As most of you are aware, good, concise, precise keywording has always been a strong factor in getting your images found by image buyers.

As I am still a recent  stock photo website owner with no prior experience in promoting and marketing one, I quickly realized the importance of having all of my images well tagged with proper keywords. I have discovered that it is much more important when it is your own website.

At the early stage of an image website, Google index all your gallery titles and image keywords. Needless to say Google is your best friend to have if your image keywords and gallery titles are well thoughout.

If an image buyer search from the google search engine instead of an image agency, your site keywords will compete with all other similar keywords under the "Google ranking system".  It is the same principle as competing with similar keywords within an agency, but the big difference is you are competing under Google algorithm not an agency own brand of algorithm.  

Interestingly, I did a few Google searches of my images to see how my website ranked amongst others.  Obviously I needed to be fairly descriptive in my keywords and included my name denis pepin to have results readily available.

Firstly I searched the following keywords: denis pepin toronto building photos.

Not surprisingly, the resulting first line is a Shutterstock link leading to my Toronto buildings, the next one is leading to depositphotos and the next one after, to my site page where some of those buildings are located at denispepin.com.

The next lines after that are Fotolia, Veer, 123RF etc. all leading to those same buildings with the same keywords.

My site came in third while other big agencies fall behind.

Of course hardly anybody will search images with my name attached, and obviously my photos will not come up first without it, but it does show that Google does a good job at finding your own site specific images if they have proper keywords.

I believe that once all the basics of having a beautiful image site is met, getting better Google ranking with less keywords to type in the search field can only come with a promotional strategy and time.

Denis
http://denispepin.com

Hi Denis,

One MAJOR factor which placed you 3rd in line for this search of denis pepin toronto building photos. is that you had denis pepin in the name of you .COM domain.

Having a domain name which have the keywords search is a major factor for being placed first in the google search.

For example, search for keyword haircut. You will have haircut.net and prohaircut.com right after the wikipedia pages.

Search for natural stone. You will notice most 1st pages have those keywords in their domain name. You can test this for most keywords. Of course, good SEO on a website will beat any .COM name without SEO, but it does gives a major edge.

Eh I had to start this thread to have 4 EL's sales at Shutterstock today!

Hi!

Was just wondering, I heard a lot of <<December is the worst month for microstock income>>.

Wanted your opinion to see if this was your reality or not?

I do not remember feeling it for the last 2 year but this year it seems pretty slow this last week?

Thanks for the output!: )

So you get no credit on Corbis, the image is $40 cheaper for the large size, and I assume you get less in royalties (percentage) because there is a cut for both Corbis and Getty in that deal.

In the internet age, why does this whacky model with many layers of distributors still persist? This isn't even an issue of internationalization (i.e. site in a local language) - it says quite clearly that Corbis international distributors can't have the image.

Holy !@$% ... This is starting to look more and more like an agency Orgy... and contributors are not invited.

I can understand why they do it ($$$$), but I don't find the copyright part very honest of them. I does give your images more views, but are you really getting paid what you should... not mentioning that they keep the credits for themselves...!

Awesome Duncan.  I shall do that then.

Thanks

Save as EPS10, EPS8 will not work (you'll lose IPTC data)

Wait, what?  Constant ELs?  You missed the point.

Look at PixelAway's numbers.  Clearly there was something very wonderful happening in Sept, Oct and Nov.  My numbers look a lot like his.  There was something crazy happening with ELs for about a sixty day period covering those three months, and a bunch of us experienced it and no one has apparently figured out what it was.

My own assumption, because I haven't heard a better theory, is that it had something to do with the big push SS gave to its single image purchase offer starting in September. 

Any other thoughts.

(P.S... this morning I woke up to see 2 ELs for the day already... maybe the mad rush is continuing after all?)

Yes I understand what you mean Didn't put any extra thought at those numbers...

For me (but I'm a poor example as I increase my portfolio a LOT each months so it's normal to see progress over months):
May = 1
June = 1
July = 2
August = 8
September = 4
October = 3
November = 3
December (5 days) = 3

Not sure I can relate to PixelAways number, but my big EL months was August, with better months after but nothing as a spike.

December do have a great start tho.

Quote from: frozensage on December 04, 2011, 07:54

I applaud how easy it is to get ur photos approved however, 70 photos later, none of them have been viewed. I don't think my photos are being indexed by the search. If this continues then it's a complete waste of time no matter how many photos gets approved...

It's normal, I get roughly 1% of SS's sales on CS. By far the worst earner for me, actually next to BS (but I really just started at BS, so the comparison isn't really fair). I stopped uploading to both.

Stopping to upload to CanStock is a bad idea if you ask me. It's one of the most easy website to upload to... For my part it gives me a good 230$ per month, twice as much as Fotolia.

Thanks for the embedded links, they didn't catch my attention in the other thread.

This chart matches what I'm seeing at ShutterStock, explosive growth, couldn't have happened to a better company.  I  love watching IStock's demise!!!!!

+1 for me . Thanks for adding the images it surely got my attention too. Very nice site this is to check websites growth, didn't know of it.

It's been a year since I joined iStock (been about 3 year in microstock), and after 20 images and Flash file upload I stopped uploading there. Seeing that it's getting less and less share of the market I think I am happy I didn't waste or don't go on wasting time over they ALL TOO TIME CONSUMING upload system. That's a major turn-off for me, being non-exclusive I keyword and description for ALL the other site, but for iStock I need to manually correct everything... Even tho the apparent ''good money'' in iStock was attractive, it's getting less and less interesting to upload there.

For me, if Shutterstock keeps growing and iStock falls I'll be a happy camper (that an individual comment, but I know for a lot of Exclusive photographer there it must be stressful to see their major source of income degrade slowly). Overall I wish best for iStock, for the sake of the contributors there, but those graphs speaks from themselves.

Losing 1 million... 1 MILLION out of 1.5 unique visitors... 66% of a business... This means something. Wouldn't want to be in their shoes.

Quote from: corareed on November 20, 2011, 17:23

I think you might feel a bit less nonchalant if it was your work being ripped off....oh yeah, and it's my job to actually be proactive in these matters. 

My work is on that site which is partly why it annoys me you promoting it.

Yeah let's just keep shutting our mouth while other people enjoys stealing copyright. GREAT PLAN. And sorry but it's not CEO it's SEO. Second, a few backlinks won't improve that much their SEO, plus, who can beat the major agencies SEO?

Sorry BHR but I find your comment a bit alienating. If you would close your eye not to advertise theft, you would do that for murder too? Rape?... My neighbor was killed by Mr. Badass, but I won't tell anyone so that Mr. Badass don't get the satisfaction of getting free advertisement for his crime...

the scurvy dogs ! and i thought they sold eye patches, parrots and hooks.

LOL, that's a funny one hehe

Made my day :p... They have  nice Pirate Woman on their home page tho.. that's a start!

Quote from: traveler1116 on November 22, 2011, 12:15

I'm not surprised you find watermarked images, at small sizes most people wouldn't even notice them.  You should report, it can't hurt.

Me neither... but is becoming annoying to be always of the same agency. Probably they should change watermark or do something about it.

I've contacted them ( at least I've learn how to write from right to left ) and will complain with hosting server. Does not matter report to the agency. because I already know what they will answer.

If it's watermarked definetly you need to report. But the link you send does not contain watermarks... or i'm blind? http://rudekhorushan.blogfa.com/post-8.aspx

I'm never all that perturbed by people using my work in "logo like" ways as long as they have correctly licensed the work otherwise and of course provided that they haven't misrepresented their rights to it by trying to trademark or copyright it.
If they don't mind that the fishing store next door can also use the same image in the same way that's their problem.

I agree to this. Some small local company will want to have a stock image and use it to represent their company as it is way cheaper than having to develop their own personnalized logo. The down point for them is that they cannot protect or copyright their new found ''logo'', so like you mention, anyone in the same busing could use the same image to represent their products and they wouldn't have any other choice than to accept it too.

Not quite sure where the line is, but a company can call an image their logo, but if don't have any rights and copyrights to it, then it's just a stock image, and I wouldn't qualify it of a Logo.