MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Adobe Stock 4K video now available in subscriptions  (Read 3916 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.



« Reply #1 on: January 25, 2024, 17:51 »
+2
The subscription price is high. Make it $16 a month and unlimited downloads. There will be more buyers and authors will receive more profits.

« Reply #2 on: January 25, 2024, 18:22 »
+6
Generally, subscriptions lead to extremely low amounts being paid to contributors. Not happy (especially with regards to 4k videos which normally command vey high prices.) Though I guess it wouldn't be as bad as SS who offer cents per video download.

Overall, the stock video situation continues to get worse across all agencies. I wish it was like the old days where every video sale meant big dollars.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2024, 19:09 by dragonblade »

« Reply #3 on: January 25, 2024, 18:26 »
+7
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.

« Reply #4 on: January 25, 2024, 18:38 »
+2
Thanks for letting us know, Matt.

« Reply #5 on: January 25, 2024, 19:19 »
+1
The subscription price is high. Make it $16 a month and unlimited downloads. There will be more buyers and authors will receive more profits.

 ;D ;D

« Reply #6 on: January 25, 2024, 19:25 »
+1
Hi Everyone,

Adobe Stocks 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

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.  I deleted all my videos in May, but uploaded a few clips recently.  I'll delete 4K clips and upload them in HD only if I don't get at least 2x for 4K video sub.

« Reply #7 on: January 25, 2024, 19:39 »
+4
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.

« Reply #8 on: January 25, 2024, 19:48 »
+5
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.

« Reply #9 on: January 25, 2024, 20:00 »
+4
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. 

« Reply #10 on: January 25, 2024, 21:00 »
+5
Yes, I think I may start removing my 4K clips too, and not submit future ones. The subscription model really only benefit the company, not the contributor.

« Reply #11 on: January 25, 2024, 21:32 »
+3
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.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2024, 00:44 by dragonblade »

« Reply #12 on: January 26, 2024, 00:10 »
+2
I would only upload HD clips.

That's been my strategy as 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.

You are ahead of us!!!   We should all submit only HD clips to Adobe Stock now because they don't give us extra for 4k clips.  That's disgusting.

« Reply #13 on: January 26, 2024, 02:30 »
+1
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.

« Reply #14 on: January 26, 2024, 03:24 »
0
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?

« Reply #15 on: January 26, 2024, 03:58 »
+1
Isn't the solution to start uploading 8k for the pros?

Adobe doesn't sell 8K though.

« Reply #16 on: January 26, 2024, 04:33 »
0
Ok... that is a hindrance ;)

« Reply #17 on: January 26, 2024, 04:51 »
+1
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.

« Reply #18 on: January 26, 2024, 06:20 »
+1
"I had first considered entering the video market, but that no longer makes any economic sense."

There are only 60?? 100 million ?? videos over all agencies compared to 1 billion stock images.

The video market is still wide open and especially with editorial selling well and being safe from ai, you are leaving a lot of money on the table. Especially if adding a few quick video clips, even with a smartphone, can easily be done while shooting regular photos.

Yesterday I sold two editorial videos, one for 37.82, the other for 5.07. Both were handheld editorial clips taken with my iphone a few years ago.

Your choice, but I think to maximise income video is the easiest thing you can add to the mix.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2024, 06:25 by cobalt »

« Reply #19 on: January 26, 2024, 07:38 »
0
Hi Everyone,

Adobe Stocks 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

« Reply #20 on: January 26, 2024, 11:40 »
0
What is the sub price now for HD and 4k video?
 
Is there a difference?

I couldn't find it.

« Reply #21 on: January 26, 2024, 19:40 »
+2
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?

« Reply #22 on: January 26, 2024, 20:02 »
+1
storyblocks and envato are being regularly noted as the by far best selling video agency for many.

But it is difficult for amateurs to get in.


« Reply #23 on: January 27, 2024, 09:31 »
0
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.

« Reply #24 on: January 27, 2024, 10:03 »
+1
so, if everyone will send only HD, I should be rich if start submiting only 4k?! :)

« Reply #25 on: January 27, 2024, 13:14 »
+1
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.






« Reply #26 on: January 27, 2024, 14:50 »
0
You make very good points.

No 8k camera for me then. :)

« Reply #27 on: January 27, 2024, 19:50 »
+5
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!

« Reply #28 on: February 07, 2024, 07:27 »
0
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?

« Reply #29 on: February 07, 2024, 09:10 »
+1
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.

« Reply #30 on: February 07, 2024, 09:15 »
+3
Of course, why value anything we do? Let's make everything 2c per download, why don't you.

Simplify it for customers, is Adobe's excuse. Right, because it's so confusing to pay more for higher quality.

And so the race to the bottom continues. Very disappointing.

« Reply #31 on: February 07, 2024, 09:24 »
0
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.

« Reply #32 on: February 07, 2024, 09:37 »
+1
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.

« Reply #33 on: February 07, 2024, 09:43 »
0
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.

« Reply #34 on: February 07, 2024, 09:52 »
0
Hi,
I just got the mail from Adobe so I sent them a reply asking for more information on royalties.

The websites for contributors and also for customers do not distinguish between HD and 4K.

If the rate for 4K will be the same as HD then I think I'll stop uploading 4K altogether. Most of my sales are HD subscriptions anyhow, with a few credit pack sales in HD every now and then.


« Reply #35 on: February 07, 2024, 09:57 »
+2
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

« Reply #36 on: February 07, 2024, 09:57 »
+1
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.

« Reply #37 on: February 07, 2024, 10:05 »
0
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, its 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.
 ;D
« Last Edit: February 07, 2024, 10:21 by stoker2014 »

« Reply #38 on: February 07, 2024, 10:25 »
0
If we already talk about video quality, then we need to talk not about resolution, but about bitrate, bit depth and everything else that is written about in the link that I gave. And then the stock agency can mark such a video as high-quality and try to sell it at a higher price. But this is not real. Most buyers are not looking for technical video quality. The buyer is only interested in the story and price. The buyer is satisfied with the HD resolution.
Therefore, with a view to the future, we all spend money on 4K equipment, shoot it in 4K, after which the stocks convert it to HD and sell it to the buyer. Therefore, it is we who are the authors who have to pay the stock agencies for the fact that they are forced to store our 4K video, which is not needed by customers now.
 ;D ;D ;D
« Last Edit: February 07, 2024, 10:27 by stoker2014 »

« Reply #39 on: February 07, 2024, 10:34 »
0
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.

« Reply #40 on: February 07, 2024, 10:35 »
+6
Bro, we got it, stop replying to yourself.

« Reply #41 on: February 07, 2024, 10:42 »
+1
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

« Reply #42 on: February 07, 2024, 11:09 »
+2
So I guess this will mean more buyers leaving the other places and coming to Adobe.

Will be interesting to see if the sales increase.

« Reply #43 on: February 07, 2024, 19:41 »
+4
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.

« Reply #44 on: February 08, 2024, 06:44 »
0
I suggest Adobe also make the price the same for HD and 4K video (for non-subscription sales). This will lead to more 4k sales and creator income.
At the very least, we will see whether the buyer even needs 4K. But the fact that the buyer is bad at buying 4K means that the price for 4K is high for the buyer.
Initially, the price for video was formed on the market; previously there was only HD. The advent of 4K should not lead to higher prices for video.

« Reply #45 on: February 08, 2024, 12:03 »
+3
I suggest Adobe also make the price the same for HD and 4K video (for non-subscription sales).

I suggest they don't.

« Reply #46 on: February 08, 2024, 13:12 »
0
I suggest Adobe also make the price the same for HD and 4K video (for non-subscription sales). This will lead to more 4k sales and creator income.
At the very least, we will see whether the buyer even needs 4K. But the fact that the buyer is bad at buying 4K means that the price for 4K is high for the buyer.
Initially, the price for video was formed on the market; previously there was only HD. The advent of 4K should not lead to higher prices for video.

you must a troll....or you are very bad at make your business....

« Reply #47 on: February 08, 2024, 14:35 »
0
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.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2024, 14:39 by stoker2014 »

« Reply #48 on: February 08, 2024, 14:45 »
0
I suggest Adobe also make the price the same for HD and 4K video (for non-subscription sales). This will lead to more 4k sales and creator income.
At the very least, we will see whether the buyer even needs 4K. But the fact that the buyer is bad at buying 4K means that the price for 4K is high for the buyer.
Initially, the price for video was formed on the market; previously there was only HD. The advent of 4K should not lead to higher prices for video.

A genius of marketplace  ;D ;D ;D
Why are you here writing in the forum? You should be really rich with your innovative ideas  ;D

« Reply #49 on: February 08, 2024, 20:28 »
+1
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.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2024, 20:36 by dragonblade »

« Reply #50 on: February 08, 2024, 20:48 »
+1
From a buyers perspective, stoker is correct. A friend who frequently buys stock footage said it made no sense that agencies price HD and 4K clips differently. From a sellers perspective (like myself), I can understand the buyers argument, but I would instead prefer selling it at a higher price. However, if other agencies such as istock, offer 4K and HD at the same price, then it makes sense for AS to adjust their offering to be more competitive.

I can now see a clear competitive advantage for contributors with 4K clips competing with others with similar subjects but in HD. Buyers may be more enticed to go for the 4K clip, leading to more sales for that contributor.

« Reply #51 on: February 08, 2024, 21:08 »
0
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.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2024, 21:41 by dragonblade »

« Reply #52 on: February 08, 2024, 22:33 »
0
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.

While it may make sense to you, it may also not make sense to some buyers. Buyers may argue that the subject matter is the same regardless of file size. We can view this from many different angles. At the end, our opinion will not change anything in the grand scheme of things.

From my side, although Im unhappy about ASs decision to price HD and 4K the same for their subscription customers, I can also clearly understand why they decided to go that way. Stock agencies must compete in an increasingly competitive landscape.

« Reply #53 on: February 08, 2024, 23:20 »
0
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.)
« Last Edit: February 09, 2024, 02:39 by dragonblade »

« Reply #54 on: February 09, 2024, 00:20 »
+5
Sad but entirely predictable that AS is chasing Shutterstock in the race to the bottom.  An effective paycut for contributors.

Very little point uploading 4k here now if its just going to be sold off for pennies.  Might actually be worth deleting existing 4ks so it doesn't eat into sales from P5 and elsewhere.

« Reply #55 on: February 09, 2024, 02:55 »
+1
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.  ;D

« Reply #56 on: February 09, 2024, 03:00 »
0
4k video generally has considerably higher bitrate than HD video.
Good cameras also shoot HD with a very high bitrate.
The bitrate size also depends on the video resolution; there is no point in making a very large bitrate for HD video.
As I already gave a link, quality depends on many factors, not just the bitrate.

« Reply #57 on: February 09, 2024, 04:24 »
0
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

« Reply #58 on: February 09, 2024, 05:15 »
0
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.

« Reply #59 on: February 09, 2024, 06:00 »
0
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

« Reply #60 on: February 10, 2024, 18:25 »
+1
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

« Reply #61 on: February 10, 2024, 23:16 »
0
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 Im aware that pricing was in place on SS before AS adjusted their offerings.

« Reply #62 on: February 11, 2024, 12:45 »
+1
I just hope everybody starts deleting their 4k videos on Adobe Stock and re-upload HD version.  Or delete videos for good like I did in last May.  I deleted like 7,000 videos one by one.  Now I don't have to worry about customers paying much less on Adobe Stock than Pond5 for the same videos because I'm 100% Pond5 Exclusive and get 60% royalty.
« Last Edit: February 11, 2024, 12:48 by blvdone »

« Reply #63 on: February 12, 2024, 08:49 »
0
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)

« Reply #64 on: March 27, 2024, 04:57 »
0
Just to clarify, with regards to non subscription sales, would we still get a significantly higher value sale for a 4k video compared to a HD video sale?

« Reply #65 on: March 27, 2024, 06:19 »
0
@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.

« Reply #66 on: March 27, 2024, 06:46 »
0
@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.

« Reply #67 on: March 27, 2024, 09:41 »
+1

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.

« Reply #68 on: March 27, 2024, 10:04 »
0
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.

« Reply #69 on: March 27, 2024, 10:52 »
+1
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?

« Reply #70 on: March 27, 2024, 11:04 »
+1
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 ( about unlimited subscription plans/sites) to other posts? If you did, I don't know why you wasting your time to responding him ;D
« Last Edit: March 27, 2024, 11:14 by Ambu »

« Reply #71 on: March 27, 2024, 11:10 »
+1
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 ;D

 ;D ;D  Ah, OK. 

« Reply #72 on: March 27, 2024, 11:41 »
0
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 ( about unlimited subscription plans/sites) to other posts? If you did, I don't know why you wasting your time to responding him ;D
+100
Accordingly, I will not waste time on answers and explanations.
 ;D ;D ;D


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
37 Replies
13927 Views
Last post October 28, 2014, 14:07
by DallasP
4 Replies
3994 Views
Last post October 07, 2015, 22:40
by Rinderart
25 Replies
7611 Views
Last post March 16, 2022, 06:44
by Findura
24 Replies
5154 Views
Last post July 11, 2022, 09:07
by wds
4 Replies
742 Views
Last post March 04, 2024, 05:57
by trucic

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors