The subscription price is high. Make it $16 a month and unlimited downloads. There will be more buyers and authors will receive more profits.

This is pretty disappointing tbh. I have already had a bunch of 4K sales at $2.80 in December, so they must have been trialling it then.

The subscription price is high. Make it $16 a month and unlimited downloads. There will be more buyers and authors will receive more profits.

 

I re-uploaded about 20 videos recently, but I just deleted all 4k videos.  I'll re-upload them in HD only to avoid my 4k videos getting snatched for a few dollars.  I make $120 per 4k video sale on Pond5 Exclusive.  Got to protect my price.

Quote from: blvdone on January 25, 2024, 19:25

Is there any difference in how many HD or 4K videos buyers get for subscription?  Is HD and 4K clip treated as the same price for subscription?  If so, I would only upload HD clips.

This is actually part of my business plan as of late: only submitting HD clips to subscription agencies.

But it's starting to get hard to find an agency that doesn't have a subscription option these days.

That makes sense.  If they want a 4k clip, buy at Pond5.  Only crappy HD clips will be available for video subs from me. 

I would only upload HD clips.

That's been my strategy on SS for a very long time - only submitting HD clips and sending 4k clips elsewhere. It's unbelievable that I may be forced to do the same thing with AS.

It would be nice to have an option for contributors to allow/prohibit the sale of 4K by subscription. Or pay for 4K by subscription at double price.

Isn't the solution to start uploading 8k for the pros?

Adobe doesn't sell 8K though.

Isn't the solution to start uploading 8k for the pros?

I mean it is the way things evolve, while hd is still usable, many now prefer 4k, Adobe is reacting to that by making 4k the mainstream choice.

I am not a video pro, but my personal opinion or choice would be to focus on the higher quality for the new situation.

I am still uploading a mix of 4k and hd, but as soon as I can afford a simple 8k camera, I will focus on that.

Or is that a silly idea?

I don't know if it makes sense in the microstock market.
Maybe highly professional video recording for TV commercials but that's a different league.

I think the same could have been said for images years ago.
The pros should just buy a 100mp Hasselblad for 10k and then it's the solution. No it wasn't. It's like cracking a nut with a sledgehammer.

They should have just limited the subscription model to small resolutions years ago. Most of the content is used online anyway.
What is happening again is simply a price war on the backs of the contributors in order to gain market shares.

I had first considered entering the video market, but that no longer makes any economic sense.
Good videos are much more expensive and take longer time to be produced than pictures.
In max. 3 years, videos will be also sold for 99 cents everywhere. If AI video generation is well developed by then, I would get in, but not before.

Hi Everyone,

Adobe Stock�s 4K video clips will now be offered alongside HD clips for licensing as part of Adobe Stock subscriptions. This change will simplify the offering for Stock customers, allowing them to license HD and 4K video content as well as standard images, templates, 3D, and audio tracks using their subscriptions.
 
There is no change to the current royalty rate. For information about compensation, please visit our Royalties page.

https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/royalty-details.html

Thank you,

Mat Hayward

+100
Correct solution!
But as I already wrote, your subscription is very expensive. In order for your subscription to generate good income, go to the pricing scheme of envato or storyblocks.

https://elements.envato.com/pricing

https://www.storyblocks.com/pricing

But as I already wrote, your subscription is very expensive. In order for your subscription to generate good income, go to the pricing scheme of envato or storyblocks.

Wow you seem to be a real pro economist. So I suppose you upload all your images to Unsplash and receive unlimited money in return? Or are you just an image buyer trolling these stock contrib forums?

Quote from: stoker2014 on January 26, 2024, 07:38

But as I already wrote, your subscription is very expensive. In order for your subscription to generate good income, go to the pricing scheme of envato or storyblocks.

Wow you seem to be a real pro economist. So I suppose you upload all your images to Unsplash and receive unlimited money in return? Or are you just an image buyer trolling these stock contrib forums?

D'accord. It only makes sense for extreme power contributors with already produced 100k+ videos.
Then the sheer mass outweighs the low price.

But if I'm a creative amateur starting from the scratch, then I need enough revenues for new in-demand props, models, travel locations, better equipment, etc.

Otherwise, it's a loss-making business right from the start.

Isn't the solution to start uploading 8k for the pros?

I mean it is the way things evolve, while hd is still usable, many now prefer 4k, Adobe is reacting to that by making 4k the mainstream choice.

I am not a video pro, but my personal opinion or choice would be to focus on the higher quality for the new situation.

I am still uploading a mix of 4k and hd, but as soon as I can afford a simple 8k camera, I will focus on that.

Or is that a silly idea?

Tv is in 1080 or 720. Kids don't see Tv. They turn it on for news or football games. Rarely go to cinema and they consume tik tok and youtube (HD/720). Netflix/HBO here the standard is 720. In Corporate videos clients have been requesting HD/720 for youtube usually because of fast download. For Mobile Consume is the same.... so i don't find any use in 4k and above for most of the end users (viewers) - maybe only for post-production. But why should a client pay for 4k even when they got already good AI upscale SW?

I got only a few sales of 4K last year. 0 in 8K.
I am almost uploading only HD. Sometimes i put in description 4k/8k can be available if needed.

Cool. Super glad that 99% of my portfolio is in 1080p.

The remaining 4k will be pulled down and replaced with 1080p version. Thanks for letting us know!

I am fine with that. The only thing I care is contributor percentage fee and as far as this does not change I will still contribute to Adobe my videos.
I don't contribute a single video to Istock - Shutterstock since many years ago because of the lower royalty rate.
Everything that is lower than 30% is out for me by principle . I do not care how many million 0.10 or 0.001$ sales they make per unit.

Why is 4k better quality than HD? I disagree with this statement.
4K is just a different format.
The stock agency has prices. It is logical to assume that these prices may be the same for all formats. The buyer will only buy the format he needs. The fact that we shoot in 4K is just our desire to reach those buyers who need 4K or will need it in the future.

Quote from: stoker2014 on February 07, 2024, 09:24

Why is 4k better quality than HD? I disagree with this statement.
4K is just a different format.
The stock agency has prices. It is logical to assume that these prices may be the same for all formats. The buyer will only buy the format he needs. The fact that we shoot in 4K is just our desire to reach those buyers who need 4K or will need it in the future.

4K is higher resolution than HD, it's not a different format.
Of course if matters how you obtain the 4K resolution. But generally a native 4K export should be more crisp and higher quality than the same export in HD resolution.

The quality of the video does not depend on its resolution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_quality

HD video may have better quality than 4K video. Any cheap Chinese phone shoots in 4K. And where is the quality?
If we talk about high-quality HD or 4K video, then everything depends on the monitor on which this video will be played.
But to say that 4K is better than HD is not correct.

Why should high-quality HD video cost less than 4K video? It is not right.

I had a 4k video sell for $5 about a year ago on AS. Would that have been a subscription sale for a HD version of the 4k clip? Or something else?

Yes, that would have been an HD version of a 4K clip that sold at a subscription price if it was a year ago.

Thank you,

Mat Hayward

Quote from: stoker2014 on February 07, 2024, 09:43

Quote from: Noedelhap on February 07, 2024, 09:37

Quote from: stoker2014 on February 07, 2024, 09:24

Why is 4k better quality than HD? I disagree with this statement.
4K is just a different format.
The stock agency has prices. It is logical to assume that these prices may be the same for all formats. The buyer will only buy the format he needs. The fact that we shoot in 4K is just our desire to reach those buyers who need 4K or will need it in the future.

4K is higher resolution than HD, it's not a different format.
Of course if matters how you obtain the 4K resolution. But generally a native 4K export should be more crisp and higher quality than the same export in HD resolution.

The quality of the video does not depend on its resolution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_quality

HD video may have better quality than 4K video. Any cheap Chinese phone shoots in 4K. And where is the quality?
If we talk about high-quality HD or 4K video, then everything depends on the monitor on which this video will be played.
But to say that 4K is better than HD is not correct.

Why should high-quality HD video cost less than 4K video? It is not right.

4K is better than HD if all other factors are equal, because more pixels allow for more detail. This may not always be the case (upscaling, compression) but again, all other factors considered equal.

The reason 4K should in some cases cost more, is because it takes more processing power to work with 4K footage, more storage space, more exporting time and more uploading time. Over time, this cost may reduce due to cheaper storage space and faster processors, but let's not forget contributors invested in faster hardware to process 4K footage/animation. Besides, we're not talking about credit price differences here, but subscription prices so it's already getting as cheap as can be for buyers.

Video detail does not depend on the resolution, but on the video bitrate and bit depth. Read what bitrate is.
As for resolution, it is only needed for the monitor. If you have a 4K monitor, then it is logical to assume that 4K will look better than HD. But, if you have an HD monitor, then the HD resolution is sufficient for that monitor.
As for your cash outlay on equipment, it�s up to you whether to spend the money or not. Video is a product, video resolution can increase, but this does not mean that its price should increase. Any production requires equipment costs. The price of any product is formed by market methods, and does not depend on your costs for equipment. If you are not satisfied with the prices for 4K, then do not buy equipment that shoots in 4K.
The market has long been pushing for lower video prices, which is why subscriptions are popular.
As we can see from this thread, buyers don't need 4K resolution. Therefore, in order to sell them 4K, the price may be even lower than the price of HD.
 

I can buy equipment for video production in 8K. But that doesn't mean I can demand high prices for this video on the stock market. The price of a video depends solely on the demand for a specific resolution. As I already wrote, there is no demand for 4K among buyers.
Those who want to make money with 4K and 8K resolution should shoot videos not for stock agencies, but for other clients. For example, television studios need this resolution in good quality. Perhaps weddings are filmed in 4K and the client is willing to pay more for 4K than for HD.

We are writing to let you know about a pricing update for video content on Adobe Stock: 4K video clips will now be offered alongside HD clips for licensing as part of Adobe Stock subscriptions. This change will simplify the offering for Stock customers, allowing them to license HD and 4K video content as well as standard images, templates, 3D, and audio tracks using their subscriptions.

There is no change to the current royalty rate.

However, it's worth noting that per-video license royalty payments for 4K videos may see a reduction, as these videos will be available to subscription customers at varying discounts based on their plans. The existing Adobe Stock royalty rate (35%) remains consistent, calculated based on the price per clip. 4K video pricing remains unchanged for all on-demand clips and credit packs.

oh cool
oh f f s

I re-uploaded about 20 videos recently, but I just deleted all 4k videos.  I'll re-upload them in HD only to avoid my 4k videos getting snatched for a few dollars.  I make $120 per 4k video sale on Pond5 Exclusive.  Got to protect my price.

I just deleted all my re-uploaded videos.  It's not fun seeing only getting $2.80 for a video sale.  I'll stick with Pond5 Exclusive only.

I suggest Adobe also make the price the same for HD and 4K video (for non-subscription sales).

I suggest they don't.

or you are very bad at make your business....

In this case, this applies to 99.9% of authors. Not many people can sell their 4K videos at prices higher than the price of HD. And so that sales are not sporadic, but constant, like HD.
I agree to sell my 4K videos at HD prices, than not selling 4K at all or selling 4K it extremely rarely.

But the fact that the buyer is bad at buying 4K means that the price for 4K is high for the buyer.

You may have noticed that many times, HD sales outperform 4k sales. Indeed, there are quite a few contributors who sell a lot more HD videos than 4k videos. I would say that this is an indicator of the lack of demand for 4k footage. It looks like a lot more clients need HD footage so they generally buy more of that. It makes perfect sense to price 4k video higher than HD because of the increased storage space and longer upload times. A 4k clip may seem expensive to you but it is considerably cheaper than hiring a videographer / cinematographer and sending them to some location for a shoot.

Video detail does not depend on the resolution, but on the video bitrate and bit depth. Read what bitrate is.

4k video generally has considerably higher bitrate than HD video.

A friend who frequently buys stock footage said it made no sense that agencies price HD and 4K clips differently.

It still makes sense to me (even for a buyer.) A buyer will also need to deal with increased storage costs when acquiring 4k footage - which justifies the higher price.

It's a similar kind of thing when buying an external hdd. A 2TB ext. hdd will typically cost more than a 1TB ext. hdd (from the same brand.)

Likewise, a chocolate bar that is 20% larger than another chocolate bar will usually command a higher price.

Buyers may argue that the subject matter is the same regardless of file size.

Yes, there could be a choice between a 4k and a HD version of the same footage. The content will be exactly the same. However, the 4k version will allow the buyer to crop the footage extensively and still end up with a decent amount of resolution. And I would say that places a higher value on the 4k version. Plus the 4k version will also have a potentially wider range of applications (eg usage in big screen movies.)

Quote from: danielstassen on February 08, 2024, 20:48

A friend who frequently buys stock footage said it made no sense that agencies price HD and 4K clips differently.

It still makes sense to me (even for a buyer.) A buyer will also need to deal with increased storage costs when acquiring 4k footage - which justifies the higher price.

It's a similar kind of thing when buying an external hdd. A 2TB ext. hdd will typically cost more than a 1TB ext. hdd (from the same brand.)

Likewise, a chocolate bar that is 20% larger than another chocolate bar will usually command a higher price.

This means that 4K video needs to be sold cheaper than HD video. Because the buyer will still spend more money on memory to store it. 

It will be fair to have info of downloaded file resolution, next to sale report on dashboad� contributor will have more data to conclude if it is worth or not to have 4k files online�

Quote from: trucic on February 09, 2024, 04:24

It will be fair to have info of downloaded file resolution, next to sale report on dashboad� contributor will have more data to conclude if it is worth or not to have 4k files online�

You can get that info by downloading the .csv file. The button for this is at the top right when viewing your insights by Activity.

Thanks I do know about that, but now, when there is no difference in buyers perspective, for artist it will be useful to do �Subscription HD� and �Subscription 4k� titles in Dashboard - Activity list�

I discovered that Shutterstock also has 4K and HD at the same price now in subscriptions. Anyone know if this is new in response to Adobe or has it been like that for a while?
https://www.shutterstock.com/pricing/video

As far as I�m aware that pricing was in place on SS before AS adjusted their offerings.

I haven't gotten a response to my request yet,

but I checked my recent sales and they were indeed 4K subscriptions at 2.80$

I don't sell much as I don't have that many assets yet, but I had multiple 4K video sales in 4 days, usually I have the same amount in HD videos in a month or so.
My last 4K sale before the subscription change was actually many many months ago ....

I guess it's too early to say, but if total sales increase then I hope this will offset the reduction in returns per sale.

I can only assume that Adobe want's to maximize sale revenue and that they know what they're doing, but I'll keep observing, and uploading (in 4K)

@stocker2014

If you apply your logic to the pre subscription era, then we should all have become millionaires with subs because of more sales.
But the opposite happened. The earnings have almost completely disappeared. Some contributors had earnings between 20k and 50k a month (!) and fell to just 1k or 2k USD.
The same will happen with videos. You just have no long experience in this industry.

That is generally my experience (not making 20k to 50k a month though!), having been a video contributor since 2008, and earning a reasonable full time living from it until subs and other changes hit video sales.

Example would be SS.  Prior to subs and 4k video sub my average income from a sale was $40.  Now its $8.

Ive seen no noticeable uptick in sale volume at all to begin to address that shortfall.

SS subscription is not correct. The subscription should cost $16-25 per month and the buyer should receive unlimited video downloads. In this case, the author's income increases.

Are you serious or joking?  If you are serious, how will that increase contributors' income?

Quote from: blvdone on March 27, 2024, 10:52

Quote from: stoker2014 on March 27, 2024, 10:04

SS subscription is not correct. The subscription should cost $16-25 per month and the buyer should receive unlimited video downloads. In this case, the author's income increases.

Are you serious or joking?  If you are serious, how will that increase contributors' income?

Did you read his previous responses to other posts? If you did, I don't know why you wasting your time to responding him

    Ah, OK.