Jump to content

Adobe wants to use your photo free for 1 year in exchange for $5... thoughts?


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Sari ONeal said:

Alex - What does it matter how many times an image sold at AS last year?

If they offer an image in their free collection, a buyer will pick the one that's cheapest.

Now they can go get an image for free from AS, as they should have paid $$ at one of the others.

For example - I sold a pic here for $80 something yesterday. That same pic is in the "selection" at AS. Should I include it in their scheme? HELL NO, because it will always bring me money here, even if it has never been an earner at AS. Now, if a buyer sees it available for free over there, why would they pay big bucks over here?

Every good image has potential for those bigger sales, and I'm NOT going to give that up for FIVE DOLLARS.

 

 

Sari - the images I would 'sell' now have never sold here there or everywhere ... Of course I would never 'sell' an image to Adobe which sells in other agensies.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 160
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Maybe, maybe not. One thing is pretty clear by now though, the more free images made available by others that are similar to the ones making you money now, the less likely you will be to sell your own

I believe that here lies a very crucial question about the raison d'être of microstock. There were these images that were talked about here. The images were really good. And because they were rea

It’s an interesting incentive which I fully support. If I can squeeze anything out of this dying industry (for microstock photos) I’m happy!

Posted Images

46 minutes ago, Firn said:

Alex, what do you think why Adobe is doing this in the first place?

I'm not so sure, but as Adobe makes most of its money from selling its products and not licensing images/videos it makes sense as a way to bring sell more of their products even if they take a small loss on the licensing arm of the business. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sari ONeal said:

I have a family member that works in an industry where they continually need images to use. They go to ridiculous amounts of trouble and time to find FREE images. IMO they would be better off buying a subscription to a large stock site and find suitable images immediately, save all that time searching, and they'd still be able to forward the cost to their clients, as the image price would not really affect the price of the final product.

 

Ideally they should use unpaid interns to do the searching! :D 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in 2 minds about this.

I have 3075 eligible assets...  (about 20% of my portfolio).

From what i can see:-

Pros:-

- You can sort by downloads and select stuff that's never sold, barely sold or likely to never sell again anywhere.

- If accepted, its possibly free money for doing nothing.

Cons:-

- Those images won't sell on there for a year (if selected) but also potentially never again.  Once they've been on free they'll likely be "around" for anyone to find.

- They probably won't sell on other sites either (after all, if you can get it free somewhere, why pay?

- If you have similar images NOT free in your portfolio it may hit sales of those (people will take the similar free not buy the pay version)

- No real restrictions on who can download.  The just need an adobe account.  So nothing to stop someone downloading the free then reselling and uploading elsewhere as their own which seems very common these days.

 

It's a tough call.  Its potentially money for photos that make nothing but there are downsides.  At least Adobe makes it opt-in and you can select which images are nominated for selection.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sari ONeal said:

I agree with Rudy - EVEN IF they had intern to do that (which they don't), they could be much more productive doing something else.

I can only speak from my own experience, but we never used interns for boring, monotonous and routine work. We used internships to spot talent that we could recruit later. As such, we tried to give them challenging tasks and a range of work experience.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, oleschwander said:

Wilm - why do you keep on posting that ...?

Because I'm wondering, Ole. Why does Adobe pick images that they could obviously continue to make money with if they don't put them in the free selction. Where is the sense there?
I don't know what's secretly behind the whole action. But it seems to be worth Adobe - besides the 5,- Euro per image - quite a bit more, if they give up additional income. I really don't understand it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Alexandre Rotenberg said:

I understand what you’re saying but you overestimate buyers’ motivations to shop around. 

In other words, even if it’s available for free so doubt that most would take the time to research, login, download etc...that is even assuming that they have an account on AS.

Oh, another thing about this -- they don't NEED to shop around, because a buyer that uses PhotoShop (and possibly other AS apps) can just look for a suitable image straight from the app they are using.

Shutterstock also has a plug-in for PS and other AS apps that does the same -- all the buyer need to do is to do an image search in the app.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wilm Ihlenfeld said:

Because I'm wondering, Ole. Why does Adobe pick images that they could obviously continue to make money with if they don't put them in the free selction. Where is the sense there?
I don't know what's secretly behind the whole action. But it seems to be worth Adobe - besides the 5,- Euro per image - quite a bit more, if they give up additional income. I really don't understand it.

But have they sold more than 4 times in the last year?  They are the ones they say are eligible?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, paula french said:

But have they sold more than 4 times in the last year?  They are the ones they say are eligible?

Well, Paula, that seems to be true with the four donwloads. I just checked that with 2 images. My subjective perception was different. I was of the opinion to have sold some of the images significantly more often. But it is probably so that I had the shutterstock sales in mind.

Then this is even more lousy! There are many images that sell well here. And have sold well at Adobe. Adobe has then let them disappear in the search into nirvana. Has the images virtually devalued, because they would still sell if they were found.
And if they are then no longer findable, then they offer $5, and assume that the attractiveness of the images upgrades the free section to the company's and their customers advantage.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Wilm Ihlenfeld said:

Because I'm wondering, Ole. Why does Adobe pick images that they could obviously continue to make money with if they don't put them in the free selction. Where is the sense there?

Maybe they hope someone will accept them. Maybe they are not looking at the image sales. Also some of my best sellers were suggested, and also some selling well at other agencies, but why should I care? - Just leaving them out. A few of the zero sales are hopeless images without sale potential. Wonder if they will pay for them ...?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Former_Poster said:

and all your images will be included with no opt out.

Yep, and when AS responds to that my next contributor email from them should go something like this;

Dear Foodio,

We have some exciting news! The unexpected response to our recently introduced free collection has been so overwhelmingly positive that we have decided to broaden the scope of the collection to include all of your portfolio assets including video. In order to address our customers ever increasing demands for freely accessible high quality content and expand our own customer pool we are also announcing that our paid library will be phased out entirely between January 1, 2022 and November 15, 2022. Please believe that we did not make this decision lightly, however experience and extensive internal research has shown that the vast majority of our customers would prefer not to pay for things if they don't have to. 

In keeping with our ongoing commitment to, and in support of our valued creators we have decided that in lieu of monetary compensation we will be delighted to offer you a full one year subscription to our complete line of software products, with up to 30% off any of our products after that for as long as your content remains in the free collection. This represents an incredible value we know, but we truly feel it's the least we can do.

We look forward to a highly productive and profitable future with you and your work!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, nah...

At first I thought okay I'll opt into this. But on further thought + reading some of the comments here, it's a blanket 'no' from me.

AS has gauged a desperation among contributors so are exploiting the situation. I doubt this so called offer would of got any serious consideration several years ago. Not from me though.

I'm not happy with AS as it is with a recent change there that has seen my sales almost stop. So I'm not about to offer any of my images for free for 12 months in lieu  of low sales.

The response to this will also provide AS a good test of the readiness among contributors to surrender more and more of their content in the interest of the agency. It's a very cheap $5 for AS to pay contributors to get a 12-month carte blanche license to each of the stock images it selects.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steven Tritton said:

I'm not about to offer any of my images for free for 12 months in lieu  of low sales.

The thing is, a pic that gets put into the free collection is liable to end up on thousands of hard drives, waiting to be used (and shared / sold / whatever, nobody has control over that), and after that year has passed, nobody is going to say "oh, that was in the free for a year collection, I can't use it now that it has passed".

You can forget about those pics from now on till the end of time.

NOPE NOPE NOPE.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sari ONeal said:

The thing is, a pic that gets put into the free collection is liable to end up on thousands of hard drives, waiting to be used (and shared / sold / whatever, nobody has control over that), and after that year has passed

But you can get buy images very cheap at SS, and even get some for free, and use them in the same way. And you get 10 cent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After all these arguments, I am not sure what to do now..🤔

Will my images included in the free collection stop selling here at SS ?

What will be the impact if many other contributors chose to opt in ? Will sales stop on AS ? (In that case, it would be better for me to opt in some, as I am Eur 5 away from my first payout)

I think it would have been easier if I was a long term contributor with many sales. I would have just picked the ones that were not selling or stopped selling because they sank into the database. I would definitely not pick the ones that are selling. 😉

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I found out that they are asking only photos. Not graphical designs or renders. I didn't go into it, because I think it was smarter to stay of from that free collection at this moment. But I see that there is all the time growing "market" for free photos. I am thinking that Adobe is trying to get customers from Pixabay -kind of places with this trick.

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...