MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Holy #@|@{  (Read 10182 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: May 11, 2007, 03:21 »
There's a mighty post of Yuri in the forum of SS saying that he has broken the 1000 dl/day barrier... This is truly mind boggling knowing that only on SS he almost earns 6-8k a month. He's probabaly on all the microstocksites so he's monthly total could easily be 15 k I guess.


« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2007, 03:48 »
I saw that after celebrating my best day ever at SS - I had 12 downloads.  ;)
But then again. my portfolio there isn't that big, nor have I been there for a long time. But it is amazing to see those numbers.

« Reply #2 on: May 11, 2007, 06:40 »
that is amazing - I'm thrilled when I go into double digits - cannot image that milestone!  All the best to him.

« Reply #3 on: May 11, 2007, 07:34 »
He has quite an incredible success story to say the least. I had record sales on the same day, albeit I have a ways to go before I'm at his stratospheric level. His success easily motivates me to double my efforts.

« Reply #4 on: May 11, 2007, 07:47 »
He claims to be the 2nd best earning microstockphotographer.
It is amazing how much this guy earns. He is on 16 other stock sites.
For me it is really encouraging and shows that microstock can give you a good income if you invest in it.

« Reply #5 on: May 11, 2007, 08:10 »
fantastic achievement!
once again the idiom is proved 'the more you put it the more you get from it'
just so brilliant!


« Reply #6 on: May 11, 2007, 09:55 »
I knew there were artists earning good money, but that absolutely blew me away.  I opened the thread to see whta the punch line was - had no idea.

On a much tinier scale, 3 of my top 4 days ever are in May. Keep it up.

« Reply #7 on: May 11, 2007, 11:15 »
Yes, this is an astonishing achievement.  An example to us all.

When asked on iStock if he is 'the world's most downloaded stock photographer', his reply was 'no - that honour goes to my friend Andre Rodriguez'.

« Reply #8 on: May 11, 2007, 11:46 »
That is amazing to know!  (And I thought me selling 22 on SS yesterday was awesome!)

If anyone would like to click through to his bio on DT. 

When reading his bio I was reminded by another success story - Iofoto... who has a team working along with him.    I wonder how long it takes for a photo for these guys to break even after salaries, etc.


  • iofoto.com
« Reply #9 on: May 11, 2007, 12:56 »
another success story - Iofoto... who has a team working along with him.    I wonder how long it takes for a photo for these guys to break even after salaries, etc.

The break-even is a really good question! We're not there yet. Like any business, we're testing new markets and microstock shows promise. In the "old" days of traditional RM and then RF, we hoped to break-even, on average, on any given image production, within 2 years. Of course, some productions never achieve profitability, and others are home-runs... But those were the days when getting an image into the marketplace could take months, not minutes.

What's exciting for us- and I think for anyone in microstock, is the growth of both the customer base and the pricing. Once customers discovered the simplicity of Royalty-Free, about 20% more customers used RF every year, and the average price per image grew about 20% a year. In microstock, that means $1 in sales today will equal $1.40 a year from now, and $1.96 two years from now due to compounding interest.

If you're interested, here's 2 links to my business thoughts:

About The Image article

Stockxpert Forum


And anyone is welcome to read my crazy shoot adventure blog...

« Reply #10 on: May 11, 2007, 13:53 »
Thanks for responding Ron, and I hope you don't mind that I compared your work style.  I (we!) hold your work with high regard and appreciate your honest commentary (I wonder how you find the time to be such a presence with your blog, articles and input on forums).  I think a lot of times we look at portfolios like Yuri's and yours and fantasize about the buckets of money that you are making.  We don't often look at your work and think of the crew required, the location permits, the travel expenses or the Kraft Tables...

« Reply #11 on: May 11, 2007, 15:45 »
That is amazing to know!  (And I thought me selling 22 on SS yesterday was awesome!)
You're link to your portfolio on SS doesn't work, or there are no photos in your portfolio.


  • iofoto.com
« Reply #12 on: May 11, 2007, 15:49 »
Thanks for responding Ron, and I hope you don't mind that I compared your work style...  I hold your work with high regard and appreciate your honest commentary...

No problem! I'll be glad to offer my thoughts on the "business" aspects. We're really in this together. Clients are always looking for fresh perspectives, and I'm quite invigorated by looking at all the awesome new images that are now available through the microstock community!

« Reply #13 on: May 11, 2007, 16:01 »
That is amazing to know!  (And I thought me selling 22 on SS yesterday was awesome!)
You're link to your portfolio on SS doesn't work, or there are no photos in your portfolio.

Thanks.  I think I fixed it... but brace yourself... it will take you all afternoon to browse through my amazingly huge SS portfolio....  of 23 photos.  (I can only take so much rejection and haven't tried to send too much of the old stuff!)

« Reply #14 on: May 11, 2007, 17:05 »

You do the hard yards, you get the $.

He's got an amazing portfolio of work, and if you look at the oldest stuff he's come a long way in quality etc.

I'm no where near that level with stock, and can't see me getting there any day soon.  Very cool.

Cheers, Me.

« Reply #15 on: May 11, 2007, 18:13 »
It took me a while to realize what 1000 dls a day mean.  :D

Awesome work indeed.  Not the kind of think I produce though (people images), so I won't keep false dreams...  ;)


« Reply #16 on: May 11, 2007, 21:32 »
1000+ DLs on a single day and site is indeed quite an accomplishment. My target for the end of the year (and after one year shooting stock) is 300. So far so good: I'm nearly half way there. To sell at his rate after only two years not only says much about his dedication and work ethic, but also about how and what he shoots.

I think the lesson to be learnt is that in order to be successful you must specialize. I firmly believe that developing a broad and shallow portfolio will not allow you to excel in any specific niche, and your sales will reflect this, forever earthbound. Yuri has chosen to specialize in shooting people within a white collar framework. I have chosen to specialize in aviation photography.

I humbly suggest that you select a subject/topic/niche that interests you - something you are (or can become) passionate about. If outdoor or street photography is your bag, then perhaps you can choose to specialize in capturing that unique something about the area in which you live. If you have young kids, why not document everything about their lives as they grow and mature? If cars are your thing, start shooting them like no one else has before. Wanna shoot fashion? There are plenty of models and stylists on Craigslist and Model Mayhem who are open to TFP/TFCD work. Go for it!

There is a market for every kind of image. Some markets are larger than others, but regardless of the demand for your imagery, it should be your goal to be the best - to be world class - at providing it. It'll be a tough go at first, as you learn your craft and find out what sells and what doesn't, but once you hit your stride you will be very far ahead of your competition - photographers who click/shoot/grab at seemingly random subjects, not having a clear and concise goal, and thus excelling at nothing. If you approach stock photography as an amateur, you will forever be an amateur. As this industry grows and matures it will become increasingly dominated by professionals. Do you want to be one of them, or do you want to sit back and envy them? Are you content with mediocre acceptance and sales rates, or do you want to do something about it?

Maybe 1000+ DLs/day is a wakeup call ... are you listening?

Okay, I'm off my soapbox now ... back to work! (making more airplane shots, of course)

[Edit: After reading this it occurred to me that you may think this is directed at you, madelaide. Rest assured that it is not - it's directed at everyone.]
« Last Edit: May 12, 2007, 15:30 by sharply_done »

« Reply #17 on: May 12, 2007, 04:55 »
Hi Sharply...

You are right, but you have to remember that for some of us it is just a hobby...  For some it's a full time job, some do it 'on the side' as professionally as time allows, others only peck at it once a month.

While this industry has great potential for generating a very good income, it is also accepting of all levels of input, and to some extent skill.

For my part I plod along with stock, only adding a few non-specialised images a month to my portfolio, I average about $150/month or there abouts.  It helps with the finance on some of my gear, which I'm happy with.  That's enough for me.

Sure, I'm a wee bit jealous of folks who are doing very well in this game, but only because I'd like the money without the work.  I'm sure you've put in a lot of hours to get to the 150/day mark, and I'm sure that Logos has put in a tremendous level of effort to get where he is.

I put in a lot of time and effort with my sports work, and I get a fair return on my efforts there.  I muck about with stock, and it pays pocket money.

I think you're expecting too much of the average microstock photographer as well...

The people who are 'good' at photography, and are able to create good images will benefit from specialising in one area and moving to create world class images.  Those who do not have the level of natural ability required will be better off covering a lot of bases to get sales.

At the end of the day photography, as with any creative endevour, requires a level of natural ability and, for want of a better word, 'nack'.  Some people can pick up any camera and shoot class images, others struggle for years though photography classes, clubs, online forums, and reading every book in the library, but still take fuzzy over exposed photos in full auto mode.

I really do believe that if someone is struggling with high rejection rates and low sales for more than a couple of months in this game, they would be better off selling their camera on Ebay if they ever want to make money in stock photography!

Cheers, Me.

« Reply #18 on: May 14, 2007, 00:52 »
G'day Sharply & Chellyar..

Just letting you know about life from the end...  starting professional and now heading to microstock.  As you suggested Sharply..  I specialize in one area of photography (sport/Leisure) and have done so for far too many years to count... but wouldn't trade it for anything.  Having owned and/or operated RM collections for the better part of 25 years, I'm finding playing in the MS has only helped my photography.

Sure... my rate of acceptance isn't as high sometimes as I'd like... you see, my day job has me going out tonight to photograph a rugby game which could yield some great MS images.  Pitch dark and in the rain!!!!!   I don't care how good your cameras are, getting images accepted to any site with the noise I'll get tonight is a real challenge.  ( I'll get a good laugh when the reject note comes in telling me to re-shoot the images in better light or with a better camera.. I shoot with Nikon D2xs ...  any news on a D3 yet?)

Microstock is helping me to look beyond my scope of work and shoot for better quality.. even if sometimes it seems impossible.   I keep think something about teaching an old dog new tricks.. but in the meantime...  I'll take your word for it and keep with what has been a great life for me  for a long time.   Specialize in what you love and understand.

Thanks...  happy flying.


« Reply #19 on: May 14, 2007, 03:58 »
Hi JC... 

You sound like anything but the average microstocker....  If you've survived 25 years in RM with lifestyle/sports you'll find the move to MS a little bumpy, but rewarding fairly quickly I'd say.

And I can appreciate the dark and wet rugby, I covered a game a few weeks ago at a club field that had terrible lighting, I was getting 1/250th at ISO1600 under exposing by 2/3rds, and that was in the 'good' patches of light at the corners of he field..  I lucked in with a good lineout photo that the paper ran with, the rest was pretty terrible...  Next time they ask me to cover that club at night I'll develop some sort of weird alergy to contact sports!  At least it wasn't raining, I've not caught any wet night games this year so far, and only one wet day game..

Out of curiosity, What part of the world are you in?

- Duh, ignore that, Clicked on your website link...    How come you've got wet rugby in Aussie already?  Isn't it meant to be warmer over there?  :-)

edit: Typo as well, I should give up typing while eating!
« Last Edit: May 14, 2007, 04:01 by chellyar »

« Reply #20 on: May 14, 2007, 13:19 »
As a former athlete (ahhh the good ole days before kids...) I think your work is very authentic and full of passion.  Your portfolio is one of my favorite.

Sharply_done has a good approach...focus in on a few areas and dominate a subject.  Being known in an area makes good marketing sense.

You can tell a difference in Jeff's sports photos- his body of work shows a level of patience and maturity that isn't created overnight.  There's a sense that he has studied the sports he shoots- not just documented it through images. Well done.

Ehhh...noise...it's something that can and can't be avoided.  For small amounts of noise I think it should just be included in the description for the buyer to decide.

« Reply #21 on: May 14, 2007, 19:08 »
Glad someone is making sales. I am back to between 2 - 6 sales a day. And after increasing my portfolio by 500%

« Reply #22 on: May 14, 2007, 19:37 »

It's fall here in the land of OZ..  and as luck would have it the rain held out for the game last night, but came this morning for our Tuesday morning golf!!  I love the challenges sports throw up ... as long as it happens during the day and outside!!  Glad to hear someone else has to put up with crappy light  and the odd good patch.

Thanks Bryan for the compliments...  I have a great body of work here in the office, over 1 million slides (sorry.. it's not a typo!) ... just trying to figure out how best to sort, scan, tag and get online...  anyone looking for a job?

Cheers for now.   JC

« Reply #23 on: May 14, 2007, 20:00 »
litifeta: I took a quick look at your SS portfolio - perhaps your sparse sales are related to your rather limited use of keywords. Your image of chocolate chip cookies, for example, can easily include "chip,white,background,homemade,home,made,home-made,brown,pile,mound,round".

Making a marketable shot only gets you to the half-way point - you won't earn money from it unless you "advertise" it well.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2007, 22:46 by sharply_done »

« Reply #24 on: May 14, 2007, 21:44 »
thanks sharply, point taken. I will get to work

« Reply #25 on: May 15, 2007, 07:04 »

It's fall here in the land of OZ.. 

Ditto here, I'm across the ditch, just south of Christchuch, NZ.

« Reply #26 on: May 15, 2007, 07:32 »
He claims to be the 2nd best earning microstockphotographer.

Who is the first.

One has to wonder is Lisa G submitted to all sites how much more money she would make, I can't see being exclusive at IS being as good as being everywhere. I would also wonder if she decided to do that would IS give her a better deal to stay?

« Reply #27 on: May 15, 2007, 07:38 »
Click this link and you will see his profile.. http://www.dreamstime.com/Andresr_info

« Reply #28 on: May 15, 2007, 14:50 »
Click this link and you will see his profile.. http://www.dreamstime.com/Andresr_info

One stat stands out for me on Andres' profile:  Average 132 images uploaded per month... 

I remember looking at that a while ago, it strikes me every time I see that number... And he's uploaded 176 so far this month...  Those a big numbers if you think about the level of quality he's holding.  Just shooting that number of 'good' shots a month would keep you busy, let or loan editing/keywording etc...

« Reply #29 on: May 15, 2007, 16:29 »
Just shooting that number of 'good' shots a month would keep you busy, let or loan editing/keywording etc...
Many of these top sellers also reuse keywords.  It's common to see some that do not belong to a series, but if you see their other photos you may see where they came from. 


« Reply #30 on: May 15, 2007, 16:38 »
« Last Edit: May 15, 2007, 16:41 by yingyang0 »

« Reply #31 on: May 15, 2007, 17:23 »
Andres's numbers only serve to underline the enormous gap bwtween the market leader (IS) and DT (who to their credit are doing good work); he has had 32,000 downloads in total, whereas at IS the top people (Lise Gagne for example) have 500,000 downloads.  Admittedly IS got started a year or two earlier.  But nonetheless the difference between the two is a factor of fifteen.

I believe he has about 50,000 downloads at FT but then I don't believe any of DT's numbers.

« Reply #32 on: May 16, 2007, 00:53 »
Yeah, nobody sells better than IS.
Nobody even comes close.

I have less than 1/4 of the images on IS than I do at my other sites, and, with the exception of SS, IS outperforms them all. It's only a matter of time before my IS sales exceed my SS sales. I can see myself reaching a point where I'll only incur a small financial penalty by going exclusive with IS - when I reach that point I won't hesitate for a second.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2007, 03:50 by sharply_done »

« Reply #33 on: May 16, 2007, 03:31 »
I see going exclusive as a big risk. If ' something goes wrong', it will be lots of trouble to get all you images into the other libraries.

Some time ago many people (from all parts of the world could) not upload to IS. A technical issue with their web providers was mentioned. Well, I have to admit that it had been fixed after some time.

Currently there are issues again getting photos online. IS answer is ' your files are corrupted' . Well they work on all other sites ... and they are jpg straight out of PS without any keyword or other data manipulated?!

I like the IS sales too, but I don't have the confidence to go exclusive ...

« Reply #34 on: May 16, 2007, 05:32 »
By the time it might be worth me considering going exclusive with istock, some of the other sites might be doing much better than they are now.  I think StockXpert might do well and as a long shot, Lucky Oliver might surprise us.  Then there are the sites that haven't launched yet.  Corbis should be able to grab a large chunk of the microstock market.  I don't think istock exclusivity will be as appealing in a few years time.

« Reply #35 on: May 16, 2007, 12:11 »
Interesting that you should mention Corbis - they have yet to turn a profit in any quarter of their existance. The company was started by Bill Gates, who believed at the time (still does?) that prints will someday be supplanted by electronic picture viewers. I think they're about as likely to dominate this industry as LO.

I'd like to see StockXpert doing better as well.

« Reply #36 on: May 16, 2007, 12:26 »
Completely agree with sharply.

I'm actually currently contemplating going exclusive at iStock very soon.   I probably and going to have to wait until I hit a payout at BigStock and 123RF again, then move towards shutting down my portfolios.  Until then, I'll build up my portfolio and work on getting high quality images up, and work from there.

Plus it gives me time to do other things, because IS is awesome and outsells everyone, and SS just needs too much maintenance (continously uploading) and after a certain point, its just too much work.

« Reply #37 on: May 16, 2007, 12:30 »
I see going exclusive as a big risk. If ' something goes wrong', it will be lots of trouble to get all you images into the other libraries.

I went exclusive for a few months, then some things changed that I wasn't excited about and I canceled my exclusivity with the agency.  I hold nothing against them - it was my decision based on my financial models and my analysis.

There is no trouble at all getting your images on other libraries if you become exclusive, then decide it isn't for you.  Like everywhere else, reviews are subjective, and some of the images that were once accepted are no longer acceptable, but other than that I've had no problems whatsoever.  In fact, when I left iStock, they told me if I wanted to come back to just send them a note and they would re-activate my images.  That's all it took (for real).  Granted, I don't have the canister ranking -  but who cares?

All it will cost you is your time - your time to deactivate images, and your time to re-upload them.

« Reply #38 on: May 16, 2007, 15:52 »
I agree with you Ichiro that SS requires too much work.  It's okay if one has a constant supply of new images, but a couple of weeks ago I had an accident and couldn't produce any new images for ten days.  After a few days my downloads at SS started to dry up.

Usually I get an average of about 28 downloads a day at SS, but because of the 'gap' in production, this week I've had two days of only 2 or 3 downloads; in other words my short period of being fallow destroyed my SS income.

What I want to do is spend time designing and creating; with SS there is too much time wasted by having to plan upload strategies, stagger submission of images etc.  Also, the long term asset value of an image is much less at SS - elsewhere I can be confident that my images will sell and sell perhaps for years, but that won't happen at SS without uploads.

« Reply #39 on: May 16, 2007, 21:05 »
I see going exclusive as a big risk. If ' something goes wrong', it will be lots of trouble to get all you images into the other libraries.


All it will cost you is your time - your time to deactivate images, and your time to re-upload them.

Thats what I mean. If I go exclusive and produce between 1000 and 2000 photos a year it will be a big hassle if the situation (or my mind) changes ...
With my current workflow I get the images up to all sites - more or less - smoothly, but an 'open batch' of over 1000 image would be a nightmare.

« Reply #40 on: June 29, 2007, 12:15 »
wow...i guess at my current rate i'm aiming more for the newbielink:http://www.larynandjanel.com/blog/the_long_tail_of_microstock_photography.html [nonactive] than for numbers like that per day...but it's a good reminder to devote some a little time regularly to get new content added.


Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
holy cow!

Started by Greg Boiarsky iStockPhoto.com

13 Replies
Last post August 14, 2006, 20:08
by Greg Boiarsky
57 Replies
Last post May 04, 2011, 11:04
by lagereek
22 Replies
Last post January 31, 2013, 16:29
by stockastic
5 Replies
Last post May 13, 2018, 03:13
by Brightontl
3 Replies
Last post June 23, 2018, 11:32
by Brightontl


Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results


3100 Posing Cards Bundle