

Which Stock Photos Convert Higher? - nkolenda
http://www.nickkolenda.com/which-stock-photos-convert-higher/

======
pygy_
_> Brain Images from MRI or fMRI..._

... were shown to boost the credibility of neuroscience-related articles[0],
and nothing in the paper hints at reasons why it could be generalized to other
topics.

It'll be fun to watch brain images pop up on the sites of people who will have
taken that post at face value :-)

————

0\.
[http://www.antoniocasella.eu/dnlaw/McCabe_2008.pdf](http://www.antoniocasella.eu/dnlaw/McCabe_2008.pdf)

------
xyby
Lot's of words, fancy images, tips and conclusions. But no actual data.

Citing research papers from 1979 to decide which photo converts better on a
website? Dude, just show me the data of an a/b test.

~~~
robobro
It reads like NLP bullshit through and through. I flagged.

~~~
xyby
Me too. This is what made me flag it:

"I’m always flabbergasted how small—seemingly irrelevant—changes can make a
big impact

If that was true, the author would have told us about those big impacts he
witnessed. I think it's all made out of thin air.

If he just said "here is a couple of research papers that might be relevant to
photos on websites" I would have no problem with the article. But they way it
is presented, it's not HN worthy.

This is a topic I am very interested in. I studied many a/b tests on the
impact of photos and other elements on conversion rations. The impact is
usually surprisingly small.

~~~
Throwaway90283
Same here, I enjoy A/B testing often, along with analyzing numbers and data.
When I opened this article and saw the A/B/C image at the top, I was excited
to see the results. Then... nothing.

------
tstactplsignore
The issue I have with this sort of obsession in optimizing conversion is this:
shouldn't you be primarily concerned with building a product that legitimately
benefits and gives back to both users and society as a whole as opposed to
making something that sells as fast as possible? Both the data and psychology
driven philosphies have this sense that your work exists to squeeze more money
out of people instead of to create something meaningful. Put that extra time
and thought into a better product and everyone wins.

~~~
Dylan16807
If your product benefits people at all, then making it better helps more
people, but using marketing to sell faster also helps more people.

It's not a dichotomy. Products can be good or well-marketed or both or
neither.

------
dingaling
I once worked for a company that never used stock photographs; all the website
images were of staff, taken and used with their permission on work premises.

Not only did it give a sense of pride and ownership of the site, internally,
but we could also add captions like "John S, St Louis Office" and had feedback
that visitors appreciated the personal touch.

Other benefits included absence of licensing fees and ability to take custom
photos with staff showing the products.

~~~
Throwaway90283
Including the name is a great idea. I feel like stock photos of business
offices and people are a turn off. Anytime I see them on a site, I figure it's
a basement operation being run by amateurs. Why are they posting a photo of a
random boardroom and not their own? My only conclusion, they have no office.
Why are they showing a photo of a random woman with a headset? They must have
no dedicated support in house.

Real photos always stand out. If I'm looking for a webhost, and they show an
actual photo of their datacenter, with one of their staff members standing
inside, that's a huge plus. They actually have physical access to the
datacenter. If I need something, they can get it done. They're not just
reselling someone else's service.

------
Throwaway90283
This article references a number of different studies, but I really wanted to
see some hard numbers with these concepts being used.

Show me that someone pointing at that newsletter button is 25% more effective
than a photo of someone with their arms crossed. Or, show me that smiling
asian male in a suit will out perform an attractive business woman in casual
clothes.

Take some photos of the same person, in the same clothes, one with them
pointing at the call to action, another with them looking at the call to
action, another with them standing in a neutral pose, and another with arms
crossed. Show me those numbers, and which increases sales.

Otherwise, I'm full of doubt.

[http://www.nickkolenda.com/wp-
content/uploads/2015/02/pointi...](http://www.nickkolenda.com/wp-
content/uploads/2015/02/pointing4.jpg)

That image freaks me out, it looks like an overly confident guy that is
pretending he's well off, and it looks like he's about to give me some awful
speech about the 10 secrets to success. I wouldn't want to donate to a
kickstarter with that image, because I don't want that guy to get my money
(even though it's a stock photo, I associate him with the project).

Then, I look at another example...

[http://www.nickkolenda.com/wp-
content/uploads/2015/03/stock-...](http://www.nickkolenda.com/wp-
content/uploads/2015/03/stock-photo-conversions.jpg)

The article says the asian male is probably best, because he's asian, and
smiling more. I'd disagree again, I prefer A, the guy looks more down to earth
in the casual clothes, and as a late twenties male, he looks very relatable.
That's the kind of person I'd want to donate money towards.

This is all speculation though, we need real world numbers, otherwise this
article is pointless.

------
frozenport
Do varying rates of effectiveness motivate us to choose something more
relevant to our product, rather than stock images?

