Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Would you please have a look at my photos and critique them, as I'm getting not many views or sales of late.
Thanks so much for your opinions (even if they maybe a bit harsh), Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They seem okay to me.

 

How have sales and zooms been in previous years?

 

I'm having an absolutely awful year after an amazingly great year.  Haven't had one zoom this moth and only one sale. My assumption is I got demoted in the re-rank for some reason, yet if I do some searches on some of my images, I find I have some on the first page, so not really sure.  Maybe I just don't have what people re looking for this year. Just keep waiting it out.

 

Jill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Things are becoming tougher all the while. I've made one very lucrative sale this year but sales numbers are well down. I've lots of zooms but very few where mine is the only one, so future uncertain.

 

I've had a quick skim through your photos Tim, and here's a few observations: -

 

1) Are you doing any post processing, some of your shots look flat and dark to me. I believe that bright and punchy is normally the best way to go.

 

2) Fill the frame with the subject, unless you want to leave copy space, e.g. the subject in G3KXB5 is much smaller than I would have shot

 

3) Lots of photos of individual athletes, do they sell? I would have thought that you would need to shoot the more famous, but I'm not into this genre.

 

4) Some nice shots of a person on a bike, but not many of ordinary people doing ordinary things, possibly en masse, e.g. shopping  etc.

 

Hope that helps!

 

 

 

Edited by Bryan
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tim, you have a good eye, so that's not the problem. And you do not give a hint about how much you've sold and are selling. Maybe you've dropped for 20 sales a month to 15? 

 

I agree with Bryan's point that some of your images are dark. Dark = sinister, no? 

 

You might try adding to your subject mix. Look at other collections to see what you have been ignoring in London. 

 

Good luck . . . and keep shooting. 

 

Edo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your photos look good to me. Many strong images. They are dominated by London which is a highly saturated subject area with 4.8 million images on Alamy. 

 

You need a strong rank to compete on the better known sites, so if the last re-rank did affect you negatively even slightly, it might have been have been enough to impact sales. 

 

I too am having a disappointing start to 2018, failing to keep up with 2017 with 1000s more images.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My sales have gone down enormously in the last two months, and my submissions have slowed as I have developed into a bit of a perfectionist.

 

Bryan - yes I do post process (mostly nikon capture 2 and photoshop) and my preference seems a bit dark and contrasty, I'm lately trying to do things a bit lighter. If I'm in Lightroom I'm a bit worried about adding vibrance or some such effect in case it degrades the basic image quality or make it look generally a bit unbelievable. I'll make efforts to fill the frame more.


Edo - My preference is dark perhaps too much, but not sinister

 

My predicament maybe that 4-5,000 pics used to be a lot in the days before Alamy got so big.

 

Thanks for your time, Tim 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironically, I think that UK-based Alamy contributors might now be at something of a disadvantage since there is so much competition. I'm talking through my bowler hat of course, since I don't really know anything about UK image markets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Tim Ayers said:

My sales have gone down enormously in the last two months, and my submissions have slowed as I have developed into a bit of a perfectionist.

 

Bryan - yes I do post process (mostly nikon capture 2 and photoshop) and my preference seems a bit dark and contrasty, I'm lately trying to do things a bit lighter. If I'm in Lightroom I'm a bit worried about adding vibrance or some such effect in case it degrades the basic image quality or make it look generally a bit unbelievable. I'll make efforts to fill the frame more.


Edo - My preference is dark perhaps too much, but not sinister

 

My predicament maybe that 4-5,000 pics used to be a lot in the days before Alamy got so big.

 

Thanks for your time, Tim 

 

I'm naturally drawn to contrasty images as well (I too must have a sinister streak B)). However, I've learned from more technically savvy forum members to lighten up my images. A lot of my old, darker ones do continue to license, but I should probably go back and redo some of them. Lightening up the shadows is probably a good advice. It's certainly worth a try. Good luck.

 

P.S. I probably still need to "lighten up" a bit. Is your monitor calibrated? I found that it makes a big difference.

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

Ironically, I think that UK-based Alamy contributors might now be at something of a disadvantage since there is so much competition. I'm talking through my bowler hat of course, since I don't really know anything about UK image markets.

 

That's my feeling too John, my small collection of images from North America does much better per shot than my UK photos. Having said that my best $ sales have been from the UK, so there remains some life in the aged hound. In contrast I have stacks of images from France, as we holiday there most years, and they are probably my worst performing set. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Bryan said:

 

That's my feeling too John, my small collection of images from North America does much better per shot than my UK photos. Having said that my best $ sales have been from the UK, so there remains some life in the aged hound. In contrast I have stacks of images from France, as we holiday there most years, and they are probably my worst performing set. 

 

I guess they don't call it the "New World" for nothing.

 

Most of my best sellers were taken south of the Wall. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John don't pay anything towards The Wall, please! 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My views have dropped by almost a third over the past twelve month and it seems as though the more images I upload the less views I get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hardly setting the world on fire with my Alamy portfolio but I'll give you these comments on your port, since you asked:

 

- The subject matter seems adequate and some interesting angle

- Move the exposure to the right by 1 or 2 stops then add selective vibrance. You've done well to shoot when it's sunny in London (rare) so pity that they're not popping in the thumbnails

- Would you consider licensing some of them as RF instead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Ed Rooney said:

John don't pay anything towards The Wall, please! 

 

 

 

No way even though with my new hip, I'll be able to pole vault right over it. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, funkyworm said:

 

There could be something in this. Whilst its early doors, my cycle trip to and around the England and Wales last year has been underwhelming in its sales on Alamy. One insignificant distributor sale of a photo taken on the Maasvlakte - so not even that was taken in the UK. (I am not discounting my own fallability in my stats.)

Pricing developments could mean many are looking closer to home to limit costs - which in turn leads to increased saturation of subject matter as many shooters are UK based. Which may be one big reason for the OP's question.

 

BTW not that I am in a position to talk - but apart from the sport there aren't a lot/any people in many of the images - maybe that is one reason for the lack of sales.

 

 

Yes, the whole strategy of shooting close to home in order to keep costs down could eventually backfire (and not for just UK photographers), especially when it comes to certain types of images -- i.e. ones taken "of" rather than "in".

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

 

I'm not sure that 'strategy' is the right word. It's more a reaction to low fees. An economic necessity. 

 

I don't think many stock photographers are covering the costs of expensive overseas trips these days - more a question of taking some pics while on holiday paid for out of pension, savings, or other income.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, perhaps more a necessity than a strategy. Your description fits me to a tee these days. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, John Mitchell said:

 

No way even though with my new hip, I'll be able to pole vault right over it. B)

 

That's a saleable pic if ever there was one!!! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edo - Yep all calibrated now thanks, seems to be giving me a more consistent view of things

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John - thanks for your calibration advice it's made things a lot clearer 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Successful writers always have something to say, and successful photographers should be no different.

 

Knowing how to type, spell and recite the alphabet, will not make anyone a successful writer. Knowing how to get through Alamy Quality Control will not make anyone a successful stock photographer

 

Clients publish a stock photograph because they want to make some point, usually beyond a simple description. If all the client wants is a simple description, then there are usually tens of thousands of simple description photographs available. You will have too much competition for those simple description sales, and probably not make a sale.

 

It may be that the subject is beautiful, ugly, funny; smart; sweaty, sad, tired, colourful, dangerous, delicious, futuristic, crowded, big, small, etc.

 

So decide what it is that makes your subject matter so interesting to you. Then use your photographic skills to enhance the image so that the image both communicates your feelings to the viewer, and solves a client’s problem.

 

For instance you have a number of motion shots that do not look like motion. Frozen cars and runners. How about panning at a slower speed to put motion blur into the background while keeping the subject sharp? Or how about a high speed sharp close in telephoto shot that shows the agony on an exhausted runners face. Or how about doing some pre race research, and concentrate only on the stars that you expect will win.

 

Every stock photographer wrestles with this problem. To make more sales we have to try to go beyond a simple description only shot. We have to try to make the clients point.

 

Not easy.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Colblimp said:

 

That's a saleable pic if ever there was one!!! :lol:

 

It definitely would be newsworthy.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your images show a very good technical capability. You seem to mostly document what's around you. How about producing shots? Start with an idea/concept, think about how to make that idea come across in a photograph, go shoot. Check out John Lund's blog.

Yes, taking mages "in", not "of".

 

GI

Edited by giphotostock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2018 at 09:36, giphotostock said:

Your images show a very good technical capability. You seem to mostly document what's around you. How about producing shots? Start with an idea/concept, think about how to make that idea come across in a photograph, go shoot. Check out John Lund's blog.

Yes, taking mages "in", not "of".

 

GI

Can you refer us to some of your images that illustrate your point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2018 at 04:01, andremichel said:

Can you refer us to some of your images that illustrate your point?

The OP asked for a critique and advise.

 

Not sure why you are asking? There's always google, if you must...

Are you challenging the idea that commercial high-production-value images would hands down outsell secondary-editorial images?

 

GI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, giphotostock said:

The OP asked for a critique and advise.

 

Not sure why you are asking? There's always google, if you must...

Are you challenging the idea that commercial high-production-value images would hands down outsell secondary-editorial images?

 

GI

I am asking so I can better appreciate what you are advising. Are you unable to illustrate what you say with one or two of your own images?

 

I am not challenging anything of the sort. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • 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.