Jump to content

What difference if any has the change to larger thumbnails made?

Recommended Posts

Hi all,


The new much larger thumbnails came in on 24.9.15. In general they have been well received, but I noted that the "portrait" orientation images were disadvantaged as a result, look relatively smaller, and can be overlooked in searches, or so it seemed to me.


I looked at my statistics to see what if any difference this had made. Clearly its too soon to see from sales figures as they often lag by 3 months, but ZOOMS are fairly immediate.


I looked at my zooms from 3 months prior to the change (Jul-Sept, 646 zooms), and compared them with the 3 months after the change (Oct-Dec, 717 zooms) to see if there was a significant difference in landscape and portrait images selected.


I also, for interest, looked at my overall proportion of landscape to portrait oriented images




July-Sept inclusive,  646 zooms;         499 landscape (77.3%); 135 portrait (20.9%),  12 pan/square (1.8%)


Oct-Dec Inclusive    717 zooms          576 landscape (80%);     128 portrait (17.7%),  13 pan/square (1.9%)


From these figures I would say that there has been no significant difference from before to after. I dont think I have enough numbers to say there has been a slight reduction in zooms for portrait oriented images. 


My collection of images consists of the following:


Total Images on sale:  18,902


Landscape:                  13,046 (69%)

Portrait:                          5,335 (28.2%)

Pan/Square:                      422 (2.2%)


Overall the number of portrait images in my collection amounts to ~28%, but the numbers zoomed appear to be between 17 and 20%


One of the reasons I was interested to look at this was because I thought I had a greater than average % of portrait images and hoped I would not be disadvantaged by the new thumbnails. Doesn't look I am!


Interested to hear what others think and what proportions your collections consist of!


Happy New Year


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm. Just 10% of my 2015 sales were verticals. Maybe I should try to cover myself better.  :blink:


Yes, it might be time to get a new fig leaf. A fair number of my higher priced book sales are verticals.


I too have to remind myself to take verticals these days. Whereas in the "old days" before LCD screens, I almost always took one of each -- i.e. a horizontal and a vertical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me 2015 




           Landscape: 87%

           Portrait:       12.3%

           Square:        0.7%


in Collection:


           Landscape: 69%

           Portrait:       28.2%

           Pan/Square: 2.2%



Link to comment
Share on other sites



My collection: 

  62% landscape

  38% portrait


All my Alamy sales:

  69% landscape

  31% portrait


My 2015 sales:

  83% landscape

  17% portrait


So I wondered whether my more recent images are more landscape, but from a casual look the proportions seem to be in line with my collection as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.