Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Worse than average - 55 licences for $1480 gross - only two in $$$, highest $220.

Zooms up however so hopefully better to come in May!

cheers

Kumar (the Doc one)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, gvallee said:

Excellent month with 25 sales and BME for revenue.

 

The analysis of what sold is interesting and proves how crucial diversity of a portfolio is:

landscapes x8, cityscapes x2, birds x3, insects x3, wildlife x1, sign x2, plant x1, people x3, other x2

 

Gen

Certainly, Alamy's diversity algorithm discourages specialism.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A relatively poor month for me -- but 2 sales on the 30th saved it from being really bad.  I'm still slightly above last year at this time on net revenue so I'm happy.

 

4 sales for $130.70 / $65.37  gross / net.  High $60.93 / $30.47, low 2 PU / presentation at $19.99 / $10.00.  

 

Views and zooms down with 3277 and 14 for a slightly below average CTR of 0.43.

 

Robert

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had an awesome month!  21 sales and one of the sales to be used for a large mural wall in a Nashville country music museum. One licensed for television, a nice change from the bread and butter sales of editorial websites/newspapers/magazines and travel guides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Cryptoprocta said:

Certainly, Alamy's diversity algorithm discourages specialism.

 

 

How so? The diversity algorithm relates to the order of images returned per contributor, not their contents?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gvallee said:

 

How so? The diversity algorithm relates to the order of images returned per contributor, not their contents?

Yes, so if someone was an apple specialist, their files would be spread through searches for apples. Of course, that's a poor example, as a specialist will be able to identify different varieties, but the idea is sound. Any subject for which you have many images, no matter how different, will be spread through any particular search, no matter how high your AR. So even if you have a top rank, you're better to shoot many subjects and be near the top of many searches rather than specialise on producing a variety of images of one subject and be spread over many search pages.

The above tempered by how granularly the buyers search (IME, sometimes they are, often they are not), and how many rival specialists there are for that subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cryptoprocta said:

Yes, so if someone was an apple specialist, their files would be spread through searches for apples. Of course, that's a poor example, as a specialist will be able to identify different varieties, but the idea is sound. Any subject for which you have many images, no matter how different, will be spread through any particular search, no matter how high your AR. So even if you have a top rank, you're better to shoot many subjects and be near the top of many searches rather than specialise on producing a variety of images of one subject and be spread over many search pages.

The above tempered by how granularly the buyers search (IME, sometimes they are, often they are not), and how many rival specialists there are for that subject.

 

It makes sense, I agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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.