# Photo Reviews vs Video Reviews: Which Drives More Purchases? Video reviews convert at 8.3% (1.6× photo, 4.1× text), but only 3% of customers submit video unprompted versus 14% for photos. Here is how to layer both. By Rohin Aggarwal · 2026-05-23 Same brand, same review-request flow, two output classes. Photos came in at three times the volume of video. Video converted at roughly twice the rate of photo. The yield curve below shows where that trade-off bites, and the two-stage ask that lifts both at once. [Video reviews](/blog/photo-video-reviews-vs-text-reviews) convert at 8.3%, roughly 1.6x the rate of [photo reviews](/blog/photo-video-reviews-vs-text-reviews) (5.1%) and 4.1x the rate of text-only reviews (2.0%). But only 3% of customers submit video reviews unprompted, versus 14% who submit photo reviews. The right strategy layers both with photos as the volume baseline and video as the high-impact accent. **Bottom line** - Video reviews convert 4.1x better than text-only reviews. - Photo reviews convert 2.6x better than text-only. - The cost gap is closing, most brands now get video reviews at ~£3/piece via post-purchase prompts. - Mixed PDPs (photo + video) outperform either format alone by 15–22%. ## Do photo or video reviews get higher submission rates? Unprompted submission rates: text 71% (of customers who leave any review), photo 14%, video 3%. With light incentivisation (small discount on next order): text 73%, photo 38%, video 11%. The submission-to-conversion ratio explains the strategic balance, photos are achievable in volume, video is rare but high-leverage. ## Conversion rates per review On PDPs, the lift attributable to each review type when it's the dominant format: text-only 2.0% conversion lift, photo 5.1%, video 8.3%. The conversion delta between video and photo (1.6x) is robust across categories. The conversion delta between either media format and text (2.6–4.1x) is even larger. ## Which format sends stronger trust signals? [Photo reviews](/blog/photo-video-reviews-vs-text-reviews) answer "is this product real?" [Video reviews](/blog/photo-video-reviews-vs-text-reviews) answer "what does it actually do?" Both close different uncertainty gaps. The most powerful PDPs use both, but in the right order: photos in the gallery, a single high-quality video pinned at the top of the review block. Detailed psychology in [social proof](/blog/social-proof-psychology). ## Production effort for the customer Average time to leave a text review: 90 seconds. [Photo review](/glossary/photo-review): 3 minutes. [Video review](/glossary/video-review): 8 minutes. The 5x effort delta between video and text explains the submission rate gap. Reducing video friction (record-in-browser, no upload-and-edit step) is the single highest-leverage UX investment for review programmes. ## Incentive impact Incentives lift video submission rates more than any other format. A 10% next-purchase discount raises video submission from 3% to 11%, a 3.7x multiplier. The same incentive on [photo reviews](/blog/photo-video-reviews-vs-text-reviews) lifts submission by only 1.6x (from 14% to 22%). Video has the highest marginal return on incentivisation. ## How do you balance photo and video reviews? Run a two-stage email cadence: day 7 post-delivery, request any review type (photo or text). Day 21, for customers who left a positive review, request a video follow-up with a discount incentive. This produces a steady supply of photo volume and a curated layer of high-conversion video. Setup details in [how to run a UGC campaign](/blog/hashtag-campaign-ugc) and [moderation best practices](/blog/ugc-moderation-best-practices). The choice isn't photo _or_ video: it's photo for volume, video for impact, layered in the right places. Brands optimising for this layered structure see 2–3x the conversion lift of brands that treat reviews as a single uniform asset class. **In one line:** If you are still collecting text-only reviews you are leaving conversion on the table, the cost of asking for a photo or video at post-purchase is functionally zero, and the lift is multiples. - **+21%** — Median PDP CVR lift over photo-only (Idukki 500-PDP dataset) - **4.1x** — Video review vs text-only (PowerReviews, 2023 baseline) - **23s** — Average watch time on PDP (vs 4s for static gallery) - **11s** — Time-to-first-cart-click (vs 38s for static) _Shoppable video conversion data._ ### Sources & notes - [PowerReviews, How UGC Impacts Conversion (2023)](https://www.powerreviews.com/how-ugc-impacts-conversion-2023/) — Video reviews convert 4.1x better than text-only; photo reviews 2.6x; +103.9% lift among photo + video UGC interactors. - [Wyzowl, Video Marketing Statistics 2025](https://www.wyzowl.com/video-marketing-statistics/) — 89% of consumers say video convinced them to buy; 96% have watched explainer videos. - [McKinsey, Live commerce in China research](https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/retail/our-insights/its-showtime-how-live-commerce-is-transforming-the-shopping-experience) — Live shopping conversion 5-15% vs 2-3% for static; China live commerce $720B GMV in 2024. - [Bazaarvoice, 2025 Shopper Experience Index](https://www.bazaarvoice.com/press/bazaarvoice-shopper-experience-index-shows-surging-importance-of-ugc/) — +144% conversion / +162% RPV among UGC-engagers; +354% conversion on PDPs with reviews vs without. --- Canonical: https://idukki.io/blog/photo-vs-video-reviews Tags: Reviews, Comparison, Video