0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Many posters here have said you need a 'big' portfolio to draw any conclusions, implying there is some 'magic number' beyond which you start to get a boost in rankings; but that's impossible to prove, and I've seen no convincing reason why 200 images wouldn't be a statistically valid sample.
If portfolio size means nothing at all, then how is it that I sell in day what the OP does in a month? I don't have one or two huge sellers in my portfolio that are carrying the load; just a reasonable quantity of images that sell consistently.
Size does matter but it's never just a simple matter of double portfolio size => double the earnings. If it was that simple I would be now a billionaire.
Quote from: Mopic on August 24, 2012, 16:01Size does matter but it's never just a simple matter of double portfolio size => double the earnings. If it was that simple I would be now a billionaire. Exactly^^ There are some people who do well with only a few hundred images because they are extremely useful to buyers. Others like me who shoot more basic images tend to compete more and get less for the effort. And it also has to do with other things: keywording, search favoritism, and a good kabuki dance.
No one knows how they determine rank but portfolio size might be a factor. Those with large ports have proven they are serious, determined and committed contributors and they may get an extra boost in the ranking for that.So that means there just might be a magic number that changes your search rank.
So that means there just might be a magic number that changes your search rank.
Quote from: digitalexpression on August 24, 2012, 16:54No one knows how they determine rank but portfolio size might be a factor. Those with large ports have proven they are serious, determined and committed contributors and they may get an extra boost in the ranking for that.So that means there just might be a magic number that changes your search rank.Yet another ridiculous conspiracy theory to supposedly explain a poor performer's lack of sales. How about the theory that it's a actually a very simple meritocracy for both individual images and individual contributors? That's what it looks like to me. SS is a business that succeeds primarily by giving it's customers what they need __ most importantly a good accurate search engine that delivers the best and most relevant images to the keywords they used. Screwing the search algorithm up with nonsense factors, in the way that IS has done for years (always pushing their most expensive and exclusive content first), is a recipe for disaster and IS have suffered the consequences. Oringer is a businessman; the people running Istock for the last few years were just idiots. That's why they've lost out so quickly and so spectacularly, even in a rising market, from a position of almost total dominance.
In 2011 SS reportedly sold just under $60M images from a library averaging 15M images over that period. Therefore an 'average image' sells roughly 4x per year. To be an average performer your portfolio of 200 images should attract about 67 sales per month.If that's not happening then you might need to work on the quality, diversity and saleability of your images. New images can attract early sales but after that they need to be good enough to climb the sort order in their subject matter for sales to be sustained.
Thanks for the replies. Although I find some of them true and logical, it seems that weird things do happen with my images. They are not commercial pictures and I am a beginner in photography, but I can't understand why I don't have dlds on files that show in the first page at popular after 3-4 months. For eg, I have a wildlife picture(not commercial, I know) of a roe deer. It is a picture of a wild animal, and I see that these pictures sell better than the ones taken in enclosures. It had 6 dlds in the first 2 weeks, then nothing. After 3 months another one. Now, if you search for "roe deer", it's on the first row of the first page from 15 pages. If you simply go for "deer", it's on the second page from 326. Now it is there for a long time without dlds. Why it was downloaded first and now nothing? I really don't know how they can mannipulate the searches, or if our searches resembles the custumer's. I have another eg, and then I stopped searching, as I found these egs. very illogical. And I checked the earnings for the last 3 months, cause some of you said that only new content from my port sell, as the older images are not commercial enough and they drown in the big library: 20% of the earnings from last 3 months is from new content. Now maybe the problem is that my new content is only cr@p. Anyway, thanks a lot for the replies as I find something to learn from them.
I know the deer is not commercial. But the second eg. is a photo of red beads over white. If you search for "red beads", it's on the first row of the first page out of 174 pages. If you go for "beads", it's on the second page out of 647. And it did not sell in the first days, it has sold after 2 months, four times in two weeks. Then nothing again. Now it is in front if you search by popular, but I think it hasn't after two months without any dlds. And for all that it had a boots for a moment. After these two, I stoped checking as I really don't understand anything from these ones.