · « **Reply #21 on:** May 07, 2016, 04:56 »

Quote from: RapidEye on May 07, 2016, 04:29

I've wondered about this often.

If I were the agencies, trying to give buyers the most appealing search results, one of the factors I'd use would be a weighting per photographer based on sales success.

Now, you couldn't use gross sales because that would vary with portfolio size. You'd have to use a ratio, and the most obvious one would be total sales divided by portfolio size.

This is total speculation, of course, but if it's true then you might improve your search ranking if you reduced the size of your portfolio.

I think that DT use that as one of the elements in their search.

cascoly · « **Reply #22 on:** May 07, 2016, 15:28 »

Quote from: RapidEye on May 07, 2016, 04:29

I've wondered about this often.

If I were the agencies, trying to give buyers the most appealing search results, one of the factors I'd use would be a weighting per photographer based on sales success.

Now, you couldn't use gross sales because that would vary with portfolio size. You'd have to use a ratio, and the most obvious one would be total sales divided by portfolio size.

This is total speculation, of course, but if it's true then you might improve your search ranking if you reduced the size of your portfolio.

so you'd rate a photographer with 5 sales on a portfolio of 10 higher than one with 45 sales out of 100? or 3000 sales out of 10,000? (using $ amts is equally useless since payments are based on user's size needs, not quality)

bigger problem is the underlying assumption that all images are fungible -- that two 100 image portfolios are equivalent when one is 100 pix of corn and the other is 100 images that span multiple categories - thus rating any particular image based on the artist's overall portfolio is meaningless

back to the original question, deleting your own images only makes sense if many buyers are looking for work by particular artists -- the antithesis of STOCK photography

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #23 on:** May 08, 2016, 09:32 »

Quote from: fotografer on May 07, 2016, 04:56

Quote from: RapidEye on May 07, 2016, 04:29
I've wondered about this often.

If I were the agencies, trying to give buyers the most appealing search results, one of the factors I'd use would be a weighting per photographer based on sales success.

Now, you couldn't use gross sales because that would vary with portfolio size. You'd have to use a ratio, and the most obvious one would be total sales divided by portfolio size.

This is total speculation, of course, but if it's true then you might improve your search ranking if you reduced the size of your portfolio.

I think that DT use that as one of the elements in their search.

dt??? LOL, you believe that?? my ratio of images to sales there is 2:1 (dl:port)
i still have been earning for past 2 years more dls with ss in one week that i get with dt in 2 years

fotografer · « **Reply #24 on:** May 08, 2016, 16:40 »

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on May 08, 2016, 09:32

Quote from: fotografer on May 07, 2016, 04:56
Quote from: RapidEye on May 07, 2016, 04:29
I've wondered about this often.

If I were the agencies, trying to give buyers the most appealing search results, one of the factors I'd use would be a weighting per photographer based on sales success.

Now, you couldn't use gross sales because that would vary with portfolio size. You'd have to use a ratio, and the most obvious one would be total sales divided by portfolio size.

This is total speculation, of course, but if it's true then you might improve your search ranking if you reduced the size of your portfolio.

I think that DT use that as one of the elements in their search.

dt??? LOL, you believe that?? my ratio of images to sales there is 2:1 (dl:port)
i still have been earning for past 2 years more dls with ss in one week that i get with dt in 2 years

The fact that you earn more at SS is irrelevant.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Delete old crappy images? What do you think? (Read 10151 times)

hsfelix

anathaya

Lana

noodle

sharpshot

Microstockphoto

Microstockphoto

Noedelhap

Difydave

Dumc

LDV81

etudiante_rapide

Dumc

Microstockphoto

Pauws99

Firewall

hairybiker777

Pauws99

danielsbfoto

RapidEye

Pauws99

fotografer

cascoly

etudiante_rapide

fotografer

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors