PhotoShelter published a free report from a 2009 survey of 550 photo buyers. The results are interesting. Over 90% of buyers surveyed hated flash-based introductions on websites. Click the link below to read a summary of the survey. They provide a place where you can enter your e-mail address and PhotoShelter will e-mail a free 22-page PDF with all of the results. I know I'm going to be redesigning my website based on this information.
I just attended a workshop that PhotoShelter gave at Adorama in NYC. The workshop was based on the surveyand gives all sorts of valuable information. The best part is the workshop was free. They also have SEO (Search Engine Optimization) tools on their website.
Walter, Thank you for sharing this info. The report is absolutely great, full of solid info on what to do and not do on websites built for photography. I build websites for service businesses, and much of what I read in there applies across the board. But the info on photography sites is absolutely invaluable. Thank you so much!
If you don't mind me throwing a little cold water on the video, it struck me that the subtext was "photo buyers want specific features that would be hard as hell for photographers to integrate into their own websites, but which you can get -- ta-daa! -- here at PhotoShelter (for only $329/year plus a 10% commission on all your revenues)."
Two unanswered questions that came to my mind when I was watching it. This is supposedly based on a survey that shows that a large percentage of these buyers will purchase from individual photographers' websites instead of just the agencies (if, of course, the photographer's website just happens to have all the features offered by PhotoShelter accounts). But left unanswered were a) how many times they purchased images from individual photographers instead of agencies, and b) under what circumstances they went with individual photographers rather than agencies?
Obviously, if they split their photo-buying evenly between websites and agencies, it would be advisable to spend a great deal of effort making your site "buyer-friendly" in the PhotoShelter manner. On the other hand, if, say, the average buyer purchased 250 images a year from agencies, and 2 or 3 from individual photographers' websites, it might suggest that all the effort being made in sprucing up your website might be put to better use by making more of an effort into getting more of your photos into the hands of your agency, or finding a better agency.
Also, why do buyers turn to websites instead of agencies? Is it because the quality of the work from the latter is judged, in the particular subject, to be lacking? Is it because they're looking for a specific subject that simply can't be found by an agency? Or is it because the prices the agencies are asking for (i.e. the standard going rates) are, in this case, more than the client wants to pay, and they go to individual photographers hoping to get cheap rates? I know, from far too many times where I have been contacted for stock use, that the latter seems to be the case, and it's not unusual to be simply asked to give them the image for free ("but you'll get a credit line, which will be valuable in the future!").
I would also question their assumption that selling stock photos and fine-art prints are essentially the same thing, and require the same thing from a website. From my experience, that isn't necessarily the case, and the print buyer will be approaching their "shopping" from a completely different vantage point than a stock photo buyer.
In short, although the information provided in that video is interesting, a bit more information needs to be known to set it in the proper context. One thing I'm curious about: since PhotoShelter's own accounts seem designed to -- surprise! -- provide everything their hypothetical photo buyer wants, and none of what drives him or her away, has anyone here tried setting up such an site using PhotoShelter, and how has their sales success been as compared to the homebrew site they used before?
I for one found their website very confusing. There is so much material laid out there that you can't see the forest for the trees. If their business site is an example of their templates etc., then I'm not convinced--Larry
Discussion
4 replieshttp://pa.photoshelter.com/mkt/photo-buyer-survey-2009
Nancy
www.NancyWagnerPhotography.com
Two unanswered questions that came to my mind when I was watching it. This is supposedly based on a survey that shows that a large percentage of these buyers will purchase from individual photographers' websites instead of just the agencies (if, of course, the photographer's website just happens to have all the features offered by PhotoShelter accounts). But left unanswered were a) how many times they purchased images from individual photographers instead of agencies, and b) under what circumstances they went with individual photographers rather than agencies?
Obviously, if they split their photo-buying evenly between websites and agencies, it would be advisable to spend a great deal of effort making your site "buyer-friendly" in the PhotoShelter manner. On the other hand, if, say, the average buyer purchased 250 images a year from agencies, and 2 or 3 from individual photographers' websites, it might suggest that all the effort being made in sprucing up your website might be put to better use by making more of an effort into getting more of your photos into the hands of your agency, or finding a better agency.
Also, why do buyers turn to websites instead of agencies? Is it because the quality of the work from the latter is judged, in the particular subject, to be lacking? Is it because they're looking for a specific subject that simply can't be found by an agency? Or is it because the prices the agencies are asking for (i.e. the standard going rates) are, in this case, more than the client wants to pay, and they go to individual photographers hoping to get cheap rates? I know, from far too many times where I have been contacted for stock use, that the latter seems to be the case, and it's not unusual to be simply asked to give them the image for free ("but you'll get a credit line, which will be valuable in the future!").
I would also question their assumption that selling stock photos and fine-art prints are essentially the same thing, and require the same thing from a website. From my experience, that isn't necessarily the case, and the print buyer will be approaching their "shopping" from a completely different vantage point than a stock photo buyer.
In short, although the information provided in that video is interesting, a bit more information needs to be known to set it in the proper context. One thing I'm curious about: since PhotoShelter's own accounts seem designed to -- surprise! -- provide everything their hypothetical photo buyer wants, and none of what drives him or her away, has anyone here tried setting up such an site using PhotoShelter, and how has their sales success been as compared to the homebrew site they used before?