pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Adobe Stock Free Collection: Video Nominations  (Read 9130 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

JamoImages

  • Stock Producer & Blogger: jamoimages.com
« Reply #175 on: November 22, 2022, 00:58 »
+3
lol.. I'm so bad at making stock footage that my clips are not good enough even for the free collection  :-[  --> none selected  :P


« Reply #176 on: November 22, 2022, 03:17 »
0
I do not anticipate more selections being made this round.

Thank you,

Mat Hayward
Judging by the number that you have chosen, you will have a very small collection. You started on a grand scale, but in the end everything was blown away to a minuscule. Probably the price of 8 dollars is expensive for you. That's why I wrote, reduce the price to 4-5 dollars.
According to the photo there were several rounds, at least 3.

« Reply #177 on: November 22, 2022, 03:18 »
0
lol.. I'm so bad at making stock footage that my clips are not good enough even for the free collection  :-[  --> none selected  :P
How many have you been nominated?

« Reply #178 on: November 22, 2022, 03:21 »
0
In my opinion, we were greatly deceived, hmm. They waved dollars in front of their noses and showed the muzzle.
Why reassure people if you werent going to take a lot of videos anyway.
Adobe drew mountains of gold for the authors, and as a result threw a handout. This is not correct behavior.

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #179 on: November 22, 2022, 03:42 »
+4
Adobe basically said, and i'm paraphrasing but still, "we're looking for videos for our free collection. We've highlighted which ones are eligible for the collection in your dashboard. Take a look, decide which ones you'd like to nominate, and then we'll decide which videos we'd like to include from all the nominated files".

Anything over and above that is your own interpretation... so you only have yourself to blame. You basically deceived yourself... and that's not correct behaviour.

« Reply #180 on: November 22, 2022, 03:44 »
+2
In my opinion, we were greatly deceived, hmm. They waved dollars in front of their noses and showed the muzzle.
Why reassure people if you werent going to take a lot of videos anyway.
Adobe drew mountains of gold for the authors, and as a result threw a handout. This is not correct behavior.

Why were you deceived? Were did Adobe claim that they would accept all or even a great part of the nominated videos into their free collection? Adobe has been pretty transparent about this. If you thought they'd take all or most videos then that's because you didn't read or understand the offer properly.

« Reply #181 on: November 22, 2022, 04:29 »
0
Were did Adobe claim that they would accept all or even a great part of the nominated videos into their free collection? Adobe has been pretty transparent about this. If you thought they'd take all or most videos then that's because you didn't read or understand the offer properly.
Yes, I personally dont worry too much, I dont have 0. But I think that many here on the forum will have 0 or around it.
Just the approach itself, write to people that you will receive so many thousands of dollars, and then accept nothing at all.
It would be interesting to read here how much they took.
Also, if you remember this program from the photo, then the photo was taken more and there were at least 3 rounds, if not more.
So far, I can see that adobe has a very meager and limited budget, which means that adobe is having a bad time.
Yes, and foolishness is everything, nominate a bunch of videos, promise a bunch of dollars, and then accept 0 or a couple of grand.

« Reply #182 on: November 22, 2022, 04:38 »
0
If there are those who take part in this program and think that adobe did not fool them, write about it.

« Reply #183 on: November 22, 2022, 04:40 »
+6
Also, if you remember this program from the photo, then the photo was taken more and there were at least 3 rounds, if not more.

As always, you still don't bother to read anything, you don't know how this works, and of course, for this reason, your opinions have value near to zero for anyone.

It never happen (and never told by Adobe) that there should be multiple rounds.
Adobe offers to buy some selected of your photos/clips for ONE TIME FOR ONE YEAR.

This was for the photo, and this is for clips.
After one year some or all photos and clips could be choosen again for another year.

ONE TIME OFFER. NO MULTIPLE MONTHLY BUYOUT.

If you still don't understand this I don't know what are you doing here, probably just to put confusion and misleading posts

« Reply #184 on: November 22, 2022, 05:09 »
+3

Yes, and foolishness is everything, nominate a bunch of videos, promise a bunch of dollars, and then accept 0 or a couple of grand.

Nowhere did Adobe PROMISE you any amount of $ at all. All they did was give you a selection of images to nominat with absolutely no promise of accepting them into the free gallery.

« Reply #185 on: November 22, 2022, 05:13 »
0

Yes, and foolishness is everything, nominate a bunch of videos, promise a bunch of dollars, and then accept 0 or a couple of grand.

Nowhere did Adobe PROMISE you any amount of $ at all. All they did was give you a selection of images to nominat with absolutely no promise of accepting them into the free gallery.
You are obviously completely off topic. Adobe clearly wrote in my account that he wanted to nominate my video, indicated the amount and indicated the amount that I would earn.

« Reply #186 on: November 22, 2022, 05:14 »
0
Her Ugliness, did you have at least one video nominated?

« Reply #187 on: November 22, 2022, 06:24 »
+6

Yes, and foolishness is everything, nominate a bunch of videos, promise a bunch of dollars, and then accept 0 or a couple of grand.

Nowhere did Adobe PROMISE you any amount of $ at all. All they did was give you a selection of images to nominat with absolutely no promise of accepting them into the free gallery.
You are obviously completely off topic. Adobe clearly wrote in my account that he wanted to nominate my video, indicated the amount and indicated the amount that I would earn.

I am certainly not "off topic" as the topic is Adobe Stock Free Collection and that's what I am talking about.

And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:

The text said:
Quote from: Adobe
You've got X eligible assets that could earn up to X upfront if seltected for the free selection.

No one expect you thought he'd definitely get the possible maximum amount, not for photos, not for vectors and not for videos.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2022, 07:02 by Her Ugliness »

« Reply #188 on: November 22, 2022, 06:52 »
+7
You are obviously completely off topic. Adobe clearly wrote in my account that he wanted to nominate my video, indicated the amount and indicated the amount that I would earn.

You have a history of not reading/ thinking things through it seems. Slow down and take deep breath.

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #189 on: November 22, 2022, 07:31 »
+4
If there are those who take part in this program and think that adobe did not fool them, write about it.

I took part in this program and I don't think that Adobe fooled me.

« Reply #190 on: November 22, 2022, 10:27 »
0
And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:
The text said:
Quote from: Adobe
You've got X eligible assets that could earn up to X upfront if seltected for the free selection.
No one expect you thought he'd definitely get the possible maximum amount, not for photos, not for vectors and not for videos.
1. We are not in court.
2. This marketing stunt greatly offended the authors who agreed to participate. If Adobe initially planned to accept 0 or several videos from people, you need to write about it. Then most of the authors would have responded by refusing to participate in the program.
3. Are you an Adobe lawyer?

« Reply #191 on: November 22, 2022, 10:40 »
0
The topic author should not have created this topic at all, and advertise what will not be done. Here on the forum, legal contracts are not signed and communication does not take place in the courtroom. Here it is customary to trust each other.
Of course, I did not understand if adobe will continue to accept videos in the next months, then it will be a normal conversation. But if that's all, it looks extremely bad.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #192 on: November 22, 2022, 11:48 »
+1
In my opinion, we were greatly deceived, hmm. They waved dollars in front of their noses and showed the muzzle.
Why reassure people if you werent going to take a lot of videos anyway.
Adobe drew mountains of gold for the authors, and as a result threw a handout. This is not correct behavior.

Why were you deceived? Were did Adobe claim that they would accept all or even a great part of the nominated videos into their free collection? Adobe has been pretty transparent about this. If you thought they'd take all or most videos then that's because you didn't read or understand the offer properly.

Yeah, you understand right.

Nowhere did Adobe PROMISE you any amount of $ at all. All they did was give you a selection of images to nominat with absolutely no promise of accepting them into the free gallery.

Also correct.

If there are those who take part in this program and think that adobe did not fool them, write about it.

Adobe did not fool me because I can read and they offered a chance to nominate.


And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:

Quote from: Adobe
You've got X eligible assets that could earn up to X upfront if seltected for the free selection.


Once again, spot on. And I thought you said you didn't understand English perfectly? Seems you do just fine.


« Reply #193 on: November 22, 2022, 12:23 »
+7
2. This marketing stunt greatly offended the authors who agreed to participate.

Adobe only chose the clips they believe to have a certain appeal to potential new customers.

If you didn't get your clips selected, it means your clips are not good enough to generate interest, hence not worth those $8/year. From this point of view Adobe is no different than any paying customer.
 
Instead of feeling offended, it may be advisable to revisit your quality and relevance standards.  ;)

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #194 on: November 22, 2022, 22:03 »
+7
This marketing stunt greatly offended the authors who agreed to participate.

Could you share the data from the surveys, forum postings, focus groups and/or meetings you've held for you to arrive at this conclusion?

« Reply #195 on: November 23, 2022, 06:36 »
+3
And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:
The text said:
Quote from: Adobe
You've got X eligible assets that could earn up to X upfront if seltected for the free selection.
No one expect you thought he'd definitely get the possible maximum amount, not for photos, not for vectors and not for videos.
1. We are not in court.
2. This marketing stunt greatly offended the authors who agreed to participate. If Adobe initially planned to accept 0 or several videos from people, you need to write about it. Then most of the authors would have responded by refusing to participate in the program.
3. Are you an Adobe lawyer?

Yes the stunt was offensive, but only because they thought we contributors love to give stuff away for a measly $8 to be featured in a free collection... Oh, that's not what you meant?

« Reply #196 on: November 23, 2022, 10:56 »
+3
I do not anticipate more selections being made this round.

Thank you,

Mat Hayward
Judging by the number that you have chosen, you will have a very small collection. You started on a grand scale, but in the end everything was blown away to a minuscule. Probably the price of 8 dollars is expensive for you. That's why I wrote, reduce the price to 4-5 dollars.
According to the photo there were several rounds, at least 3.

even if you beg for money likely your content isn't good enough even for the free collection...we din't sell bread where the cheapest sells,put your heart at rest...

« Reply #197 on: November 24, 2022, 15:30 »
0
And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:
The text said:
Quote from: Adobe
You've got X eligible assets that could earn up to X upfront if seltected for the free selection.
No one expect you thought he'd definitely get the possible maximum amount, not for photos, not for vectors and not for videos.
1. We are not in court.
2. This marketing stunt greatly offended the authors who agreed to participate. If Adobe initially planned to accept 0 or several videos from people, you need to write about it. Then most of the authors would have responded by refusing to participate in the program.
3. Are you an Adobe lawyer?

Yes the stunt was offensive, but only because they thought we contributors love to give stuff away for a measly $8 to be featured in a free collection... Oh, that's not what you meant?
No, that's not what I meant at all. I meant that it's one thing to give away 1-10 videos for $8, and another thing to give away 200-1000 videos for $8. So it makes no sense to give a few videos, but there are 1000, because. 8x1000=8000 dollars.

« Reply #198 on: November 24, 2022, 15:31 »
0
I do not anticipate more selections being made this round.

Thank you,

Mat Hayward
Judging by the number that you have chosen, you will have a very small collection. You started on a grand scale, but in the end everything was blown away to a minuscule. Probably the price of 8 dollars is expensive for you. That's why I wrote, reduce the price to 4-5 dollars.
According to the photo there were several rounds, at least 3.

even if you beg for money likely your content isn't good enough even for the free collection...we din't sell bread where the cheapest sells,put your heart at rest...
Compared to others here who wrote in the topic, I have a lot of videos were nominated and approved. But only in comparison to others. What can you brag about?

« Reply #199 on: November 24, 2022, 18:27 »
+3
And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:
The text said:
Quote from: Adobe
You've got X eligible assets that could earn up to X upfront if seltected for the free selection.
No one expect you thought he'd definitely get the possible maximum amount, not for photos, not for vectors and not for videos.
1. We are not in court.
2. This marketing stunt greatly offended the authors who agreed to participate. If Adobe initially planned to accept 0 or several videos from people, you need to write about it. Then most of the authors would have responded by refusing to participate in the program.
3. Are you an Adobe lawyer?

Yes the stunt was offensive, but only because they thought we contributors love to give stuff away for a measly $8 to be featured in a free collection... Oh, that's not what you meant?
No, that's not what I meant at all. I meant that it's one thing to give away 1-10 videos for $8, and another thing to give away 200-1000 videos for $8. So it makes no sense to give a few videos, but there are 1000, because. 8x1000=8000 dollars.

If 1000 videos cannot gather at least 36 downloads of $28 in a year, then yes, giving them away for $8 is an okay deal. But then you probably have some quality issues with your portfolio to worry about.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
402 Replies
61865 Views
Last post June 13, 2022, 14:36
by JaenStock
38 Replies
10002 Views
Last post November 30, 2021, 19:33
by leremy
142 Replies
16581 Views
Last post August 09, 2022, 14:57
by MatHayward
9 Replies
1481 Views
Last post July 01, 2022, 02:34
by cobalt
38 Replies
5072 Views
Last post October 04, 2022, 11:48
by jasonlee3071

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle