Social Media Photography Survey Results 2009
Earlier in the year I wrote a series of blog articles on Social Media including Why Social Media Matters to Photographers. Shortly after the publication of these articles I began to receive questions from photographers concerned about the time commitment and return on investment (ROI) in relation to Social Media activity. After numerous e-mail correspondences & phone conversations explaining the non-traditional value of social media participation, I decided to run a survey on the subject as I was preparing to present on a Twitter Revolution panel at Photo Plus Expo. The (2) two goals of this survey was to:
- Answer many of the basic questions I was receiving not just with my professional opinion, but the cold hard reality of what other photographers were reporting in relation to their marketing & business efforts.
- Capture a historical snapshot of early business adoption of social media in the photography industry.
In less than a month I was blown away to have nearly 550 photographers take part in the survey. With the skillful help of friend, photographer and business designer Taylor Davidson the survey data was combed through to provide meaningful patterns and trends. After several weeks of review the results are summarized in the slide deck below along with some high level analysis to provide greater clarity on the subject. I hope this proves to be of great value to you and I invite you to share these survey results with your peers, trade organizations and others who have questions about Social Media.
—
You’ve found my blog, but you’re only seeing the tip of the iceberg… Sign up to get email updates & news on future web marketing / business development programs. Follow me on Twitter, Facebook and FriendFeed. I also invite you to listen and subscribe to my podcast “EXIF and Beyond”.
—
Technorati Tags: social media, photography, survey
| Stay Connected with Jim | |||
 | Join Me On Twitter |  | Become a Fan on Facebook |
 | Listen to EXIF & Beyond |  | My Latest on YouTube |
[...] in partnership with Jim Goldstein, the results of the Social Media Photography Survey [...]
It is interesting to see just how far a marketing option like a stock subscription service has fallen. I'm guessing that had you asked that question 5 years ago, most photographers would have had it and number 1 or 2.
Part of that is certainly due to the changing landscape, but I think some of these results are due to the survey sample. Since this was promoted on social media outlets, you probably have a disproportionate share of photographers using such options for marketing. It would have been interesting to see the results from some of your other questions like number of followers, years of experience with social media, etc.
Very interesting, thank for undertaking this and sharing Jim.
[Reply]
Ron thanks for the comment. It is interesting to see how the times have changed in regard to stock subscription services. Much of that change could be amplified as a result of the recession.
I intentionally surveyed people in various online communities, but also solicited involvement of numerous trade organizations (ASMP, SAA, WPPI, PPA, etc.) via email knowing that many would not be using Social Media. To me it was as important to find people who were not using Social Media as well as those who were.
In the end 25% of all those who took part did not have a Twitter account. The real world number is likely quite higher.
I'm still looking to release a PDF of the overall results. Google hasn't made it easy to save the results summary page to PDF.
To answer your question…
50% of those who responded had 0-249 followers
13% had 250-499 followers
6% had 500-999 followers
4% had 1000-1999 followers
2% had 2000-4999 followers
0% & 0 people had 5000-9999 followers
0% / 2 people had Over 10000 followers
25% again stated they did not have a Twitter account.
Length of Social Media community activity:
4% had no participation
2% had 0-3 months
6% had 3-6 months
12% had 6-12 months
21% had 1-2 years
18% had 2-3 years
38% had Over 3 years
Check back to this post or look for the update on Twitter and I'll relay a link to a PDF of the full result summary.
[Reply]
Looks like a far more representative sample then I realized. Thanks Jim.
[Reply]
Agreed with Ron. I subscribe to a few stock subscription services but even in the past year I have done that I have noticed a gradual downturn in the number of requests coming in.
I find it interesting that Facebook is above Twitter and even the subscription services because I've always considered FB more for play. People are just not in the photo buying / business mindset when browsing that site not to mention that it is a semi-private network unlike Twitter which is public by default.
[Reply]
Although I ranked Facebook as more valuable then Twitter, I agree with you Richard, and was surprised that others also ranked Facebook higher then Twitter.
[Reply]
It is interesting to see just how far a marketing option like a stock subscription service has fallen. I'm guessing that had you asked that question 5 years ago, most photographers would have had it and number 1 or 2.
Part of that is certainly due to the changing landscape, but I think some of these results are due to the survey sample. Since this was promoted on social media outlets, you probably have a disproportionate share of photographers using such options for marketing. It would have been interesting to see the results from some of your other questions like number of followers, years of experience with social media, etc.
Very interesting, thank for undertaking this and sharing Jim.
[Reply]
Ron thanks for the comment. It is interesting to see how the times have changed in regard to stock subscription services. Much of that change could be amplified as a result of the recession.
I intentionally surveyed people in various online communities, but also solicited involvement of numerous trade organizations (ASMP, SAA, WPPI, PPA, etc.) via email knowing that many would not be using Social Media. To me it was as important to find people who were not using Social Media as well as those who were.
In the end 25% of all those who took part did not have a Twitter account. The real world number is likely quite higher.
I'm still looking to release a PDF of the overall results. Google hasn't made it easy to save the results summary page to PDF.
To answer your question…
50% of those who responded had 0-249 followers
13% had 250-499 followers
6% had 500-999 followers
4% had 1000-1999 followers
2% had 2000-4999 followers
0% & 0 people had 5000-9999 followers
0% / 2 people had Over 10000 followers
25% again stated they did not have a Twitter account.
Length of Social Media community activity:
4% had no participation
2% had 0-3 months
6% had 3-6 months
12% had 6-12 months
21% had 1-2 years
18% had 2-3 years
38% had Over 3 years
Check back to this post or look for the update on Twitter and I'll relay a link to a PDF of the full result summary.
[Reply]
Looks like a far more representative sample then I realized. Thanks Jim.
[Reply]
Agreed with Ron. I subscribe to a few stock subscription services but even in the past year I have done that I have noticed a gradual downturn in the number of requests coming in.
I find it interesting that Facebook is above Twitter and even the subscription services because I've always considered FB more for play. People are just not in the photo buying / business mindset when browsing that site not to mention that it is a semi-private network unlike Twitter which is public by default.
[Reply]
Although I ranked Facebook as more valuable then Twitter, I agree with you Richard, and was surprised that others also ranked Facebook higher then Twitter.
[Reply]
[...] Jim Goldstein has the 2009 Social Media Photography Survey Results [...]
jim, between twitter and facebook, which more valuable in your opinion??
[Reply]
[...] Social Media Photography Survey Results 2009 » JMG-Galleries – Jim M. Goldstein Photography (tags: photography social media) [...]
They each have their strengths and depending on what you're looking to accomplish one might be stronger than the other. I personally think Twitter has a farther reaching impact as it relates to publishing and interconnecting networks primarily because Twitter has always been an open network. Facebook on the other hand started off as a walled garden so not everyone could see what you were publishing… and has recently been morphing into a hybrid closed/open model.
See my writing on The Birds and the Bees of Social Media Connectivity and 5 Tips To Get The Most Out Of Twitter
Ultimately I think an open network will work best as it creates the broadest reach when you publish content. As large as Facebook is… not everyone is on Facebook and not everyone can access Facebook all the time. A lot of corporations blog access to Facebook.
The flip side to my argument is that you might have a greater number of targeted and “approved” viewers in your Facebook network.
In general as it relates to communicating online its the power user you don't know about, a “Black Swan” on the edge of your network, that can have a huge impact to your online marketing efforts.
So if I had to choose one I'd bet on Twitter, but would cover all my bases shortly after with a presence on Facebook.
[Reply]
[...] Check out the results of the Social Media Photography Survey 2009 run by friend and photographer Jim Goldstein and I in the fall of 2009. Share tweetmeme_style = 'compact'; tweetmeme_url = [...]