Author Topic: RPI per month (Read 16281 times)

mattdixon · « **on:** October 30, 2012, 07:30 »

I'm probably going to get some understandably guarded answers here, but with a decent portfolio of a few thousand images what kind of Royalty per Image per month can you (roughly) expect at Shutterstock. I'm asking because quite honestly I'm cr**ping myself as an exclusive artist over at iStock and need to do something fairly soon before they wipe out the value of 6 years work.

leaf · « **Reply #1 on:** October 30, 2012, 08:14 »

I've added a poll to this topic - I think you'll probably get more responses if people can answer anonymously.

HerMajesty · « **Reply #2 on:** October 30, 2012, 08:43 »

It really depends what are you doing. There's a huge difference between illustrators and simple isolation shots for example when it comes to RPI.

mattdixon · « **Reply #3 on:** October 30, 2012, 09:07 »

Quote from: leaf on October 30, 2012, 08:14

I've added a poll to this topic - I think you'll probably get more responses if people can answer anonymously.

Thanks Leaf, didn't know you could do that :-)

OM · « **Reply #4 on:** October 30, 2012, 09:24 »

I'm a bit embarrassed to say but I've only been on SS effectively since end of June and have less than 120 photo's there. I hit $130 today for this month, having made $100 payout in September too. I must admit to having 'migrated' what I considered my best shots first from FT where I have only 300. FT is deceased for me and I'll probably fail to reach 50 credit payout for the second month in a row. Most of my old FT best sellers that were cut short in their prime by FT's monstrous search change are selling like mad on SS.

Even had I not had 1 EL on SS this month, I would still have made almost $1/image this month. Got no people in my port, mostly food and a few frames...........fffing great for me anyway. Dunno if it will last as I now have to come up with more work that's on a par with stuff I already have which sells.

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #5 on:** October 30, 2012, 09:48 »

Question about Total Images:
Since we upload continuously, how do you determine the number of images used to calculate RPI (per month)

Would you use the number you had at the start of the month? End of the Month? Or some previous month?

mattdixon · « **Reply #6 on:** October 30, 2012, 10:35 »

Quote from: WarrenPrice on October 30, 2012, 09:48

Question about Total Images:
Since we upload continuously, how do you determine the number of images used to calculate RPI (per month)

The way I do it for a rough calculation is current yearly $ total divided by current image total divided by current month (10 in this case).

gostwyck · « **Reply #7 on:** October 30, 2012, 11:26 »

I think you'll find that the most popular answer would be a good figure to work with. The situation is not static however. SS is steadily growing, month by month, as customers appear to be migrating from elsewhere, IS and FT in particular. That's what my data indicates anyway.

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #8 on:** October 30, 2012, 11:48 »

Why do people even bother with RPI ? whats the point? surely the important thing is what you get in your hand in the end of month, thats all that matters.
I couldnt give a flying so and so about the RPI as long as the money keeps rolling in.

Morphart · « **Reply #9 on:** October 30, 2012, 12:20 »

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on October 30, 2012, 11:48

Why do people even bother with RPI ? whats the point? surely the important thing is what you get in your hand in the end of month, thats all that matters.
I couldnt give a flying so and so about the RPI as long as the money keeps rolling in.

People who wants to upload their portfolios when leaving exclusivity do tend to do some research as... If I upload all my portfolio to SS, what can I expect to get from (xxxx images).

If the amount is 10% of what he usually gets per month, thats food for thought

.

stockmarketer · « **Reply #10 on:** October 30, 2012, 13:51 »

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on October 30, 2012, 11:48

Why do people even bother with RPI ? whats the point? surely the important thing is what you get in your hand in the end of month, thats all that matters.
I couldnt give a flying so and so about the RPI as long as the money keeps rolling in.

If you have been doing this for a while, what goes through your head when you're about to upload a new batch?

Do you have any expectation for it? Let's say you make next to nothing. Your RPI is, say, a penny a month. Would that be enough to keep you doing this?

But if it was a three bucks a month, you would be motivated to continue, right? Of course you would.

But what about $.25 a month? $.75? Everyone has a threshold number where it makes sense to keep going, or to hang it up. And everyone should have a goal number to shoot for which would symbolize getting a good handle on this microstock game.

The point is, knowing this number helps you project where you should be in a month or a year. You can plan your way to success, or you can hope to get there with blind ignorance and a dash of luck. I know which way has worked for me.

cthoman · « **Reply #11 on:** October 30, 2012, 14:04 »

Quote from: stockmarketer on October 30, 2012, 13:51

The point is, knowing this number helps you project where you should be in a month or a year. You can plan your way to success, or you can hope to get there with blind ignorance and a dash of luck. I know which way has worked for me.

I keep track of it and find it useful for long term forecasting, but, in the end, it is mostly a leap of faith with a dash of luck.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #12 on:** October 30, 2012, 15:06 »

Quote from: cthoman on October 30, 2012, 14:04

Quote from: stockmarketer on October 30, 2012, 13:51
The point is, knowing this number helps you project where you should be in a month or a year. You can plan your way to success, or you can hope to get there with blind ignorance and a dash of luck. I know which way has worked for me.

I keep track of it and find it useful for long term forecasting, but, in the end, it is mostly a leap of faith with a dash of luck.

And what the poll is going to prove is the same thing that CJ and I keep hinting at (or slamming with a big hammer)

One persons RPI is not the same as someone else's. It based on what you shoot or draw and not how many. Look at the range already with 30+ votes. All the way from 10c to $1 an image. WOW, there's some variation.

Otherwise, I agree, as a personal valuation, and looking at my own sales, vs my own sales, it can show how good an agency preforms or how I'm doing compared to myself.

But I'm also with CJ on the other part. I look at bottom line and what specific images sell, not how many. I have 100 images that have never sold once. So I remove them and my RPI goes up smartly to show what I get for images that do sell? I like that. Makes for pretty numbers.

My RPI has no relationship to anyone else's RPI. That's what I'm trying to say.

fotografer · « **Reply #13 on:** October 30, 2012, 15:16 »

Quote from: RacePhoto on October 30, 2012, 15:06

One persons RPI is not the same as someone else's. It based on what you shoot or draw and not how many. Look at the range already with 30+ votes. All the way from 10c to $1 an image. WOW, there's some variation.

And the range could be even bigger as the <10c could be 1c and the more than 1$ could be absolutely any number. I also don't really understand what use other peoples figures are as you have no idea if you will be in the <10c or over 1$ range.

gostwyck · « **Reply #14 on:** October 30, 2012, 16:01 »

Quote from: fotografer on October 30, 2012, 15:16

I also don't really understand what use other peoples figures are as you have no idea if you will be in the <10c or over 1$ range.

Most contributers know if their sales, relative to size of portfolio, compared to others are generally above average, below average or, like me, distinctly average. I think that the 30c per image/month would be a reasonable guide for Matt. Even that would take time as progress is made through the commission levels.

lisafx · « **Reply #15 on:** October 30, 2012, 17:50 »

To get an accurate idea what a newbie might earn, I agree with Gostwyck that .30 is probably a good guess.

But if you want to get an overall idea what people are making there, stopping the poll at $1 is WAY too low.

Poncke · « **Reply #16 on:** October 30, 2012, 19:16 »

Quote from: lisafx on October 30, 2012, 17:50

To get an accurate idea what a newbie might earn, I agree with Gostwyck that .30 is probably a good guess.

But if you want to get an overall idea what people are making there, stopping the poll at $1 is WAY too low.

If I understand correctly the formula the OP wants us to use is RPI=(total $ made so far this year/images online)/month of the year

Someone with 2000 images online, making 1000 dollar per month has an RPI of 50 cent. Someone with 3000 images online making 3000 dollar per month has an RPI of 1 dollar. So if you have 7000 images online making 3500 a month its still only an RPI of 50 cent. I guess the dollar is not too low.

stockmarketer · « **Reply #17 on:** October 30, 2012, 19:54 »

I prefer to look at avg daily RPI, since monthly has too much variation (months have between 28 and 31 days). My daily RPI for Oct is .096, which would be $2.98 for a 31-day month. It fluctuates a few fractions of a cent each month... daily for Aug was .089 (or $2.76 for the month), and daily for Sept was .097 (or $2.91 for the month)

Microbius · « **Reply #18 on:** October 31, 2012, 04:18 »

Quote from: mattdixon on October 30, 2012, 10:35

Quote from: WarrenPrice on October 30, 2012, 09:48
Question about Total Images:
Since we upload continuously, how do you determine the number of images used to calculate RPI (per month)

The way I do it for a rough calculation is current yearly $ total divided by current image total divided by current month (10 in this case).

The way i do it is to keep track of uploads on a spread sheet and each month use the running total to divide the income for that month. A few of the sites give you stats for total uploads each month (incl. rejections) so it shouldn't be too hard to input old data (canstock and DT for example).

Unrelated: there are also people on this thread still bringing up the old arguments about how you can delete images in your portfolio to bring up your RPI. Again, no professional contributor would ever calculate RPI in a way where this would make a difference. It is calculated using total images produced, regardless of whether they are then rejected or even deleted as non sellers.

HerMajesty · « **Reply #19 on:** October 31, 2012, 06:46 »

Quote from: Poncke on October 30, 2012, 19:16

I guess the dollar is not too low.

That's not the point. Some people (not many I give you that) are making way more. There are a few people with just a few hundred images making a couple of thousand dollars a month. Nevertheless that's a very small group so statistically speaking irrelevant.

gostwyck · « **Reply #20 on:** October 31, 2012, 09:10 »

Quote from: Microbius on October 31, 2012, 04:18

The way I do it for a rough calculation is current yearly $ total divided by current image total divided by current month (10 in this case).

The way i do it is to keep track of uploads on a spread sheet and each month use the running total to divide the income for that month. A few of the sites give you stats for total uploads each month (incl. rejections) so it shouldn't be too hard to input old data (canstock and DT for example).

Unrelated: there are also people on this thread still bringing up the old arguments about how you can delete images in your portfolio to bring up your RPI. Again, no professional contributor would ever calculate RPI in a way where this would make a difference. It is calculated using total images produced, regardless of whether they are then rejected or even deleted as non sellers.
[/quote]

Exactly. Not to take this thread off-topic but the ratio that I'm most interested in (after monthly earnings) is the average earnings per image since I started doing microstock. I simply divide the total amount I've ever earned by the number of images I've produced. Being as the portfolio is still earning I then double that number to give an approximate value of each image uploaded. I know it can never be an exact formula but it is the closest I think of to get an idea of how much I earn per hour doing microstock.

lisafx · « **Reply #21 on:** October 31, 2012, 11:38 »

Quote from: Poncke on October 30, 2012, 19:16

If I understand correctly the formula the OP wants us to use is RPI=(total $ made so far this year/images online)/month of the year

Someone with 2000 images online, making 1000 dollar per month has an RPI of 50 cent. Someone with 3000 images online making 3000 dollar per month has an RPI of 1 dollar. So if you have 7000 images online making 3500 a month its still only an RPI of 50 cent. I guess the dollar is not too low.

Then I must have miscalculated. I calculate RPI by dividing the monthly income at a site, by how many images I have on that site during that month. The way the OP suggest doesn't make sense to me.

cascoly · « **Reply #22 on:** October 31, 2012, 13:56 »

as many of us have said over and over - RPI is at best a marginal statistic, and totally worthless if you're trying to figure what your results will be -- the only possible comparison would be without others who have similar portfolios and polls like this won't give you that info

RacePhoto · « **Reply #23 on:** October 31, 2012, 14:29 »

Quote from: Microbius on October 31, 2012, 04:18

(clipped parts)

Unrelated: there are also people on this thread still bringing up the old arguments about how you can delete images in your portfolio to bring up your RPI. Again, no professional contributor would ever calculate RPI in a way where this would make a difference. It is calculated using total images produced, regardless of whether they are then rejected or even deleted as non sellers.

So you mean I need to calculate based on submitted images, not active images?

Does anyone else except you do that? Because lets say I sent in 1000 images and 500 got accepted. You are saying my RPI is based on 1000 not the 500 active and selling? Or in that case, I have 500 images that will always be averaged in as a zero?

I find that kind of strange. Where calculating based on how many images working and how many images are licensed for X dollars, seems the norm?

In other words, I believe the general way of figuring it is - RPI=Sales/Number Of Images that's simple enough.

You really calculate based on every photo you ever submitted, on every site? Amazing!

cthoman · « **Reply #24 on:** October 31, 2012, 15:22 »

Quote from: RacePhoto on October 31, 2012, 14:29

So you mean I need to calculate based on submitted images, not active images?

Does anyone else except you do that?

I don't (I do only accepted images), but I'm not overly concerned about my time put in and my acceptance rate is pretty high (so it probably wouldn't be much different anyway). I could see that being useful if you feel you are just spinning your wheels or trying to track particular batches of images. That's too robotic for me though. I like the cluster shot approach.

Microbius · « **Reply #25 on:** October 31, 2012, 15:46 »

Quote from: RacePhoto on October 31, 2012, 14:29

Quote from: Microbius on October 31, 2012, 04:18
(clipped parts)

Unrelated: there are also people on this thread still bringing up the old arguments about how you can delete images in your portfolio to bring up your RPI. Again, no professional contributor would ever calculate RPI in a way where this would make a difference. It is calculated using total images produced, regardless of whether they are then rejected or even deleted as non sellers.

So you mean I need to calculate based on submitted images, not active images?

Does anyone else except you do that? Because lets say I sent in 1000 images and 500 got accepted. You are saying my RPI is based on 1000 not the 500 active and selling? Or in that case, I have 500 images that will always be averaged in as a zero?

I find that kind of strange. Where calculating based on how many images working and how many images are licensed for X dollars, seems the norm?

In other words, I believe the general way of figuring it is - RPI=Sales/Number Of Images that's simple enough.

You really calculate based on every photo you ever submitted, on every site? Amazing!

Not sure how it can still seem the norm to you when the misapprehension is corrected by numerous people whenever you make the same point.
The reason to do it this way is to give an accurate assessment of whether you are spending your time productively. If you are producing images that are not selling or being rejected you need to see that reflected in the sum. Otherwise it is just pretty numbers.

chromaco · « **Reply #26 on:** October 31, 2012, 15:57 »

The main value of this calculation is to compare the sites to each other. If you are using it in this way it is extremely valuable because it becomes real easy to see which sites are performing best for your portfolio. I agree that it has almost no value in comparing artists, there is just too much difference from one port to the next.

heywoody · « **Reply #27 on:** October 31, 2012, 16:03 »

It's a pointless question if someone is figuring out the pro and cons of dropping the crown. The op needs to figure out what he / she might lose by being non-exclusive on IS and then maybe some detail on how RPI per accepted image compares between IS and SS for non exclusives generally. The fact that Johnny makes $1 and Fred makes 10c on SS is not useful info.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #28 on:** November 01, 2012, 23:42 »

Quote from: Microbius on October 31, 2012, 15:46

Quote from: RacePhoto on October 31, 2012, 14:29
Quote from: Microbius on October 31, 2012, 04:18
(clipped parts)

Unrelated: there are also people on this thread still bringing up the old arguments about how you can delete images in your portfolio to bring up your RPI. Again, no professional contributor would ever calculate RPI in a way where this would make a difference. It is calculated using total images produced, regardless of whether they are then rejected or even deleted as non sellers.

So you mean I need to calculate based on submitted images, not active images?

Does anyone else except you do that? Because lets say I sent in 1000 images and 500 got accepted. You are saying my RPI is based on 1000 not the 500 active and selling? Or in that case, I have 500 images that will always be averaged in as a zero?

I find that kind of strange. Where calculating based on how many images working and how many images are licensed for X dollars, seems the norm?

In other words, I believe the general way of figuring it is - RPI=Sales/Number Of Images that's simple enough.

You really calculate based on every photo you ever submitted, on every site? Amazing!
Not sure how it can still seem the norm to you when the misapprehension is corrected by numerous people whenever you make the same point.
The reason to do it this way is to give an accurate assessment of whether you are spending your time productively. If you are producing images that are not selling or being rejected you need to see that reflected in the sum. Otherwise it is just pretty numbers.

Yup we agree. I don't think most people if anyone else, uses all images, rejects and accepted to calculate this.

No problem, you're being more honest with yourself.

I prefer to calculate RPI based on working images, not failures. Also if I had more agencies like I once did, I could compare them to each other, except they don't accept the same images and different types sell at different places.

To each their own.

Hey, maybe we need a poll or thread or MSG standards committee to determine what is RPI and how to calculate it? LOL

rubyroo · « **Reply #29 on:** November 02, 2012, 05:02 »

Well which should we do for the poll? I already voted based on my whole port but, given the above, I went back and re-calculated on only actively selling images, and obviously the result was very different.

So, should the poll be re-run with this form of calculation stated as required? It'll be a pretty useless result if everyone's calculating it differently.

mattdixon · « **Reply #30 on:** November 02, 2012, 06:38 »

For the RPI to make sense it should be calculated using the total of images on line, irrespective of whether they are bestsellers or duds. It's useful for knowing how much work you need to do to grow or maintain your income. Or in my case whether to ditch a library altogether because of diminishing returns.

rubyroo · « **Reply #31 on:** November 02, 2012, 06:49 »

OK thanks. In that case I voted as you required, but it sounds as though some others didn't. You might want to add the facility for people to alter their vote so that the results are returning the information you want. I don't know how you add that option though.

borg · « **Reply #32 on:** November 02, 2012, 06:52 »

Quote from: lisafx on October 31, 2012, 11:38

Quote from: Poncke on October 30, 2012, 19:16

If I understand correctly the formula the OP wants us to use is RPI=(total $ made so far this year/images online)/month of the year

Someone with 2000 images online, making 1000 dollar per month has an RPI of 50 cent. Someone with 3000 images online making 3000 dollar per month has an RPI of 1 dollar. So if you have 7000 images online making 3500 a month its still only an RPI of 50 cent. I guess the dollar is not too low.

Then I must have miscalculated. I calculate RPI by dividing the monthly income at a site, by how many images I have on that site during that month. The way the OP suggest doesn't make sense to me.

I'm always amazed how most people have a "superficial" knowledge of elementary mathematics... Or that often might be characteristic of "artistic soul"... !

Lisa, leave it them in their "condition"... That was job of their teachers in elementary school... They were payed for that!
I think that is reason why World is in crisis, nobody knows anything, but they think they deserve excellent standard! And probably they are local patriots!

rubyroo · « **Reply #33 on:** November 02, 2012, 07:29 »

Oh hang on. I hadn't seen the OP's method of calculating. I didn't do it that way at all. The way I calculated was:

Monthly income divided by total images in port.

Do tell me if I'm wrong to do it that way.

sgoodwin4813 · « **Reply #34 on:** November 02, 2012, 08:31 »

That's how I did it, too. I think the "correct" way to do it depends on what you want to know. If your goal is to determine whether microstock is financially worthwhile relative to other activities then you probably should use total images, regardless of whether they get accepted - that will indicate return on total effort. For a business that is what you will want to know. If your goal is to see which agencies return the most per accepted image then do it only on those accepted. That's what I do, because I want to know which agencies work the best for me and should be the focus of future efforts. In my case for the past two years that agency is Shutterstock by a wide margin. The two years before that it was iStock. My RPI for accepted images on SS has been nearly the same over the past 4 years, while iStock has dropped by more than half. The numbers would be different but the trend the same if I used all images produced because acceptance rates are not that different between the agencies.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #35 on:** November 02, 2012, 12:04 »

Quote from: rubyroo on November 02, 2012, 07:29

Oh hang on. I hadn't seen the OP's method of calculating. I didn't do it that way at all. The way I calculated was:

Monthly income divided by total images in port.

Do tell me if I'm wrong to do it that way.

That's the way most people do it. Microbius was targeting me because I said "I can remove the non-sellers and my RPI will go way up." It also applies to images ready to go FREE on some sites. So people can remove images and will for any reason they want, and unless it's a best seller, it influences the RPI in a positive way.

Microbius was pointing out that the correct way for someone to evaluate the business and their profit as a whole ,would be include everything, accepted and rejected, to see the value of an image. He's right if someone looks at it from that viewpoint. In fact, it's a more honest way to see the real stats on how much an average image makes

Where it gets complicated, and why I personally choose to only use accepted images that are on the market, is this. I can shoot easily 1000 images a day at an event. I generally try to limit each upload batch to three best images of each driver or team. DO I figure the RPI including the 300 images that I threw away before I started sorting?

Or do I include the 400-500 that didn't make the cut for closer review? Or should I only count images that I actually crop and edit and upload? See where this is leading? Take 1000, upload 60 and statistically it's horrible! But when one of those 60 sells Editorial, I don't feel so bad about my I'm a statistical failure badge.

I prefer the simple answer, accepted images, and what do they earn a month. But honestly RPI is irrelevant except for personal use, or for comparing agencies. Because everyone has different shots and different portfolios, some have illustrations, some sell editorial, so anyone can choose their own way of calculation.

This all boils down to why some people say Alamy is terrible. They use RPI instead of bottom line. It can also be why some people don't like SS, they use RPI, not dollars in the bank = Bottom Line. Although SS kicks butt on IS for me anyway? I prefer to put gas in my car, buy equipment and eat lunch with dollars, not RPI's.

Microbius isn't wrong and I don't disagree with him, for someone evaluating how the Microstock business is doing for returns on investment. He's just doing it his own way. I do it mine. And I think if we checked most people use accepted images, not all images.

Poncke · « **Reply #36 on:** November 02, 2012, 13:45 »

Quote from: borg on November 02, 2012, 06:52

Quote from: lisafx on October 31, 2012, 11:38
Quote from: Poncke on October 30, 2012, 19:16

If I understand correctly the formula the OP wants us to use is RPI=(total $ made so far this year/images online)/month of the year

Someone with 2000 images online, making 1000 dollar per month has an RPI of 50 cent. Someone with 3000 images online making 3000 dollar per month has an RPI of 1 dollar. So if you have 7000 images online making 3500 a month its still only an RPI of 50 cent. I guess the dollar is not too low.

Then I must have miscalculated. I calculate RPI by dividing the monthly income at a site, by how many images I have on that site during that month. The way the OP suggest doesn't make sense to me.

I'm always amazed how most people have a "superficial" knowledge of elementary mathematics... Or that often might be characteristic of "artistic soul"... !
Lisa, leave it them in their "condition"... That was job of their teachers in elementary school... They were payed for that!
I think that is reason why World is in crisis, nobody knows anything, but they think they deserve excellent standard! And probably they are local patriots!

All I did was explain what the OP posted. No need to come here and be a pr*ck just because I am clarifying something. Cheers.

cascoly · « **Reply #37 on:** November 02, 2012, 16:45 »

Quote from: Microbius on October 31, 2012, 15:46

Quote from: RacePhoto on October 31, 2012, 14:29
Quote from: Microbius on October 31, 2012, 04:18
(clipped parts)

Unrelated: there are also people on this thread still bringing up the old arguments about how you can delete images in your portfolio to bring up your RPI. Again, no professional contributor would ever calculate RPI in a way where this would make a difference. It is calculated using total images produced, regardless of whether they are then rejected or even deleted as non sellers.

So you mean I need to calculate based on submitted images, not active images?

Does anyone else except you do that? Because lets say I sent in 1000 images and 500 got accepted. You are saying my RPI is based on 1000 not the 500 active and selling? Or in that case, I have 500 images that will always be averaged in as a zero?

I find that kind of strange. Where calculating based on how many images working and how many images are licensed for X dollars, seems the norm?

In other words, I believe the general way of figuring it is - RPI=Sales/Number Of Images that's simple enough.

You really calculate based on every photo you ever submitted, on every site? Amazing!
Not sure how it can still seem the norm to you when the misapprehension is corrected by numerous people whenever you make the same point.
The reason to do it this way is to give an accurate assessment of whether you are spending your time productively. If you are producing images that are not selling or being rejected you need to see that reflected in the sum. Otherwise it is just pretty numbers.

in the days of film maybe that had some validity, but now it doesnt make much sense -- you can easily take 100s of images and quickly weed them down to the technically correct ones; then select the ones to submit -- but with the subjectivity of reviewers what you think are the best may not be true, so it's easier to submit a larger number and let each agency pick the ones they like. the resulting number of ACCEPTED images would be used for RPI (if you care)

another big factor is what & how you shoot -- since most of my images are travel, i may never get another chance to capture any particular day; so taking as many as possible makes sense. if you're concentrating on a few niches, you dont need to, since you know you'll be revisiting.

however, this muddle on what the base number might be just points to the relative uselessness of RPI in the first place

borg · « **Reply #38 on:** November 02, 2012, 17:01 »

Quote from: Poncke on November 02, 2012, 13:45

Quote from: borg on November 02, 2012, 06:52
Quote from: lisafx on October 31, 2012, 11:38
Quote from: Poncke on October 30, 2012, 19:16

If I understand correctly the formula the OP wants us to use is RPI=(total $ made so far this year/images online)/month of the year

Someone with 2000 images online, making 1000 dollar per month has an RPI of 50 cent. Someone with 3000 images online making 3000 dollar per month has an RPI of 1 dollar. So if you have 7000 images online making 3500 a month its still only an RPI of 50 cent. I guess the dollar is not too low.

Then I must have miscalculated. I calculate RPI by dividing the monthly income at a site, by how many images I have on that site during that month. The way the OP suggest doesn't make sense to me.

I'm always amazed how most people have a "superficial" knowledge of elementary mathematics... Or that often might be characteristic of "artistic soul"... !
Lisa, leave it them in their "condition"... That was job of their teachers in elementary school... They were payed for that!
I think that is reason why World is in crisis, nobody knows anything, but they think they deserve excellent standard! And probably they are local patriots!
All I did was explain what the OP posted. No need to come here and be a pr*ck just because I am clarifying something. Cheers.

In fact, my post was not directed toward you, rather than general (for this kind of debate) ...As Lisa said "it doesn't make sense", I am sorry...

Poncke · « **Reply #39 on:** November 02, 2012, 17:44 »

Quote from: borg on November 02, 2012, 17:01

Quote from: Poncke on November 02, 2012, 13:45
Quote from: borg on November 02, 2012, 06:52
Quote from: lisafx on October 31, 2012, 11:38
Quote from: Poncke on October 30, 2012, 19:16

If I understand correctly the formula the OP wants us to use is RPI=(total $ made so far this year/images online)/month of the year

Someone with 2000 images online, making 1000 dollar per month has an RPI of 50 cent. Someone with 3000 images online making 3000 dollar per month has an RPI of 1 dollar. So if you have 7000 images online making 3500 a month its still only an RPI of 50 cent. I guess the dollar is not too low.

Then I must have miscalculated. I calculate RPI by dividing the monthly income at a site, by how many images I have on that site during that month. The way the OP suggest doesn't make sense to me.

I'm always amazed how most people have a "superficial" knowledge of elementary mathematics... Or that often might be characteristic of "artistic soul"... !
Lisa, leave it them in their "condition"... That was job of their teachers in elementary school... They were payed for that!
I think that is reason why World is in crisis, nobody knows anything, but they think they deserve excellent standard! And probably they are local patriots!
All I did was explain what the OP posted. No need to come here and be a pr*ck just because I am clarifying something. Cheers.

In fact, my post was not directed toward you, rather than general (for this kind of debate) ...As Lisa said "it doesn't make sense", I am sorry...

Well its quite confusing to speak in general but quote my calculations and make denigrating comments. So I took it you were talking about me, since you quoted me.

borg · « **Reply #40 on:** November 03, 2012, 04:15 »

Quote from: Poncke on November 02, 2012, 17:44

Quote from: borg on November 02, 2012, 17:01
Quote from: Poncke on November 02, 2012, 13:45
Quote from: borg on November 02, 2012, 06:52
Quote from: lisafx on October 31, 2012, 11:38
Quote from: Poncke on October 30, 2012, 19:16

If I understand correctly the formula the OP wants us to use is RPI=(total $ made so far this year/images online)/month of the year

Someone with 2000 images online, making 1000 dollar per month has an RPI of 50 cent. Someone with 3000 images online making 3000 dollar per month has an RPI of 1 dollar. So if you have 7000 images online making 3500 a month its still only an RPI of 50 cent. I guess the dollar is not too low.

Then I must have miscalculated. I calculate RPI by dividing the monthly income at a site, by how many images I have on that site during that month. The way the OP suggest doesn't make sense to me.

I'm always amazed how most people have a "superficial" knowledge of elementary mathematics... Or that often might be characteristic of "artistic soul"... !
Lisa, leave it them in their "condition"... That was job of their teachers in elementary school... They were payed for that!
I think that is reason why World is in crisis, nobody knows anything, but they think they deserve excellent standard! And probably they are local patriots!
All I did was explain what the OP posted. No need to come here and be a pr*ck just because I am clarifying something. Cheers.

In fact, my post was not directed toward you, rather than general (for this kind of debate) ...As Lisa said "it doesn't make sense", I am sorry...
Well its quite confusing to speak in general but quote my calculations and make denigrating comments. So I took it you were talking about me, since you quoted me.

Yes it' looks like, but my quote was on Lisa's post ( and yours were in it)...
Lisa has patience to explain everything, but sometimes it seems that some of us only want to provoke good informations, without asking, especially newbies...
So, apologize again...

Microbius · « **Reply #41 on:** November 03, 2012, 04:58 »

Quote from: cascoly on November 02, 2012, 16:45

Quote from: Microbius on October 31, 2012, 15:46
Quote from: RacePhoto on October 31, 2012, 14:29
Quote from: Microbius on October 31, 2012, 04:18
(clipped parts)
.....
.....
...
.....

Total submitted not every time you take a photo i.e. include rejections.

For one thing an image will not a be rejected by every site.

I submit the same content to every site and keep track of total uploads/ portfolio size using Canstock's stats just because it is easy to see the breakdown on their stats page.

It would make no sense to omit what they happen to reject when other sites have accepted the same images.

Not subtracting images you choose to delete from a site is another obvious one for me, for any calculation their being on a site and not selling is the same as them being deleted. The only reason to not take them into account would be to massage your ego with a high RPI, very nice if you are doing this for fun, but useless if you want to evaluate how your business is going and whether you are producing salable images.

cascoly · « **Reply #42 on:** November 03, 2012, 14:18 »

Quote from: Microbius on November 03, 2012, 04:58

Total submitted not every time you take a photo i.e. include rejections.

For one thing an image will not a be rejected by every site.

I submit the same content to every site and keep track of total uploads/ portfolio size using Canstock's stats just because it is easy to see the breakdown on their stats page.

It would make no sense to omit what they happen to reject when other sites have accepted the same images.

that's another problem with the whole RPI calc - if you have 100 images, submitted to 10 sites, do you calc rpi for each site? (logical since each site will have a different selection)

Quote

Not subtracting images you choose to delete from a site is another obvious one for me, for any calculation their being on a site and not selling is the same as them being deleted. The only reason to not take them into account would be to massage your ego with a high RPI, very nice if you are doing this for fun, but useless if you want to evaluate how your business is going and whether you are producing salable images.

whatever your RPI, it's useless in evaluating your business - since we've agreed any RPI calc will have problems, it doesntt give any picture of what's happening. i can have an RPI of $1 by counting only acceptance or $.50 if i include rejections - but in BOTH cases my INCOME is exactly the same! and income is all i really care about in tracking my business.

given the fickleness & subjectivity of reviewers, any decisions will have large margins of error if you use RPI to predict

cthoman · « **Reply #43 on:** November 03, 2012, 14:20 »

Quote from: Microbius on November 03, 2012, 04:58

Total submitted not every time you take a photo i.e. include rejections.

For one thing an image will not a be rejected by every site.

I submit the same content to every site and keep track of total uploads/ portfolio size using Canstock's stats just because it is easy to see the breakdown on their stats page.

It would make no sense to omit what they happen to reject when other sites have accepted the same images.

Not subtracting images you choose to delete from a site is another obvious one for me, for any calculation their being on a site and not selling is the same as them being deleted. The only reason to not take them into account would be to massage your ego with a high RPI, very nice if you are doing this for fun, but useless if you want to evaluate how your business is going and whether you are producing salable images.

I think that is the big difference here. I don't submit the same images to every site. I never really have, and I only submit my new images to to a few sites. So, it never really made sense to keep track of how my whole portfolio was performing on sites that I never submitted my whole portfolio to.

fotografer · « **Reply #44 on:** November 03, 2012, 14:30 »

The only amounts that really interest me are the amount of money in my account at the end of each month compared to the amount of time put in. That's what tells me if this is worth doing or not.

gostwyck · « **Reply #45 on:** November 03, 2012, 15:48 »

Quote from: fotografer on November 03, 2012, 14:30

The only amounts that really interest me are the amount of money in my account at the end of each month compared to the amount of time put in. That's what tells me if this is worth doing or not.

Very true but ... that's not going to help the OP decide whether to remain exclusive or not (which was why he started the thread!).

fotografer · « **Reply #46 on:** November 03, 2012, 15:59 »

Quote from: gostwyck on November 03, 2012, 15:48

Quote from: fotografer on November 03, 2012, 14:30
The only amounts that really interest me are the amount of money in my account at the end of each month compared to the amount of time put in. That's what tells me if this is worth doing or not.

Very true but ... that's not going to help the OP decide whether to remain exclusive or not (which was why he started the thread!).

You are right of course. I forgot how this thread started.

mattdixon · « **Reply #47 on:** November 08, 2012, 09:12 »

Quote from: rubyroo on November 02, 2012, 07:29

Oh hang on. I hadn't seen the OP's method of calculating. I didn't do it that way at all. The way I calculated was:

Monthly income divided by total images in port.

Do tell me if I'm wrong to do it that way.

It's fine to do it that way.

The reason I calculated it my way is to give a smoother average, some months are better than others, Sept would be higher than July or December for example - "calculation is current yearly $ total divided by current image total divided by current month (10 in this case)."

mattdixon · « **Reply #48 on:** November 08, 2012, 09:43 »

Quote from: heywoody on October 31, 2012, 16:03

The op needs to figure out what he / she might lose by being non-exclusive on IS and then maybe some detail on how RPI per accepted image compares between IS and SS for non exclusives generally. The fact that Johnny makes $1 and Fred makes 10c on SS is not useful info.

I've got a good idea of how much my income will drop when ditching the crown, I need to make an educated guess on how much my portfolio is worth on other sites and whether I can recover my income. The fact that Johnny makes $1 tells me the Shutterstock is a serious contender, Fred needs to sharpen his skills.

JPSDK · « **Reply #49 on:** November 08, 2012, 10:03 »

or you do?

dirkr · « **Reply #50 on:** November 08, 2012, 10:22 »

Quote from: mattdixon on November 08, 2012, 09:43

I've got a good idea of how much my income will drop when ditching the crown, I need to make an educated guess on how much my portfolio is worth on other sites and whether I can recover my income.

If you take your assumed income after leaving exclusivity as input, maybe the best guess for your income from other sites is the poll on the right.
As this is caculated out of the average of many people participating in the poll, it will be as good as it gets.

So your total income from other agencies might be in the area of three times your (newly non-exclusive) Istock income if you only consider the (other) top three agencies.

djpadavona · « **Reply #51 on:** November 08, 2012, 10:31 »

I track income earned per month per image at SS. It takes some time to calculate, but it is worth my while. I keep it all in a spreadsheet and I focus on image topics which make me $2 or more per month, per image. Not that I don't try new topics now and then, but I am more interested in increasing my % chance for a successful upload.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #52 on:** November 08, 2012, 15:23 »

Quote from: djpadavona on November 08, 2012, 10:31

I track income earned per month per image at SS. It takes some time to calculate, but it is worth my while. I keep it all in a spreadsheet and I focus on image topics which make me $2 or more per month, per image. Not that I don't try new topics now and then, but I am more interested in increasing my % chance for a successful upload.

Good point, optimal earnings from less images. I want to see who's making $2 RPI a month on average, it must be some kick a$$ collections. Or maybe, illustrations? Too bad there's no way that it's identified by type of material, even if nothing about actually who.

djpadavona · « **Reply #53 on:** November 09, 2012, 16:41 »

Quote from: RacePhoto on November 08, 2012, 15:23

Quote from: djpadavona on November 08, 2012, 10:31
I track income earned per month per image at SS. It takes some time to calculate, but it is worth my while. I keep it all in a spreadsheet and I focus on image topics which make me $2 or more per month, per image. Not that I don't try new topics now and then, but I am more interested in increasing my % chance for a successful upload.

Good point, optimal earnings from less images. I want to see who's making $2 RPI a month on average, it must be some kick a$$ collections. Or maybe, illustrations? Too bad there's no way that it's identified by type of material, even if nothing about actually who.

Race,

Those statistics might not be worth looking at to be honest. Plenty of people have their entire port heavily influenced by a few big winners. So maybe the contributor has an RPI per month of $2 overall, but in reality it is more like $20+ from a few images, a slightly larger group which returns $5 to $15 each, and $0.25 to $0.75 for most everything else.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #54 on:** November 09, 2012, 18:32 »

Quote from: djpadavona on November 09, 2012, 16:41

Quote from: RacePhoto on November 08, 2012, 15:23
Quote from: djpadavona on November 08, 2012, 10:31
I track income earned per month per image at SS. It takes some time to calculate, but it is worth my while. I keep it all in a spreadsheet and I focus on image topics which make me $2 or more per month, per image. Not that I don't try new topics now and then, but I am more interested in increasing my % chance for a successful upload.

Good point, optimal earnings from less images. I want to see who's making $2 RPI a month on average, it must be some kick a$$ collections. Or maybe, illustrations? Too bad there's no way that it's identified by type of material, even if nothing about actually who.

Race,

Those statistics might not be worth looking at to be honest. Plenty of people have their entire port heavily influenced by a few big winners. So maybe the contributor has an RPI per month of $2 overall, but in reality it is more like $20+ from a few images, a slightly larger group which returns $5 to $15 each, and $0.25 to $0.75 for most everything else.

I'd take that. Statistics don't buy lunch, but for a couple of $20 a month images would make me feel pretty happy. LOL

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Poll

Earnings per image per month on Shutterstock

Author Topic: RPI per month (Read 16281 times)

mattdixon

mattdixon

WarrenPrice

mattdixon

RacePhoto

lisafx

Poncke

Microbius

lisafx

RacePhoto

Microbius

RacePhoto

rubyroo

mattdixon

rubyroo

rubyroo

RacePhoto

Poncke

Poncke

Microbius

mattdixon

mattdixon

RacePhoto

RacePhoto

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors