Comments on: Bigger Photos Equals Higher Earnings

By: calevphoto

calevphoto — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 21:52:55 +0000

While having a camera with more MP does enable you to sell photos at a higher rate, in reality you will not increase your sales by the same ratio. Many buyers do not purchase the largest sizes available and they are unlikely to purchase a larger size given a larger image.

I recently examined my IStockPhoto sales to see how much I would gain from moving from my current 5D (13MP) to the 1Ds Mark III (21MP) and found that – if everyone that purchased the largest size continued to do so – I would increase my sales by about 10%.

This calculation gave me the same conclusion that you have here – it pays far more to invest in lenses than in more MP.

By: Lee Torrens

Lee Torrens — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 17:00:24 +0000

Yes, it’s complicated at most agencies, which I tried to address in the caveats below the table.

-Lee

By: Laurent

Laurent — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 15:26:25 +0000

Lee I was looking at the numbers you quote for Bigstockphotos prices. It depends for how much the customer buy the credit right ? If he gets then cheap at $ 1 the XXL costs him only $6, if he pays high rate it is $15. And we always get 50%

By: L. F. File

L. F. File — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 05:10:26 +0000

With higher megapixel cameras primes become more practical since you can gain back some of the flexibility of a zoom by cropping. fred

By: Photonomikon

Photonomikon — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 21:58:52 +0000

Primes are great. You won’t find many zooms that beat a good (or even average) prime. However, personally I hate swapping lenses especially due to the dust problem. So I prefer good quality zooms. Canon’s L zooms have great quality, although not quite as sharp as a good(ish) prime.

By: Marco Venturini Autieri

Marco Venturini Autieri — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 08:49:43 +0000

Talking of megapixels and money, I just wanted to add that I have some pics on iStock that are considered XL or even XXL (about 20 MP), and I just used an old and cheap medium format film camera, and a scanner.

By: Stephen Strathdee

Stephen Strathdee — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 03:32:31 +0000

That may be good advice if you’re planning on making fine art images or doing street photography, but it isn’t very sound for shooting commercial stock. In order to get the most out of a location or studio session you really need to have a high quality zoom lens. But why take my word on it – check out what the most successful among us are using … they ain’t primes.

By: Lee Torrens

Lee Torrens — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 01:07:03 +0000

Thanks for this informative comment. I just bought my first prime lens (50mm F1.8) last week! Haven’t given it a run yet, but I’m hoping it’ll pay for itself like yours.

-Lee

By: Lee Torrens

Lee Torrens — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 01:04:32 +0000

Hi James,

I have a Nikon D70s and am looking at the D300. I would love the D3, but I wouldn’t do it justice, yet.

-Lee

By: Smooth Bokeh

Smooth Bokeh — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:46:02 +0000

Really nice article.

For those wanting to maximize their earnings I suggest buy a prime macro lens. Around 100mm seems like what many prefer. I, for one, use extensively a 50mm F2.8 macro on tripod and in less than 3 months it already paid for itself plus the Manfrotto CF tripod, Neat Image plug-in and the upgrade to 10MP (from 6MP) dSLR.

In order to get better results from a higher MP camera you really need to use good (prime) lenses since any imperfection from the lens shows up even more.

Overall, I get a lot more return from the 10MP images: via cropping (horizontal and vertical), from higher pay due to resolution increase, more acceptance rate at Alamy due to lower upscaling ratio required etc.

Bottom line for me: the combination of a good prime lens with higher MP count increased my acceptance rate and payout.