Is size everything?

Well only a quick posting this time folks. Busy with my core business designing so not had a lot of time to devote to the photography. But something that is becoming apparent and has been mentioned before in many other blogs is the 'quality v quantity' decision.

Having been contributing 4 months properly, it seems my initial thoughts of chucking everything I can into the mix may not necessarily be the order of the day. I notice, particularly as a buyer of stock, that the quality is getting a lot better - you get a lot more bang for your buck. With this in mind I have tried to be a little stricter of late on what I upload, and more significantly results may back this up. I have only around 80 images, yet my earnings this month have been $70 and my total in 4 months of contributing $200. This makes the time/revenue more acceptable. If I had chucked loads more average stuff online, I would have spent a hell of a lot more time on preparation/upload etc and would that have given me any better return? Initially I thought 'yes' but now I'm not so sure...

Add to this the interesting article from Lee Torrens at Microstock Diaries about the 'Long Tail' and how only a few good shots make the most money. Food for thought!

Interested in anyone else thoughts/experiences on this.

Photo credits: Antloft.

Your article must be written in English

December 02, 2009


If you focus on 'easier' shots that are inexpensive to produce you will be able to produce more of them, or "focus on quantity" - but it would be a mistake to think that this necessarily implies they are low quality: they are low complexity.

December 02, 2009


I think this is a useful post. My problem is that when I shoot specifically for stock in controlled circumstances, i.e. studio, I end up with loads of really high quality images. Yet I find it always boils down to about 10 of the uploaded images to make the money. This has been my experience with other agencies. I'm still newish to Dreamstime.

December 01, 2009


Useful click from me!

December 01, 2009


Totally agree, but for the less experienced in this field, it's the knowing what sells. And that takes time (and lots of rejections), winks!

December 01, 2009


great blog, i totally agree with what you've said - def quality vs quantity - i feel i'm a better photographer now than i was a year ago so my latest images are def better too and also acceptance in my opinion has become stricter too and they are def going for more quality.
well done on your achievement in just 4 months

December 01, 2009


Yeah the longer you do this the more selective you become in what you submit. It's hard sometimes to figure out what a good image is and what isn't though. Sometimes I have an image I'm very confident about but it gets rejected everywhere, maybe due to it's lack of sales potential. These days I think hard about my images and ask myself, will it sell and not do I like it.

December 01, 2009


Well I believe in quality than quantity. 100 good quality image is 1000 times better than 1000 images, if rest of the 900 images brings just 5 percent of the total sales. Just imagine the time you will take for the post productions, keywording, and uploading. And instead of uploading similar images also doesn't make a point, there is a good forum about similarity images.

Related image searches
Earnings related image searches