Jump to content
Tawrat Ferdousi Branding

Adobe Contributor Experience

Recommended Posts

Do you think constant .10 c sells are depressing?

Than look at this.

On Adobe Stock I haven't had a single sell since 13 June.

---

You have to admit other microstock sites are shit

and that's why Shutterstock got the power to take this dicition.

--

After the BycottShutterstock trend I only given content to Adobe Stock 

and this is the result I have got.

And at the meantime with no new content and 0.10 c sell Shutterstock out performed..

--

Currently I have AVAILABLE EARNINGS $20.36 on Adobe Stock and on Shutterstock I have $24.56.

and I am getting constant sells on shutterstock on one single vector image.

--

Don't get me wrong. I am not supporting shutterstock's huge 0.10c sell

But you have to admit other sites are Shit as well.

Hash truth or realty you say.

--

Thanks. 

I am open to any kind of comment on this.

image.png.e7131a532c7abff866231fe94c423a94.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen the same pattern of sales disappearing on Adobe - although I have only uploaded 2 things only to Adobe since SS announced its change to 10c - I was having a rough time personally and that just was cherry on top and I just have not really been shooting or uploading since as I work out what my next step should be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Starsphinx said:

I have seen the same pattern of sales disappearing on Adobe - although I have only uploaded 2 things only to Adobe since SS announced its change to 10c - I was having a rough time personally and that just was cherry on top and I just have not really been shooting or uploading since as I work out what my next step should be.

But I am constantly uploading content on Adobe both vector and video and still I got this result. very bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Benevector said:

Lack of marketing is their only weakness. Their payment rate is very good.

Yes they have sevearl problems and weakness to compete against Shutterstock. But their payment is high. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My experience is a different one.
Adobe has done fairly well for me all year with an average price of 1$ per image, used to be either close to my SS earnings or above.
This month I made about more than double as much on Adobe as on SS. No complains from me about Adobe.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Tawrat Ferdousi Branding said:

Yes they have sevearl problems and weakness to compete against Shutterstock. But their payment is high. 

Acceptance time. A series and hop ... I have time to take two weeks of vacation, it is not beautiful life?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Firn said:

My experience is a different one.
Adobe has done fairly well for me all year with an average price of 1$ per image, used to be either close to my SS earnings or above.
This month I made about double as much on Adobe as on SS. No complains from be about Adobe.
 

Same here. The last couple of months AS have gained momentum for me and the sales have increased. Yes, it's still slower in sheer numbers than SS was, but the fact that one image sold on AS equals ten sold at SS, the total difference is minimal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, VALAMO Studio said:

Same here. The last couple of months AS have gained momentum for me and the sales have increased. Yes, it's still slower in sheer numbers than SS was, but the fact that one image sold on AS equals ten sold at SS, the total difference is minimal. 

I have a very positive experience with AS, and my sales are doing relatively well in the last couple of months. Overall income at SS is still higher, but my portfolio is much larger here that at AS. It it was the same number of photos, I am sure that stock would perform even better. As a matter of fact, AS are still holding on while others rob their contributors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tawrat Ferdousi Branding said:

Do you think constant .10 c sells are depressing?

Than look at this.

On Adobe Stock I haven't had a single sell since 13 June.

 

I am open to any kind of comment on this.

 

Why would they buy from you at Adobe when they can buy your work cheaper at Shutterstock?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Objowl's Fractal Art said:

Why would they buy from you at Adobe when they can buy your work cheaper at Shutterstock?

Why would I bother to upload more where I haven't got any single sell for the half of the moth despite of having bulk vector and video upload almost every day?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Tawrat Ferdousi Branding said:

Why would I bother to upload more where I haven't got any single sell for the half of the moth despite of having bulk vector and video upload almost every day?

Exactly, you have undercut yourself, no point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Objowl's Fractal Art said:

Exactly, you have undercut yourself, no point.

To be clear, I am not supporting Sutterstock's new payment structure. Its' bad really bad than what other sites are doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am only one year on adobe stock, but I have sales almost every day, a portfolio of 450 pictures. But I must say that when I started, I had my first sale after almost 2 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tawrat Ferdousi Branding said:

To be clear, I am not supporting Sutterstock's new payment structure. Its' bad really bad than what other sites are doing.

Then take your buyers to a better place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not good for me.  Maybe 3-4 sales a month at AS vs. over 40 here at SS.  Granted, my port on AS is only 650 images vs. over 2,800 images here.  Maybe I'll submit more there.

How do you guys deal with AS' "keywords sorted in order of relevance" as opposed to SS' "keywords sorted alphabetically"?  I find it undercuts the ease of just copy/pasting keywords from here to there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mike Kuhlman said:

Not good for me.  Maybe 3-4 sales a month.  Granted, my port on AS is only 650 images vs. over 2,800 images here.  Maybe I'll submit more there.

How do you guys deal with AS' "keywords sorted in order of relevance" as opposed to SS' "keywords sorted alphabetically"?  I find it undercuts the ease of just copy/pasting keywords from here to there.

Just click the up-arrow of the most relevant keywords on the right to bring them on the top. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, VALAMO Studio said:

Just click the up-arrow of the most relevant keywords on the right to bring them on the top. 

Yeah--I've been doing that, thanks.  So WE determine what keywords are most relevant? 

Using AS' supplied keywords, relevance sorting has already been determined by AS automatically, but then we have to keep looking at AS' sorted according to relevance keywords vs. SS' alphabetized keywords, to make sure none are repeated, and make sure to not go over 50 keywords, rather complicated, a major PITA.

I was wondering if there's a better way to automate this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tawrat Ferdousi Branding said:

Do you think constant .10 c sells are depressing?

Than look at this.

On Adobe Stock I haven't had a single sell since 13 June.

---

You have to admit other microstock sites are shit

and that's why Shutterstock got the power to take this dicition.

--

After the BycottShutterstock trend I only given content to Adobe Stock 

and this is the result I have got.

And at the meantime with no new content and 0.10 c sell Shutterstock out performed..

--

Currently I have AVAILABLE EARNINGS $20.36 on Adobe Stock and on Shutterstock I have $24.56.

and I am getting constant sells on shutterstock on one single vector image.

--

Don't get me wrong. I am not supporting shutterstock's huge 0.10c sell

But you have to admit other sites are Shit as well.

Hash truth or realty you say.

--

Thanks. 

I am open to any kind of comment on this.

image.png.e7131a532c7abff866231fe94c423a94.png

AS has consistently out performed SS for me as far as revenue over the past year, in spite of a smaller portfolio and fewer downloads. But that's my experience, not everyone's.

No data on P5 yet, as I've been there less than a month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Objowl's Fractal Art said:

Why would they buy from you at Adobe when they can buy your work cheaper at Shutterstock?

 

2 hours ago, Objowl's Fractal Art said:

Exactly, you have undercut yourself, no point.

Firstly have you checked the prices customers pay v what contributors are paid?  5 image on demand packs are virtually the same price on both - other packs and licences vary but not necessarily cheaper on SS.  However what is paid to the contributor IS different.

Secondly several experienced knowledgable stock shooters have deliberately looked at having the same images at different agencies and run as many variables against them as possible and come to the conclusion that the vast majority of stock purchasers do not shop around, and even though some do it does not make any significant difference to sales volume or income at different agencies.  Research does in fact suggest that each agencie has its own customer base and its own needs and it is often found that images that sell heavily at one agency sell rarely or not at all at the other agencies - you can have identical images all over the place but different ones will sell in different places.  There is absolutely no evidence that having the same shot at different agencies undercuts yourself.  This is a disproved argument.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Objowl's Fractal Art said:

Why would they buy from you at Adobe when they can buy your work cheaper at Shutterstock?

From a buyer perspective do they see any price differential? The payment system for contributors has changed but not the purchase system for customers. If there is no change for customers then you haven't 'undercut' yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Starsphinx said:

 

Firstly have you checked the prices customers pay v what contributors are paid?  5 image on demand packs are virtually the same price on both - other packs and licences vary but not necessarily cheaper on SS.  However what is paid to the contributor IS different.

Secondly several experienced knowledgable stock shooters have deliberately looked at having the same images at different agencies and run as many variables against them as possible and come to the conclusion that the vast majority of stock purchasers do not shop around, and even though some do it does not make any significant difference to sales volume or income at different agencies.  Research does in fact suggest that each agencie has its own customer base and its own needs and it is often found that images that sell heavily at one agency sell rarely or not at all at the other agencies - you can have identical images all over the place but different ones will sell in different places.  There is absolutely no evidence that having the same shot at different agencies undercuts yourself.  This is a disproved argument.

 

I'm no suggesting having the same images at both, just taking the buyers to the better paying one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...