MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Adobe Stock Free Collection: Video Nominations  (Read 9126 times)

1 Member and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #75 on: October 14, 2022, 05:40 »
+4
Zero Talent, Adobe only nominates what hasn't sold in the last 12 months, i.e. slag.
I'm not talking about subscription stocks, which, following your logic, should have bankrupted Adobe a long time ago.

Free "slag" is very likely be preferred by many "buyers" as an alternative to paid quality stuff.

"Slag" at Adobe may be selling well at other agencies.

Basically, Adobe is gambling with our global assets, hoping that giving stuff for free will increase their sales.
We take for granted this claim without being shown any proof that it actually works.

Besides, even if there may be some extra sales, it's also likely that these sales are canibalising sales from other agencies (=dumping), resulting in overall losses for contributors.

Free is distorting the market and the competition, because Free is not used, but abused.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2022, 06:01 by Zero Talent »


« Reply #76 on: October 14, 2022, 07:14 »
0
I have 32 eligible videos, I have zero videos nominated currently... I'm still deciding. I think you're missing the point... obviously you stand to make more money all things being equal. That could be because you just have more videos that have never sold, but it's purely a numbers game... you have a lot more videos than me so it stands to reason that you'd have more eligible files. My point is that you're highly unlikely to make $1600 unless they adjust the eligibility of files... i.e. not every video that is nominated is going to be selected.
I just wanted to say that the more files that are nominated, the theoretically more income will be. I do not compare the quality of your video and mine. I just wrote that it is necessary to strive to ensure that Adobe selects as many files as possible for the nomination.

« Reply #77 on: October 14, 2022, 07:20 »
0
Free "slag" is very likely be preferred by many "buyers" as an alternative to paid quality stuff.
Free distorts the market and competition, because free is not used, but is abused
Your statement is very controversial and reflects only your opinion. You have no evidence or calculations.

"Slag" at Adobe may be selling well at other agencies.
No one is forcing you to participate in this program. The more people who opt out, the more my videos will end up in collections and the more money I'll get. :)

« Reply #78 on: October 14, 2022, 07:40 »
0
Zero Talent, Adobe only nominates what hasn't sold in the last 12 months, i.e. slag.
I'm not talking about subscription stocks, which, following your logic, should have bankrupted Adobe a long time ago.
it means that adobe nomitates even files that have 0 sales in the laste 4/5/3/6 months old..those are actually brand new files...they even nominated files with 2 sales in my case...

« Reply #79 on: October 14, 2022, 07:56 »
0
The eligible assets do not work well. Once you choose the videos you want to be considered, when you re-enter your portfolio, they appear deselected again.

I don't understand why Adobe spends time and resources on this instead of putting all its effort into what really matters: correcting the keyword ingestion system that wastes users thousands of hours.

« Reply #80 on: October 14, 2022, 09:29 »
+2
Free "slag" is very likely be preferred by many "buyers" as an alternative to paid quality stuff.
Free distorts the market and competition, because free is not used, but is abused
Your statement is very controversial and reflects only your opinion. You have no evidence or calculations.

"Slag" at Adobe may be selling well at other agencies.
No one is forcing you to participate in this program. The more people who opt out, the more my videos will end up in collections and the more money I'll get. :)

 ::)
Very short-sighted.

Here are a few examples from my eligible clips:
1. AS: 0 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $199
2. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $391
3. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $562.55
3. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $143.91
4. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $371
.... and more

So, if I allow these clips to be given away for free, in exchange for 8 bucks, I'm not only shooting myself in the foot, but I may also shoot you in the foot if we both cover the same topics.
 :-\

f8

« Reply #81 on: October 14, 2022, 10:48 »
+5
Free "slag" is very likely be preferred by many "buyers" as an alternative to paid quality stuff.
Free distorts the market and competition, because free is not used, but is abused
Your statement is very controversial and reflects only your opinion. You have no evidence or calculations.

"Slag" at Adobe may be selling well at other agencies.
No one is forcing you to participate in this program. The more people who opt out, the more my videos will end up in collections and the more money I'll get. :)

 ::)
Very short-sighted.

Here are a few examples from my eligible clips:
1. AS: 0 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $199
2. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $391
3. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $562.55
3. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $143.91
4. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $371
.... and more

So, if I allow these clips to be given away for free, in exchange for 8 bucks, I'm not only shooting myself in the foot, but I may also shoot you in the foot if we both cover the same topics.
 :-\

That is how my math adds up as well.

My best selling image on AS hardly sells on other sites. On other sites my best selling images hardly sell on AS and are on offer for free if I nominate them. But I won't. I also have multiple content that does well across all platforms.

Interestingly enough if I do a Google image search for my content more often than not there are links across all platforms. Why would I take a paltry offering of $5-$8 dollars. It makes no sense.

Now Stoker2014 on the other hand appears to not understand basic economics and is enthusiastic about making poor business decisions. There is a reason some of us make it and some of us don't. I also suspect they are a troll and love getting a rise from posting such gibberish.

« Reply #82 on: October 14, 2022, 12:01 »
+1
Now Stoker2014 on the other hand appears to not understand basic economics and is enthusiastic about making poor business decisions. There is a reason some of us make it and some of us don't. I also suspect they are a troll and love getting a rise from posting such gibberish.
Yeah, so Adobe suggested this whole scheme, and I'm a troll? I believe that adobe is smarter than all of us put together, and knows what it is doing, and plus pays more money. Everything suits me. I have so many of these videos that I can inflate at least 30% of the portfolio even for free, and I will lose little. I just shoot a lot. And adobe chose only a few themes from me.

« Reply #83 on: October 14, 2022, 12:06 »
0
Here are a few examples from my eligible clips:
1. AS: 0 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $199
2. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $391
3. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $562.55
3. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $143.91
4. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $371
.... and more
So, if I allow these clips to be given away for free, in exchange for 8 bucks, I'm not only shooting myself in the foot, but I may also shoot you in the foot if we both cover the same topics.
 :-\
I think that many buyers buy on one site, and do not waste time looking for everything on all sites, and even wondering where is cheaper. Even if you distribute all your videos on Adobe for free, your income on other sites will not decrease.

And it, unlike us, adobe conducts market research, and conducts appropriate policies. I trust adobe.
My video is sold on cheap subscription stocks for 16 dollars a month by subscription, on other sites this video is also bought, for a high price.

« Reply #84 on: October 15, 2022, 04:55 »
+1
Here are a few examples from my eligible clips:
1. AS: 0 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $199
2. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $391
3. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $562.55
3. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $143.91
4. AS: 1 sale - Total earnings across all agencies: $371
.... and more
So, if I allow these clips to be given away for free, in exchange for 8 bucks, I'm not only shooting myself in the foot, but I may also shoot you in the foot if we both cover the same topics.
 :-\
I think that many buyers buy on one site, and do not waste time looking for everything on all sites, and even wondering where is cheaper. Even if you distribute all your videos on Adobe for free, your income on other sites will not decrease.

And it, unlike us, adobe conducts market research, and conducts appropriate policies. I trust adobe.
My video is sold on cheap subscription stocks for 16 dollars a month by subscription, on other sites this video is also bought, for a high price.

1. I have many examples of sales on DT (where the keywords used for finding the pictures are shared with us) of images found on other sites, but purchased from DT. This is beyond any doubt, because the search string is the exact full title of that image, as found elsewhere => customers DO shop around.

2. Adobe is bulding this free collection to stimulate extra sales for themselves. This is done by attracting customers from other agencies, since the free collection has no reason to stimulate extra sales from their current customer base (quite the opposite) => canibalisation.

3. You say you "trust" AS (trust, but no verify?), but given how succesful (with the global customer base) are the clips in my examples above, I would say that AS should do a better job in marketing such clips (which are obviously in demand), instead of trying to offer them for free.

« Last Edit: October 15, 2022, 06:36 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #85 on: October 15, 2022, 08:02 »
0
Free "slag" is very likely be preferred by many "buyers" as an alternative to paid quality stuff.
Free distorts the market and competition, because free is not used, but is abused
Your statement is very controversial and reflects only your opinion. You have no evidence or calculations.


 ::)
Very short-sighted.

So, if I allow these clips to be given away for free, in exchange for 8 bucks, I'm not only shooting myself in the foot, but I may also shoot you in the foot if we both cover the same topics.
 :-\

To free or not to free - that is the question.

Its futile Zero Talent. Some of us have understood this since the early days of UnSplash and Freepik arguing tooth and nail the absurdity of it all. I cant be bothered anymore trying to defend simple concepts like systemic devaluation or mutual benefit. Its clear to me the divide is more than philosophical.

« Reply #86 on: October 15, 2022, 08:14 »
0
1. I have many examples of sales on DT
DT is what stock?

« Reply #87 on: October 15, 2022, 08:16 »
0
2. Adobe is bulding this free collection to stimulate extra sales for themselves. This is done by attracting customers from other agencies, since the free collection has no reason to stimulate extra sales from their current customer base (quite the opposite) => canibalisation.
If your work is in a free collection, it means that a lot of people download it, this is advertising for you, people will go into your portfolio and see what you have, and they will buy it. You are against advertising your portfolio, that's your right.

« Reply #88 on: October 15, 2022, 09:07 »
+3
2. Adobe is bulding this free collection to stimulate extra sales for themselves. This is done by attracting customers from other agencies, since the free collection has no reason to stimulate extra sales from their current customer base (quite the opposite) => canibalisation.
If your work is in a free collection, it means that a lot of people download it, this is advertising for you, people will go into your portfolio and see what you have, and they will buy it. You are against advertising your portfolio, that's your right.

You make it sound like a wine and cheese opening at an actual art gallery where potential patrons are so taken by your unique vision and talent that they just cant help but gobble up your incredible work whether they need it or not. Thats not how Microstock works. Exposure for free is a fallacy perpetuated by those with something to actually gain unless of course your work does stand out from the crowd in some extraordinary way in which case you likely wouldnt need to give it away anyway. Agencies already know exactly what to do with that kind of content.

So ask yourself.

« Reply #89 on: October 15, 2022, 09:59 »
0
2. Adobe is bulding this free collection to stimulate extra sales for themselves. This is done by attracting customers from other agencies, since the free collection has no reason to stimulate extra sales from their current customer base (quite the opposite) => canibalisation.
If your work is in a free collection, it means that a lot of people download it, this is advertising for you, people will go into your portfolio and see what you have, and they will buy it. You are against advertising your portfolio, that's your right.

You make it sound like a wine and cheese opening at an actual art gallery where potential patrons are so taken by your unique vision and talent that they just cant help but gobble up your incredible work whether they need it or not. Thats not how Microstock works. Exposure for free is a fallacy perpetuated by those with something to actually gain unless of course your work does stand out from the crowd in some extraordinary way in which case you likely wouldnt need to give it away anyway. Agencies already know exactly what to do with that kind of content.

So ask yourself.
My experience with some stock sites is that giving away a portion of a video for free leads to a portfolio of buyers who need others like it. And the more buyers buy something, the higher the portfolio rating. Therefore, I am always for the free distribution of part of the video as advertising. Moreover, the experience of the same subscription stocks says that a fixed monthly price for unlimited downloads leads to an increase in income and stability.

« Reply #90 on: October 15, 2022, 10:10 »
+4
Interesting, I would find it difficult for me to do that kind of analysis since none of the agencies I contribute to let me know who my buyers actually are. Lucky you then.

« Reply #91 on: October 15, 2022, 11:15 »
0
Interesting, I would find it difficult for me to do that kind of analysis since none of the agencies I contribute to let me know who my buyers actually are. Lucky you then.
I don't know who my customers are, I look at the total profit and its growth.

« Reply #92 on: October 15, 2022, 11:38 »
+4
Interesting again, because I could say exactly the same thing without ever having given anything away on any platform. Lucky me I guess.

So how is it that you can possibly credit this growth and profit to what you are trying to attribute it to? It seems to me you are the one making controversial statements without any evidence or proof.

« Reply #93 on: October 15, 2022, 12:41 »
0
Interesting again, because I could say exactly the same thing without ever having given anything away on any platform. Lucky me I guess.

So how is it that you can possibly credit this growth and profit to what you are trying to attribute it to? It seems to me you are the one making controversial statements without any evidence or proof.
Envato has a website where they give away free videos, no subscription. After I agreed to have some of my videos given away for free, I had a 30% increase in income from envato.elements.
As for Adobe, after participating in the free photo giveaway, my income from video sales has also grown well.
The logic here is simple, sites advertise my account on the stock, interested persons come to it and buy. An increase in sales leads to an increase in the overall rating.

« Reply #94 on: October 15, 2022, 12:52 »
0
I don't want my files being downloaded in droves and then uploaded to other sites by stalkers and leechers. Much less for 8$. I would be tempted for 30$/file. But 8$ is laughable.In my case they have selected over 200 files :o
« Last Edit: October 15, 2022, 12:54 by everest »

« Reply #95 on: October 15, 2022, 12:59 »
+2
My experience with some stock sites is that giving away a portion of a video for free leads to a portfolio of buyers who need others like it. And the more buyers buy something, the higher the portfolio rating. Therefore, I am always for the free distribution of part of the video as advertising. Moreover, the experience of the same subscription stocks says that a fixed monthly price for unlimited downloads leads to an increase in income and stability.

basic logical fallacy -  correlation is not causation

« Last Edit: October 15, 2022, 13:30 by cascoly »

f8

« Reply #96 on: October 15, 2022, 13:06 »
+2
I don't want my files being downloaded in droves and then uploaded to other sites by stalkers and leechers. Much less for 8$. I would be tempted for 30$/file. But 8$ is laughable.In my case they have selected over 200 files :o

Or the corporation that in effect is using your asset for $8 and the unlimited usage is for their sole marketing purpose could let you nominate your asset for 'free' and the corporation could then pay you the minimum subscription rate per 'free' download. But we know corporations don't work that way.

You'd have to be delusional to think this benefits the contributor/s in any way.

 


« Reply #97 on: October 15, 2022, 13:41 »
+1
Well then, proof positive. I stand corrected. Except that again, my income with AS has grown roughly the same amount as yours since the introduction of the free library even though I havent nominated a single asset. Furthermore I havent uploaded anything at all to any agency since the beginning of this year. In light of that Id suggest that your simple logic isnt necessarily logical at all. And without the kind of proof Zero Talent was asking about Id say your interpretation is based on nothing more than personal opinion and desire to see what you want to see. Certainly not the evidence and calculations you demand of others.

For what its worth though, Im not necessarily against giving away content when it actually makes sense. I may have been a little misleading when I stated I have never given away content on any platform. Thats not entirely true. Im strictly a food photographer, and I have a sponsored website where we give content away to select industry affiliates B2B in return for donation consideration to local food banks.

The difference here is that I think this actually qualifies as advertising. Its highly selective and targeted. I can easily gauge its success with real data and at the same time Im not lining the pockets further of those who really need it least.

But whatever, good luck to you.



« Reply #98 on: October 15, 2022, 14:15 »
0
In light of that Id suggest that your simple logic isnt necessarily logical at all. And without the kind of proof Zero Talent was asking about Id say your interpretation is based on nothing more than personal opinion and desire to see what you want to see. Certainly not the evidence and calculations you demand of others.
So, as you can see, the free distribution of video in the worst case does not affect income in any way, i.e. does not reduce it.

« Reply #99 on: October 15, 2022, 15:06 »
+4
Once again you are jumping to inaccurate conclusions and seeing only what you want to see. Given what Ive shared with you a logical mind would actually question what you might have made had you not given your work away. Instead you use it as confirmation of your own bias. Seriously.

Certainly I also have my own bias, but it is the product of more than 40 years experience in the industry. Believe it or not none of this is new.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
402 Replies
61865 Views
Last post June 13, 2022, 14:36
by JaenStock
38 Replies
10001 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
5071 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