MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Adobe Stock => Topic started by: MatHayward on October 10, 2022, 13:13
-
Hi Everyone,
Heads up! Videos will be eligible for nomination into the Adobe Stock Free collection starting tomorrow (Tuesday, October 11). An email with detailed information will be sent to those of you with eligible content, tomorrow morning (PDT). Check your inbox then, and let me know if you have any questions after you read it.
Thank you,
Mat Hayward
-
Thanks for letting us know Matt, will the email show the price per clip?
-
Thanks for letting us know Matt, will the email show the price per clip?
Yes, more information will be available tomorrow including the price per clip.
Thanks for the question,
Mat
-
Thank you for information. :D
-
Didn't receive any letters. I don't think this is true.
-
Didn't receive any letters. I don't think this is true.
PDT morning time. Wait:)
-
Didn't receive any letters. I don't think this is true.
PDT morning time. Wait:)
Write European time.
-
Didn't receive any letters. I don't think this is true.
Why on earth Matt should announce something not true ;D
-
Didn't receive any letters. I don't think this is true.
Why on earth Matt should announce something not true ;D
Who is this Matt? And how does he know.
-
Didn't receive any letters. I don't think this is true.
Why on earth Matt should announce something not true ;D
Who is this Matt? And how does he know.
uhm if you don't know him it seems you are not frequently partecipating in this forum
-
I've been on this forum for a few weeks.
Well then, let him offer Adobe to subscribe to the video, following the example of envato.elements.
Accept only those authors who agree to this.
-
Email came out, but can't see what video assets are eligible when I go into my account. Is it not live yet?
-
@Mat
I got an email again from adobe free collection
Title: Upfront payment opportunity, now until October 27
Also In my Portal there is no banner visible.
Can you please tell me is it 2nd Wave of 2022 is going to start or its a system Error.
TIA.
Note: I am not a Video contributor.
-
Email came out, but can't see what video assets are eligible when I go into my account. Is it not live yet?
My eligible clips are showing on my dashboard
-
How exciting! Another shoot yourself in the foot opportunity.
-
8 USD for a clip, with auto-renewal and I'm not sure if we are getting paid every year.
thank you, not for my work.
-
In principle, I find the FreeCollection offers quite good, but $8 for a video clip does not seem to me to be in proportion to $5 for a photo.
I will definitely not participate in this programme with my videos.
-
I haven't received any emails even though I have a huge portfolio of videos on Adobe.
-
8 USD for a clip, with auto-renewal and I'm not sure if we are getting paid every year.
thank you, not for my work.
I had a batch of images that were in the freezer section last year and received an invite to re-submit them this year. They were all highlighted on the dashboard. I'm guessing they may do something similar with footage.
-
Email came out, but can't see what video assets are eligible when I go into my account. Is it not live yet?
My eligible clips are showing on my dashboard
There is a filter option in the dashboard section. It is below the banner, and above the thumbnails and says "eligible for free collection." Check that box and you'll see your files available for nomination.
Thanks,
Mat Hayward
-
In principle, I find the FreeCollection offers quite good, but $8 for a video clip does not seem to me to be in proportion to $5 for a photo.
I will definitely not participate in this programme with my videos.
Agree.
8 for one year is really poor for what clips could generate. I'm a little disappointed
-
At 8$ it's a no for me too
-
Hi all,
We apologize. The email many of you received was sent to the wrong recipient list. You received it if you had vector and illustration files which you had a chance to opt in in August. We'll send out a retraction and an apology.
If you have eligible videos, check out your dashboard in the contributor portal and nominate as many as you'd like. Note, we only selected ones which has 0 sales in the last 12 months. Also, if you chose to renew them for the free collection next year, you'll be paid again.
-
In principle, I find the FreeCollection offers quite good, but $8 for a video clip does not seem to me to be in proportion to $5 for a photo.
I will definitely not participate in this programme with my videos.
Agree.
8 for one year is really poor for what clips could generate. I'm a little disappointed
I'd have a heck of a lot more respect for this 100+ billion dollar company if they gave us the choice to use our content for "free" and offer us 0.33 per download per image and $2.80 per video per download rather than a one time $5 and $8 respectively. The reality is they offer chump change to us for their sole marketing purposes. We see no direct benefit for giving our work away for so cheap. I really do like Adobe Stock but this "free" section is not right. I too am thankful they give us a choice to opt in or opt out. I will 'donate' my work for a charity, but not a publicly traded multi-billion dollar company.
-
In the UK were only getting £6 per clip which when using a currency converter into $ is only $6.68.
Matt I feel in the volatile world in which we live in today Adobe should be checking currency rates on a monthly basis. It can't be too hard right? Do you know if the company is looking into this? Even when the rates come down I feel it's still in the best interest for the company as then artists don't feel like they are at a disadvantage just because of the country they are from.
-
Hi all,
We apologize. The email many of you received was sent to the wrong recipient list. You received it if you had vector and illustration files which you had a chance to opt in in August. We'll send out a retraction and an apology.
If you have eligible videos, check out your dashboard in the contributor portal and nominate as many as you'd like. Note, we only selected ones which has 0 sales in the last 12 months. Also, if you chose to renew them for the free collection next year, you'll be paid again.
Hello. You have chosen very few of my videos for free collection. Why? I have a huge portfolio, but you only picked a couple hundred videos. Are you limited in quantity? Choose from me not 200 videos, but 2000-20000 videos.
-
Hi all,
We apologize. The email many of you received was sent to the wrong recipient list. You received it if you had vector and illustration files which you had a chance to opt in in August. We'll send out a retraction and an apology.
If you have eligible videos, check out your dashboard in the contributor portal and nominate as many as you'd like. Note, we only selected ones which has 0 sales in the last 12 months. Also, if you chose to renew them for the free collection next year, you'll be paid again.
Hello. You have chosen very few of my videos for free collection. Why? I have a huge portfolio, but you only picked a couple hundred videos. Are you limited in quantity? Choose from me not 200 videos, but 2000-20000 videos.
Correct, only a select number of clips are eligible for nomination. Not the entire video collection. Also, as Kirsten noted above, only clips with zero sales in the last 12 months are eligible.
Thanks for the question,
Mat Hayward
-
Hi all,
We apologize. The email many of you received was sent to the wrong recipient list. You received it if you had vector and illustration files which you had a chance to opt in in August. We'll send out a retraction and an apology.
If you have eligible videos, check out your dashboard in the contributor portal and nominate as many as you'd like. Note, we only selected ones which has 0 sales in the last 12 months. Also, if you chose to renew them for the free collection next year, you'll be paid again.
Hello. You have chosen very few of my videos for free collection. Why? I have a huge portfolio, but you only picked a couple hundred videos. Are you limited in quantity? Choose from me not 200 videos, but 2000-20000 videos.
Correct, only a select number of clips are eligible for nomination. Not the entire video collection. Also, as Kirsten noted above, only clips with zero sales in the last 12 months are eligible.
Thanks for the question,
Mat Hayward
I have several thousand videos that have 0 sales in the last 12 months. But why did you choose only 200 videos, take them all.
-
@Mat
I understand well how marketing dept in big company works, and probably 8$ for a one year free clip has been calculated on download numbers/earnings, but sometimes numbers should have a more different perspective.
I'm absolutely happy with your offer: we can opt out, and we can select what's in and what's not, and this is absolutely fair from my point of view.
BUT
I've just sold (right now!) for 70$ one of the nominated clips.
Of course it's a coincidence, and of course this is something that do not happen every day;
but, in general terms, we all know that a clip can generate a much higher revenue than 8$ in one year.
If you have the option to report this notice (the general terms I mean, not my own sales! :-) ) to your sales dept, maybe they will rethink the amount of 8$ offer for one year in free market. It's really too low, and the risk for Adobe is to spent money to gain only poor and old clips
Only my thoughts: I'm not a "company", but I know that sometimes it's hard for a company to understand some little human reasoning :-)
-
Only my thoughts: I'm not a "company", but I know that sometimes it's hard for a company to understand some little human reasoning :-)
I don’t understand at all how they choose videos from the author’s portfolio, on what basis. I don't care if my videos sold in the last 12 months or not, but they chose very few videos from me, they chose a monotonous video, 70% of the same story. I personally would like all my videos to be featured in the free collection if I get paid to do so. I don't care if it's $8 or more. Okay, they say they only take what hasn't sold in a year, great, let them take it. But they do not take, but choose very few videos.
-
Only my thoughts: I'm not a "company", but I know that sometimes it's hard for a company to understand some little human reasoning :-)
I don’t understand at all how they choose videos from the author’s portfolio, on what basis. .... I personally would like all my videos to be featured in the free collection if I get paid to do so. I don't care if it's $8 or more. Okay, they say they only take what hasn't sold in a year, great, let them take it. But they do not take, but choose very few videos.
sure, many of us would like AS to take all our work, but that's not how it works
you're new here, but once again you should read the rules before you post - the process is explained, and it never said they'd take anything you want
-
cascoly, what rules are you talking about? I'm just trying to figure out why adobe does not take a lot of videos into the free collection, and why the selection is so weak in content.
-
cascoly, what rules are you talking about? I'm just trying to figure out why adobe does not take a lot of videos into the free collection, and why the selection is so weak in content.
it really helps to start at the first post!
Hi Everyone,
Heads up! Videos will be eligible for nomination into the Adobe Stock Free collection starting tomorrow (Tuesday, October 11). An email with detailed information will be sent to those of you with eligible content, tomorrow morning (PDT). Check your inbox then, and let me know if you have any questions after you read it.
Thank you,
Mat Hayward
-
They only chose one, but I haven‘t uploaded many videos to Adobe.
Can we upload illustrative editorial video?
-
cascoly, what rules are you talking about? I'm just trying to figure out why adobe does not take a lot of videos into the free collection, and why the selection is so weak in content.
it really helps to start at the first post!
Hi Everyone,
Heads up! Videos will be eligible for nomination into the Adobe Stock Free collection starting tomorrow (Tuesday, October 11). An email with detailed information will be sent to those of you with eligible content, tomorrow morning (PDT). Check your inbox then, and let me know if you have any questions after you read it.
Thank you,
Mat Hayward
My video was also chosen, but I still have not received any letters.
-
I didn't get an email either. There's a notification on my dashboard, but I never go on my dashboard normally, so wouldn't have known about it If I hadn't seen this thread. I have 32 eligible videos, two have 2 downloads, four have 0 downloads and the rest all have 1 download, so not quite sure what's going on there.
-
8$ per year...? Very, very low...
-
I did nominate images... but I won't do it for video... this is such a low price. Not worth it.
-
I did nominate images... but I won't do it for video... this is such a low price. Not worth it.
The idea of putting up an $8 video is a good idea. This is advertising for the portfolio and income. But, it makes sense if adobe selects more videos.
In general, I recommend Adobe to create a subscription collection following the example of Envato Elements, I am ready to give all my videos to it. I think that subscription sales will bring more income.
-
Didn't receive any letters. I don't think this is true.
cretino would say that inside only their own head.
-
The idea of putting up an $8 video is a good idea. This is advertising for the portfolio and income. But, it makes sense if adobe selects more videos.
In general, I recommend Adobe to create a subscription collection following the example of Envato Elements, I am ready to give all my videos to it. I think that subscription sales will bring more income.
You haven't understand nothing on how it works; it would be nice if you read the rules before giving away your ideas.
First of all, Adobe has already subscription offers alive.
Second, the "8$ proposal" is for one year of your clip in the free section; nothing to do with subscriptions.
Last but not least, you cannot give away your full portfolio: Adobe "nominate" some elegible assets, and AFTER this they choose a (little) slice of them to be payed for the free section.
So, usually if you have, let's say, 1000 clips, you will find 300 nominated for the 8$ proposal, and after this a small part, let's say 30, will be accepted and payed.
Please read before posting strange opinions
-
derby, I'm in the stock business more than you, for sure. No need to send me to where you yourself have not been.
As for prices and subscriptions, you don’t understand what a modern subscription is at all. Compare prices here
https://stock.adobe.com/plans
and here
https://elements.envato.com/pricing
-
derby, I'm in the stock business more than you, for sure. No need to send me to where you yourself have not been.
As for prices and subscriptions, you don’t understand what a modern subscription is at all. Compare prices here
https://stock.adobe.com/plans
and here
https://elements.envato.com/pricing
I'm sure you're a top expert, so it seems you don't need to read what we're talking about ;D
You're simply talking and talking and put comments about something completely different, something that has nothing to do with the thread; the title is "Adobe stock free video collection".
Where should be the link between subscription offers and free assets? Only you expert could see
And that's all :)
-
Where should be the link between subscription offers and free assets? Only you expert could see
You answered your own question.
-
They are selecting more videos, it's just those videos are from other people. If they select every video of yours then they have to select every video of everyone else .. and then there won't any paid videos on the site. Everything is free!
-
derby, I'm in the stock business more than you, for sure. No need to send me to where you yourself have not been.
As for prices and subscriptions, you don’t understand what a modern subscription is at all. Compare prices here
https://stock.adobe.com/plans
and here
https://elements.envato.com/pricing
your claim to competence would be stronger if you posted a portfolio link, rather than jumping into conversations you haven't bothered to read
-
For the most recent free collection exercise which was for illustrations if I recall, I went through all the nominated files and selected / deselected files according to their sales and sales potential. In the final stage selection, not one file was selected. So seems pretty pointless to run through this again and given $8 a video compared to $5 an image, I too will opt out of this one.
-
Perhaps a little calculation will help to assess how to value the $8 offer for the Free Collection (just crossed my mind):
For photos, $5 is offered in the Free Collection with a minimum sale price of $0.33-$0.38 depending on account status - so about a 13:1 ratio ( 5 / 0.38 = 13.15).
If we now extrapolate the $8 in the Free Collection offer for videos to the minimum price for videos, which as far as I know is $2.80, this should actually result in a 13:1 ratio for the video offer of $2.80*13 = $36.40 per Free Video.
(If the $2.80 is not the minimum price for videos, please correct me here).
So the $8 seems like a very bad deal to me...
Don't get me wrong, AS is certainly one of the better platforms for us providers, but this offer is not a good one.
-
Adobe is taking the Shutterstock path...
-
I will for sure denominate my assets, simply 8$ for a year is not right...
-
As I already wrote, the price suits me, but the number of selected videos by Adobe categorically does not suit me. You won't earn much with that amount.
-
They have pre-selected 1 in 70 of my clips for evaluation. From these, a couple has already sold and at least one is a good earner in all agencies. The rest have to do with not widely offered content and at least one is unique. For me personally, $8 is a very bad deal that does not do any justice to the offered content. I guess each one has to decide based on his content and numbers. Noone is trying to influence others, we are all just sharing our different opinions.
-
As I already wrote, the price suits me, but the number of selected videos by Adobe categorically does not suit me. You won't earn much with that amount.
The other consideration is, even if you nominate all your videos selected in this first-stage selection process, there's no guarantee (and I suggest it's very unlikely) all your selected videos will qualify for the free collection offer - except for the better, more saleable clips at just $8.00 each for the year. One video sale to a customer will often eclipse $8.00 and much more, and over the course of 12 months will invariably add up to much more than that.
-
Gotta love the contrast in this thread - one side is making a rational argument, weighing the pros and cons for a well thought out decision. The other side doesn't even care to read, keeps repeating the same over and over, throwing a tantrum like a 5 year old, then claims authority ;D. I hate the fact that I'm in the same business with the second type, it's the type that will proudly facilitate the agencies to make it worse for all of us. And there are so many like him...
-
8$ is low for one year. But as a activ mostly video/animation contributor I will nominate some of my content. I also nominated my images and I can say that sales of images this year increased significantly compared to last year. I think this helps to expose portfolio.. I hope the same will happen with videos in the future. Good luck to everyone!
-
Dear Diana,
Yesterday we sent you an email to opt-in nominated assets for the free video collection on the Contributor portal by October 27. Unfortunately, you received the email in error based on your previous eligibility to nominate vectors and illustrations.
We regret any inconvenience. Please disregard the previous email.
Regards,
The Adobe Stock Content team
-
As I already wrote, the price suits me, but the number of selected videos by Adobe categorically does not suit me. You won't earn much with that amount.
The other consideration is, even if you nominate all your videos selected in this first-stage selection process, there's no guarantee (and I suggest it's very unlikely) all your selected videos will qualify for the free collection offer - except for the better, more saleable clips at just $8.00 each for the year. One video sale to a customer will often eclipse $8.00 and much more, and over the course of 12 months will invariably add up to much more than that.
The math here is simple. The more videos that are initially nominated, the more videos will be included in the free collection and the more money will be transferred to you.
Also, as far as I understand, the video in the free collection is not removed from the sale. Well, Adobe basically chooses what has not been sold even once in the last 12 months.
A free collection is generally incomprehensible to anyone, I don’t think that all buyers will run there, many have bought and will continue to buy. I doubt that the video in the portfolio will even be marked somehow, like don't buy it, go and download it for free.
-
Also, as far as I understand, the video in the free collection is not removed from the sale. Well, Adobe basically chooses what has not been sold even once in the last 12 months.
A free collection is generally incomprehensible to anyone, I don’t think that all buyers will run there, many have bought and will continue to buy. I doubt that the video in the portfolio will even be marked somehow, like don't buy it, go and download it for free.
You're wrong.
At least that is how it works for photos: If a photo is in the free collection, any customer can download it for free (for the period of one year), and there is not even the option to pay for it.
-
Only my thoughts: I'm not a "company", but I know that sometimes it's hard for a company to understand some little human reasoning :-)
I don’t understand at all how they choose videos from the author’s portfolio, on what basis. I don't care if my videos sold in the last 12 months or not, but they chose very few videos from me, they chose a monotonous video, 70% of the same story. I personally would like all my videos to be featured in the free collection if I get paid to do so. I don't care if it's $8 or more. Okay, they say they only take what hasn't sold in a year, great, let them take it. But they do not take, but choose very few videos.
Did you understand that footages chosen in the free collection won't sell anymore on adobe and probably way less on other sites too??
-
The math here is simple. The more videos that are initially nominated, the more videos will be included in the free collection and the more money will be transferred to you.
Unbelievable. Quite the same as selling clip in standard market. Great math.
Did you understand that footages chosen in the free collection won't sell anymore on adobe and probably way less on other sites too??
No, he doesn't understand; at the third page of thread, because he doesn't want to waste time reading the first one.
He doesn't understand that proposal is to sell the clip to Adobe for one year
-
The math here is simple. The more videos that are initially nominated, the more videos will be included in the free collection and the more money will be transferred to you.
Unbelievable. Quite the same as selling clip in standard market. Great math.
Did you understand that footages chosen in the free collection won't sell anymore on adobe and probably way less on other sites too??
No, he doesn't understand; at the third page of thread, because he doesn't want to waste time reading the first one.
He doesn't understand that proposal is to sell the clip to Adobe for one year
or maybe he hasn't sold a single clip on adobe and this is the only way to make some profit...in this way it makes sense...
-
Coincidentally one of my "eligible assets" that has already sold twice on Adobe Stock just sold again for over $50. I should accept and nominate their offer of $8. It should be noted that this particular clip has also sold five times elsewhere. That $8 just keeps looking better and better. That $8 would essentially wipe out my income producing asset for the sole benefit of a corporation and it's marketing needs.
-
Coincidentally one of my "eligible assets" that has already sold twice on Adobe Stock just sold again for over $50. I should accept and nominate their offer of $8. It should be noted that this particular clip has also sold five times elsewhere. That $8 just keeps looking better and better. That $8 would essentially wipe out my income producing asset for the sole benefit of a corporation and it's marketing needs.
This is not even the main issue.
Every free clip or image is an alternative to paid images or videos created by other contributors.
It's hard to compete with free. Even if other paid images/videos are better, many "buyers" will choose a free option.
It is short-sighted to selfishly look only at the immediate little gains obtained from allowing your free assets to be downloaded for free, without looking at the bigger losses from your other assets, when free competitive alternatives are offered by other users.
As a community, we shoot ourselves in the feet. :(
-
The math here is simple. The more videos that are initially nominated, the more videos will be included in the free collection and the more money will be transferred to you.
The math here is that this is an initiative by a publicly traded company which you can guarantee will have a set budget, which will result in a set number of selections for the free collection. If 100% of people nominate 100% of their eligible clips, then I'll put good money on Adobe not select all of those clips. Sure, if a total of only 1% of eligible clips are nominated then that changing to 2% will mean more clips in the free collection... but a change from 99% to 100% isn't going to increase anything. And while the more videos that are selected, the more money will be transferred to you, that's based on them all being selected which they probably won't be... nominating more doesn't automatically mean more money.
-
Coincidentally one of my "eligible assets" that has already sold twice on Adobe Stock just sold again for over $50. I should accept and nominate their offer of $8. It should be noted that this particular clip has also sold five times elsewhere. That $8 just keeps looking better and better. That $8 would essentially wipe out my income producing asset for the sole benefit of a corporation and it's marketing needs.
This is not even the main issue.
Every free clip or image is an alternative to paid images or videos created by other contributors.
It's hard to compete with free. Even if other paid images/videos are better, many "buyers" will choose a free option.
It is short-sighted to selfishly look only at the immediate little gains obtained from allowing your free assets to be downloaded for free, without looking at the bigger losses from your other assets, when free competitive alternatives are offered by other users.
As a community, we shoot ourselves in the feet. :(
I totally agree this is not even the main issue. The main issue is much bigger than any one individual.
As a community we are not only shooting ourselves in our foot, we are shooting ourselves in the other foot as well. :(
I will never opt in to one of these offers. They do not benefit the community at all, they do however benefit a billion dollar corporation.
I have enough confidence in the quality of work I produce that I will NOT give it away. Just because it does not sell on Adobe does not mean it's not a best seller on another platform and vice versa.
Free is the kiss of death.
-
The math here is simple. The more videos that are initially nominated, the more videos will be included in the free collection and the more money will be transferred to you.
The math here is that this is an initiative by a publicly traded company which you can guarantee will have a set budget, which will result in a set number of selections for the free collection. If 100% of people nominate 100% of their eligible clips, then I'll put good money on Adobe not select all of those clips. Sure, if a total of only 1% of eligible clips are nominated then that changing to 2% will mean more clips in the free collection... but a change from 99% to 100% isn't going to increase anything. And while the more videos that are selected, the more money will be transferred to you, that's based on them all being selected which they probably won't be... nominating more doesn't automatically mean more money.
Adobe is selecting the content with their needs in mind and not the contributor's needs. Just sayin.
-
The math here is simple. The more videos that are initially nominated, the more videos will be included in the free collection and the more money will be transferred to you.
The math here is that this is an initiative by a publicly traded company which you can guarantee will have a set budget, which will result in a set number of selections for the free collection. If 100% of people nominate 100% of their eligible clips, then I'll put good money on Adobe not select all of those clips. Sure, if a total of only 1% of eligible clips are nominated then that changing to 2% will mean more clips in the free collection... but a change from 99% to 100% isn't going to increase anything. And while the more videos that are selected, the more money will be transferred to you, that's based on them all being selected which they probably won't be... nominating more doesn't automatically mean more money.
I'll make it easy to understand. You have 20 videos nominated. I've had over 200 nominations. Let's see now who gets the most money from this.
-
Here, some write about prices, that free undermines the market. Guys, there are already a lot of sites with cheap subscriptions, and it hasn't changed the market much yet. Not all buyers need it to be cheap or free, some need it to be expensive so that their project looks solid and expensive in the eyes of the customer. And these people will never buy anything for free.
-
Here, some write about prices, that free undermines the market. Guys, there are already a lot of sites with cheap subscriptions, and it hasn't changed the market much yet.
it hasn't change the market?? have you been doing stock since yesterday??what do you think all 2/3$ sales come from?
-
For all the whiners on the forum, nominate what suits you and that's it, you have this opportunity. Jessus...
-
Here, some write about prices, that free undermines the market. Guys, there are already a lot of sites with cheap subscriptions, and it hasn't changed the market much yet.
it hasn't change the market?? have you been doing stock since yesterday??what do you think all 2/3$ sales come from?
The financial crisis due to the coronavirus and the russian attack on Ukraine.
-
Here, some write about prices, that free undermines the market. Guys, there are already a lot of sites with cheap subscriptions, and it hasn't changed the market much yet.
it hasn't change the market?? have you been doing stock since yesterday??what do you think all 2/3$ sales come from?
The financial crisis due to the coronavirus and the russian attack on Ukraine.
no..2/3 $ sales come to compete with subscription model...actually coronavirus increased the need for stock because of procutions stopped working and the travel ban..
-
For all the whiners on the forum, nominate what suits you and that's it, you have this opportunity. Jessus...
Jessus... you missed the point.
Other people's nominations may impact your sales, if you create similar stuff, since it's hard for you to compete with free, even if your stuff is better.
And vice-versa.
Tragedy of the commons.
-
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.
-
The math here is simple. The more videos that are initially nominated, the more videos will be included in the free collection and the more money will be transferred to you.
The math here is that this is an initiative by a publicly traded company which you can guarantee will have a set budget, which will result in a set number of selections for the free collection. If 100% of people nominate 100% of their eligible clips, then I'll put good money on Adobe not select all of those clips. Sure, if a total of only 1% of eligible clips are nominated then that changing to 2% will mean more clips in the free collection... but a change from 99% to 100% isn't going to increase anything. And while the more videos that are selected, the more money will be transferred to you, that's based on them all being selected which they probably won't be... nominating more doesn't automatically mean more money.
I'll make it easy to understand. You have 20 videos nominated. I've had over 200 nominations. Let's see now who gets the most money from this.
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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. :)
-
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...
-
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.
-
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.
:-\
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
It’s 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 can’t be bothered anymore trying to defend simple concepts like systemic devaluation or mutual benefit. It’s clear to me the divide is more than philosophical.
-
1. I have many examples of sales on DT
DT is what stock?
-
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.
-
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 can’t help but gobble up your incredible work whether they need it or not. That’s 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 wouldn’t need to give it away anyway. Agencies already know exactly what to do with that kind of content.
So ask yourself.
-
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 can’t help but gobble up your incredible work whether they need it or not. That’s 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 wouldn’t 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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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”.
-
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.
-
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
-
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
-
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.
-
We’ll 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 haven’t nominated a single asset. Furthermore I haven’t uploaded anything at all to any agency since the beginning of this year. In light of that I’d suggest that your “simple logic” isn’t necessarily logical at all. And without the kind of proof Zero Talent was asking about I’d 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 it’s worth though, I’m 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. That’s not entirely true. I’m 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”. It’s highly selective and targeted. I can easily gauge its success with real data and at the same time I’m not lining the pockets further of those who really need it least.
But whatever, good luck to you.
-
In light of that I’d suggest that your “simple logic” isn’t necessarily logical at all. And without the kind of proof Zero Talent was asking about I’d 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.
-
Once again you are jumping to inaccurate conclusions and seeing only what you want to see. Given what I’ve 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.
-
Certainly I also have my own bias, but it is the product of more than 40 years experience in the industry.
David, don't tell him this! he claimed to be a great expert!
DT is what stock?
He knows well the agencies
people will go into your portfolio and see what you have
He deeply knows how the client search around, and how long they take time to analyze a single portfolio
And the more buyers buy something, the higher the portfolio rating.
He also knows everything about the search rating! And this is the reason for which he has so many thousand of unsold clips in Adobe
a fixed monthly price for unlimited downloads leads to an increase in income and stability.
Ah. Ok. I understand.
You're working for an agency.
Or you're trolling us.
-
Ah. Ok. I understand.
You're working for an agency.
Or you're trolling us.
Back to serious.
It seems the issue is going to be "free or not free".
I'm in the middle: the proposal has been tested with photos, and a lot of people was happy with it after one year. I'm one of them.
Giving to Adobe a small portion of still images for one year with reasonable amount in return was good for me, I see a good growth in sales, and I can think that this happened because a good free section has attracted new buyers in Adobe market.
Unfortunately, the video clip market seems to be very different: clip production can be much more expensive, and the produced clip can give much higher profit in return; 8$ a year for a free clip seems a very very low agreement. 5$ for still is really not comparable with 8$ for clip.
So for me the problem is the price, and not in general the "free against not free".
We all know that everything has a price (in normal market business I mean...). If Adobe should offer 40$ for one year free clip I'm sure a lot of us would change ideas about the answer.
Finally we have to admit that Adobe is transparent and never in any way forces contributors to partecipate, and this is fair and good.
It's an opportunity and everyone can take their conclusion.
This is the point we're talking about: the personal conclusion.
Apart from trolls
-
DavidK, I've been selling my videos on subscription sites for years now, where people pay $16 a month and download my entire portfolio in any quantity. These subscription stocks give me my main income. And you think that $8 per video + ads is a bad option for me? :) I looked at everything that Adobe chose from me, I would have given this video for $ 2, and even for free :).
-
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.
:-\
I can't comment with regards to footage but the images I nominated for the free collection had zero impact on how they performed at other agencies.
I can only presume this comes down to the fact that most people who acquire the images do so from their companies Adobe account. They are not paying for them directly for them themselves and therefore they value their time more which means they won't shop around because A) takes too long and B) they don't have the ability to create / setup a second subscription account with another agency
Sales volume and $ for me has increased significantly since the introduction off the free images. My weekly ranking still holds the same 150-800 depending on the time of year. The only logically explanation is they have gained more customers. This may well be at the expense of other agencies but as they are my No1 agency in terms of $ I don't have any concerns there either. The drop in $ at Shutterstock per month is more to do with their pricing structure than that of AS. Incidentally, they routinely license footage at $0.38 these days.
I feel there is no right or wrong answer here and each person needs to decide for themselves But I can say from experience, the free images at AS still perform at other agencies. That doesn't guarantee footage won't suffer but it also makes me think there is also a very good chance that it will continue to do well (or as well as it has done).
That said, I do feel the $ for the free footage is a little on the low side but I can see why given the the sub price at AS and especially at SS.
-
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.
:-\
I can't comment with regards to footage but the images I nominated for the free collection had zero impact on how they performed at other agencies.
I can only presume this comes down to the fact that most people who acquire the images do so from their companies Adobe account. They are not paying for them directly for them themselves and therefore they value their time more which means they won't shop around because A) takes too long and B) they don't have the ability to create / setup a second subscription account with another agency
Sales volume and $ for me has increased significantly since the introduction off the free images. My weekly ranking still holds the same 150-800 depending on the time of year. The only logically explanation is they have gained more customers. This may well be at the expense of other agencies but as they are my No1 agency in terms of $ I don't have any concerns there either. The drop in $ at Shutterstock per month is more to do with their pricing structure than that of AS. Incidentally, they routinely license footage at $0.38 these days.
I feel there is no right or wrong answer here and each person needs to decide for themselves But I can say from experience, the free images at AS still perform at other agencies. That doesn't guarantee footage won't suffer but it also makes me think there is also a very good chance that it will continue to do well (or as well as it has done).
That said, I do feel the $ for the free footage is a little on the low side but I can see why given the the sub price at AS and especially at SS.
if it was like you described it,what would be the abobe benefits to create a free collection if buyers keep on buying those image on other agencies?? adobe has the data,their goal is to gain new buyers and it brings to less buyers that buy elsewhere..this is math...
btw video is very different from photo...it's not oversaturated like photo and hasn't many free sites like unsplash yet...
-
Bringing new buyers from smaller agencies that are dying perhaps? I've seen a small drop in SS earnings, no change in volume, Increase in sales and $ at iStock but nothing close to that of AS. Nearly 3500dls in the last 30 days. All I can go off is my own data and it suggests that AS are making good decisions, as far as my port goes anyway! Also, I'd imagine he free images will bring in people who aren't signed up to any agency at all... new buyers to the market.
As far as saturation, as you say, images are far more abundant but so are the sales. Footage has dropped in $ a lot of late but the volume hasn't elevated to the point that it can make up for that drop. SS $0.38 basically treats footage the same as images. I stopped spending as much time with footage development as soon as I seen this drop and focus on what will earn me the most for X amount of time.
-
One of my clips requested for the free collection, was just sold today and I got $28.
Well done AS!
This is what I expect from you, instead of giving away good material for free!
Let's not shoot ourselves in the foot anymore!
;)
-
Haha, $8 to give your nominated clips away for a whole year? Only short-sighted contributors might take that easy-money. But they're shooting themselves in the foot.
All you need is a single €28 sale to earn more than what you get for 3 years in the free collection.
-
Haha, $8 to give your nominated clips away for a whole year? Only short-sighted contributors might take that easy-money. But they're shooting themselves in the foot.
All you need is a single €28 sale to earn more than what you get for 3 years in the free collection.
Yet there are contributors singing the praises.
Giving their work away---> complaining about falling income--->giving their work---->complaining about falling income---> giving their work away---->
I can understand it for people that have only been at this for a few months/ couple of years where a few dollars can make a big difference to their overall income. They don't know about hitting the wall; but I’ve seen some people literally cropping up ten years later singing the same tune. Even though it hasn’t worked for them for ten years and their income has steadily declined! :o
-
All you need is a single €28 sale to earn more than what you get for 3 years in the free collection.
And we will sell it for $28, and we will get $8 for participation in the program. One does not interfere. Plus advertising portfolio.
-
The more people opt out of the program, the more money I get. 8)
-
I look forward to finding out how many of your clips get selected
-
I look forward to finding out how many of your clips get selected
This will stretch out a lot over time. Adobe picks up every month. It seems within a year, or half a year. But I'm also interested in whether there will be an increase in sales from this advertisement, I hope it will.
-
I look forward to finding out how many of your clips get selected
not so many seeing the desperate need of giving away his clips almost for free...adobe nominates only valuable clips seeing what they choose from my port...i mean they could choose unsold clips with low value just to fill the collection,they don't....
-
not so many seeing the desperate need of giving away his clips almost for free...adobe nominates only valuable clips seeing what they choose from my port...i mean they could choose unsold clips with low value just to fill the collection,they don't....
They monetize those videos . They have to pay 0 after those 8$. They will only select good sellers. If I would guess it will be 3 to 4x times more they would to pay in commissions to those acquired for 1 year files than if they had to pay a 35% for the sales they expect. Remember, they run the maths and they know exactly. ::)
-
not so many seeing the desperate need of giving away his clips almost for free...adobe nominates only valuable clips seeing what they choose from my port...i mean they could choose unsold clips with low value just to fill the collection,they don't....
They monetize those videos . They have to pay 0 after those 8$. They will only select good sellers. If I would guess it will be 3 to 4x times more they would to pay in commissions to those acquired for 1 year files than if they had to pay a 35% for the sales they expect. Remember, they run the maths and they know exactly. ::)
have you read the actual AS offer?? they DON'T select only good sellers! exactly the opposite!
they're choosing videos with at best a few sales in the last year! no reason to believe ALL those accepted would suddenly be getting many more sales.
as far as making 3-4x more - unless you're Milo Minderbinder, it's hard to show a profit on FREE offerings. And after that year the artist still gets their commission
instead the free collection is a loss leader - attracting users who they hope will stay to buy something
-
instead the free collection is a loss leader - attracting users who they hope will stay to buy something
I don't think Adobe will attract new buyers. I treat this program as an advertisement for my portfolio, for which I am also paid money.
-
I don't think Adobe will attract new buyers. I treat this program as an advertisement for my portfolio, for which I am also paid money.
And it, unlike us, adobe conducts market research, and conducts appropriate policies. I trust adobe.
You think Adobe makes market research and you trust them, yet you believe they pay you money for videos to give away for free, but it doesn't attract new customers to their site, so they are just wasting their money without anything in return? ???
So which one is it?
Make up yor mind. Either Adobe knows what its doing and the free gallery is attracting new customers, or they have no clue what they are doing if they just pay contributors for images to offer for free and don't gain new customers.
If it does not attract any new customers, then all of this is nothing but a miscalculation by Adobe that harms the whole microstock industry.
-
For $50 per clip I'm in. Can you pay me that much? ;)
-
I don't think Adobe will attract new buyers. I treat this program as an advertisement for my portfolio, for which I am also paid money.
And it, unlike us, adobe conducts market research, and conducts appropriate policies. I trust adobe.
You think Adobe makes market research and you trust them, yet you believe they pay you money for videos to give away for free, but it doesn't attract new customers to their site, so they are just wasting their money without anything in return? ???
This is really becoming a funny show 😂
He doesn't even read the proposal from Adobe and he think that there will be a monthly add of this buying offer...
Let's back to serious 😉
Attract new buyers with free section it's the main target for Adobe and it's absolutely obvious,
-
For $50 per clip I'm in. Can you pay me that much? ;)
This would be a reasonable amount for me too
-
I did this with photos and vectors but not gonna do it with videos. The pay isn't high enough for that.
-
So which one is it?
Make up yor mind. Either Adobe knows what its doing and the free gallery is attracting new customers, or they have no clue what they are doing if they just pay contributors for images to offer for free and don't gain new customers.
If it does not attract any new customers, then all of this is nothing but a miscalculation by Adobe that harms the whole microstock industry.
Work is work. Work is not only a profit, but also a cost. I said my opinion. I think more about my profits than adobe's. Obviously adobe thinks it will attract outside buyers to the site, or maybe adobe wants to increase the amount of traffic on the site, which will lead to an increase in the overall ranking of the site and, as a result, will give better positions in Google.
There is no harm to the industry. Ask how Netflix makes money. Free collections, low subscription prices, and unlimited downloads are the future of stocks and is long overdue. And this can be seen from the daily howl on the forum of those dinosaurs who want to sell their video only for a high price, for 50 or more dollars, and do not have success in sales. I do not want to say that the sector of expensive sales will die, no, but in it the success will be more likely with professionals, who are very few in stocks.
-
Either way, participating in the free program will bring more existing buyers to my portfolio. And this is the main point!
And even if not, $8 for a lot of videos is a very profitable option. I agree to give Adobe half of my portfolio for $1 even.
-
Lol
-
All you need is a single €28 sale to earn more than what you get for 3 years in the free collection.
And we will sell it for $28, and we will get $8 for participation in the program. One does not interfere. Plus advertising portfolio.
What are you talking about? Once you lock your clips in the free section, you cannot sell it for $28 anymore for at least 1 year.
There is no evidence that enabling free assets results in more sales of your regular portfolio. MAYBE some customers purchase other clips, but not necessarily from YOUR portfolio. So the only real winner here is Adobe, not the individual artist.
-
All you need is a single €28 sale to earn more than what you get for 3 years in the free collection.
And we will sell it for $28, and we will get $8 for participation in the program. One does not interfere. Plus advertising portfolio.
What are you talking about? Once you lock your clips in the free section, you cannot sell it for $28 anymore for at least 1 year.
There is no evidence that enabling free assets results in more sales of your regular portfolio. MAYBE some customers purchase other clips, but not necessarily from YOUR portfolio. So the only real winner here is Adobe, not the individual artist.
"Can Adobe offer Free collection content in paid offerings?
Yes - content in the free collection can be offered by Adobe to customers for free or for a fee (e.g., as part of a subscription or enterprise contract). "
In any case, it means that I will sell this video on other stocks. This video hasn't been sold on adobe for a year, do you understand that?
As for advertising my portfolio, I don't mind if buyers go into my portfolio and see what I have there. Let them go more into my portfolio than into the portfolio of those who do not participate in this program. 8)
-
Lol
I am also glad that almost all the participants of this forum will not give their video to the free collection. 8)
Lol
-
Either way, participating in the free program will bring more existing buyers to my portfolio. And this is the main point!
And even if not, $8 for a lot of videos is a very profitable option. I agree to give Adobe half of my portfolio for $1 even.
Why don't you write Adobe your concept simply giving away your portfolio for 1$ each clip? You're so sure that this will bring you many people to look at your full port to buy more clips.
These idea seems... Let me think... It's quite near the famous "great news" we had in the past from several agencies:
"we will pay less, but you will have much more sales"
"we will pay less but you will gain a new market slice"
"we will pay less but your portfolio will gain great visibility"
Of course none of these happened to anyone.
It's like a broken record but despite this after years of experiences someone seems still to believe this.
Once again, Adobe seems to me fair and good with contributors, so I'm not talking to them. I'm talking to you. It seems you're just arrived from Mars.
Listen to me, send your port to Adobe for 1$, no one will know, but trying to convince other experienced contributors it's hard (and useless) way to go
-
derby, I'm not convincing anyone here. I answer questions and write my opinion. The topic was opened by adobe representatives and they are also in it, why should I write to them when they already read everything.
I have many thousands of videos in my portfolios, of course, even for $ 1 it will be a huge amount.
Read me more carefully, I already wrote that I get the main income from agencies that sell my videos almost for free, for a few cents. And I don't have to believe it, it's a reality that has been around for many years.
-
derby, I'm not convincing anyone here. I answer questions and write my opinion. The topic was opened by adobe representatives and they are also in it, why should I write to them when they already read everything.
I have many thousands of videos in my portfolios, of course, even for $ 1 it will be a huge amount.
Read me more carefully, I already wrote that I get the main income from agencies that sell my videos almost for free, for a few cents. And I don't have to believe it, it's a reality that has been around for many years.
You have cured my insomnia. Thank you.
-
All you need is a single €28 sale to earn more than what you get for 3 years in the free collection.
And we will sell it for $28, and we will get $8 for participation in the program. One does not interfere. Plus advertising portfolio.
What are you talking about? Once you lock your clips in the free section, you cannot sell it for $28 anymore for at least 1 year.
There is no evidence that enabling free assets results in more sales of your regular portfolio. MAYBE some customers purchase other clips, but not necessarily from YOUR portfolio. So the only real winner here is Adobe, not the individual artist.
"Can Adobe offer Free collection content in paid offerings?
Yes - content in the free collection can be offered by Adobe to customers for free or for a fee (e.g., as part of a subscription or enterprise contract). "
In any case, it means that I will sell this video on other stocks. This video hasn't been sold on adobe for a year, do you understand that?
As for advertising my portfolio, I don't mind if buyers go into my portfolio and see what I have there. Let them go more into my portfolio than into the portfolio of those who do not participate in this program. 8)
You really need to read things through thoroughly... i.e. you might want to read the section directly after that!
"You will receive an upfront payment within 30 days after the start of each 12-month period where your content is in the free collection. Content in the free collection will not receive any additional royalties beyond the upfront payment".
i.e. it may be offered by Adobe to customers for free or for a fee, but you're not getting any of that fee!
-
All you need is a single €28 sale to earn more than what you get for 3 years in the free collection.
And we will sell it for $28, and we will get $8 for participation in the program. One does not interfere. Plus advertising portfolio.
What are you talking about? Once you lock your clips in the free section, you cannot sell it for $28 anymore for at least 1 year.
There is no evidence that enabling free assets results in more sales of your regular portfolio. MAYBE some customers purchase other clips, but not necessarily from YOUR portfolio. So the only real winner here is Adobe, not the individual artist.
"Can Adobe offer Free collection content in paid offerings?
Yes - content in the free collection can be offered by Adobe to customers for free or for a fee (e.g., as part of a subscription or enterprise contract). "
This simply means THEY can monetize the free content, not you. You will only get $8 for the whole year.
-
This simply means THEY can monetize the free content, not you. You will only get $8 for the whole year.
ok.
I already wrote that this video will be sold in other agencies.
On adobe, anyway, this video was not sold for a whole year. And adobe will pay $8 for it.
-
They asked for vertical videos claiming they are in high demand. So, I uploaded 100 vertical background animations on July 2022.
Now, in October, most of my vertical videos were selected for the free collection. It doesn't make sense!
They also selected other 997 videos that are in high demand across the other agencies. Many of them have 1, 2 or more downloads at Adobe Stock itself.
Not for me this offer, thanks !
-
They also selected other 997 videos
You have a good video, it seems that no one has taken so much from anyone.
I would like to see your portfolio.
-
here it is: https://stock.adobe.com/contributor/205909344/Roddig
-
They asked for vertical videos claiming they are in high demand. So, I uploaded 100 vertical background animations on July 2022.
Now, in October, most of my vertical videos were selected for the free collection. It doesn't make sense!
They also selected other 997 videos that are in high demand across the other agencies. Many of them have 1, 2 or more downloads at Adobe Stock itself.
Not for me this offer, thanks !
To me it sounded more like that social network vertical stuff is in demand, I don't know, some kind of premade generic reels for "fake" social accounts to use and gain following, rather than animated backgrounds. Not trying to be smart here, just thinking out loud.
-
Hi Everyone,
Heads up! Videos will be eligible for nomination into the Adobe Stock Free collection starting tomorrow (Tuesday, October 11). An email with detailed information will be sent to those of you with eligible content, tomorrow morning (PDT). Check your inbox then, and let me know if you have any questions after you read it.
Thank you,
Mat Hayward
Hello Mat,
I was wondering if there are any "statistics" from the impact the free image collection had/have regarding attracting new buyers?
We can all share our own experiences, but is there any official statement from Adobe?
Is the expanding of the free collection to videos result of a success in getting more photo-buyers, or is Adobe just "following the flow", afraid of loosing the clients it already have?
-
Hi Everyone,
Heads up! Videos will be eligible for nomination into the Adobe Stock Free collection starting tomorrow (Tuesday, October 11). An email with detailed information will be sent to those of you with eligible content, tomorrow morning (PDT). Check your inbox then, and let me know if you have any questions after you read it.
Thank you,
Mat Hayward
Hello Mat,
I was wondering if there are any "statistics" from the impact the free image collection had/have regarding attracting new buyers?
We can all share our own experiences, but is there any official statement from Adobe?
Is the expanding of the free collection to videos result of a success in getting more photo-buyers, or is Adobe just "following the flow", afraid of loosing the clients it already have?
Thanks for the question @KoKi. I don't have any statistics to share with you. The program is designed to attract new buyers with and it is working.
As a reminder, please make your final decision on video nominations today. The option to nominate, or remove nomination will close tomorrow. I expect the final decisions and payments will not be complete until near the end of November, so thank you in advance for your patience as the process continues.
Thanks very much to all of you for your participation so far. Without you, there is no us.
-Mat Hayward
-
Hi Everyone,
Heads up! Videos will be eligible for nomination into the Adobe Stock Free collection starting tomorrow (Tuesday, October 11). An email with detailed information will be sent to those of you with eligible content, tomorrow morning (PDT). Check your inbox then, and let me know if you have any questions after you read it.
Thank you,
Mat Hayward
Hello Mat,
I was wondering if there are any "statistics" from the impact the free image collection had/have regarding attracting new buyers?
We can all share our own experiences, but is there any official statement from Adobe?
Is the expanding of the free collection to videos result of a success in getting more photo-buyers, or is Adobe just "following the flow", afraid of loosing the clients it already have?
Thanks for the question @KoKi. I don't have any statistics to share with you. The program is designed to attract new buyers with and it is working.
As a reminder, please make your final decision on video nominations today. The option to nominate, or remove nomination will close tomorrow. I expect the final decisions and payments will not be complete until near the end of November, so thank you in advance for your patience as the process continues.
Thanks very much to all of you for your participation so far. Without you, there is no us.
-Mat Hayward
If you have info saying that it attracts new customers, it will be nice to know if it attracts really new customers, or rather customers from other platforms (or the ratio between these 2 categories).
Because while the second case might be great for AS, it might not be so great for its contributors => robbing Peter to pay Paul (or worse).
Sharing some facts could help you and AS addressing the push back seen on this thread.
-
If you have info saying that it attracts new customers, it will be nice to know if it attracts really new customers, or rather customers from other platforms (or the ratio between these 2 categories).
Who cares. I don't care where the buyer comes from in my portfolio.
-
Who cares.
The person who asked.
-
Bets are made. The time for reflection has expired. Who agreed, he agreed and did the right thing. Who did not agree to the exit. Both selection and deselection are no longer possible.
-
If you have info saying that it attracts new customers, it will be nice to know if it attracts really new customers, or rather customers from other platforms (or the ratio between these 2 categories).
Who cares. I don't care where the buyer comes from in my portfolio.
:o this is embarrassing. You didn't even understand what you were signing up for/ read the terms. You aren't reading people's posts before replying either. You might care to know if you are getting more cash or a if a "new" buyer has just switched over from an agency that pays you better. Why wouldn't you.
-
Justanotherphotographer, on adobe normal prices for videos. The income of the author from the sale of videos is very often more than on shutterstock. Adobe is the only stock that still pays authors well. Therefore, the arrival of a buyer from any stock agency in my adobe portfolio will only increase my income. And it's strange that you don't understand elementary mathematics.
But for me, this is not even the main thing, I believe that the more videos they buy from me, the higher the rating of my portfolio will be, and the more income. The question of price has never been the main one for me, I have always believed that the lower the prices, the more sales and the more income. And as time has shown, it is. You are a dinosaur who thinks in ideas that are long dead.
-
... The question of price has never been the main one for me, I have always believed that the lower the prices, the more sales and the more income. And as time has shown, it is. You are a dinosaur who thinks in ideas that are long dead.
Sorry, your attitude is not a new one. It has been around since day one of microstock. As long as agencies have been trying to exploit us and our work. I actually don’t know how long you have been doing this but I have been at it a while. Long enough to have seen many, many people with the same attitude as you. None of them stay in the business more than a few years, or they change their attitude and learn to value their work. I know I can’t convince you, I couldn’t convince any of the others either.
-
... The question of price has never been the main one for me, I have always believed that the lower the prices, the more sales and the more income. And as time has shown, it is. You are a dinosaur who thinks in ideas that are long dead.
Sorry, your attitude is not a new one. It has been around since day one of microstock. As long as agencies have been trying to exploit us and our work. I actually don’t know how long you have been doing this but I have been at it a while. Long enough to have seen many, many people with the same attitude as you. None of them stay in the business more than a few years, or they change their attitude and learn to value their work. I know I can’t convince you, I couldn’t convince any of the others either.
I have been uploading videos to stock sites for over 10 years. And I am open to new offers that bring a stable income. The answer to your questions is here, this is already a statistic that has been around for several years.
https://www.microstockgroup.com/37398/37398/msg581167/#msg581167 (https://www.microstockgroup.com/37398/37398/msg581167/#msg581167)
-
Justanotherphotographer, on adobe normal prices for videos. The income of the author from the sale of videos is very often more than on shutterstock. Adobe is the only stock that still pays authors well. Therefore, the arrival of a buyer from any stock agency in my adobe portfolio will only increase my income. And it's strange that you don't understand elementary mathematics.
But for me, this is not even the main thing, I believe that the more videos they buy from me, the higher the rating of my portfolio will be, and the more income. The question of price has never been the main one for me, I have always believed that the lower the prices, the more sales and the more income. And as time has shown, it is. You are a dinosaur who thinks in ideas that are long dead.
Not sure I follow your logic regarding prices. Yes, lower prices lead to more sales. The problem is if the price was zero, there would be no income. So logically, there must be a curve that would perhaps show that lowering prices could lead to more sales and income, but at some point when the prices become too low, the contributors income will trend toward zero. I think that many contributors experience shows that we are in the down part of that curve.
-
Not sure I follow your logic regarding prices. Yes, lower prices lead to more sales. The problem is if the price was zero, there would be no income. So logically, there must be a curve that would perhaps show that lowering prices could lead to more sales and income, but at some point when the prices become too low, the contributors income will trend toward zero. I think that many contributors experience shows that we are in the down part of that curve.
The gains are also very short term as there isn't a bottomless number of buyers. The first few people to sell their work for pennies rake it in for a short time on these sites until enough people join dilute the earnings pool. In the case of Freepik, for example, the contributor then realises giving work to people who don't think it has value also has additional drawbacks...
-
I have been uploading videos to stock sites for over 10 years. And I am open to new offers that bring a stable income. The answer to your questions is here, this is already a statistic that has been around for several years.
https://www.microstockgroup.com/37398/37398/msg581167/#msg581167 (https://www.microstockgroup.com/37398/37398/msg581167/#msg581167)
What statistic?
I have also been on the stock sites for over ten years. I make a six figure income and am well into 7 figures overall. The last two years have been my best in terms of earnings. What's your point?
-
I think that many contributors experience shows that we are in the down part of that curve.
If you are at the bottom, then the income will be maximum. This is if we talk about the current market situation. Not many people are lucky enough to be at the bottom of the curve, only those whose videos are sold on sites like Storyblocks, Elements and the like. So for you to understand, you still need to earn your video to be sold for a penny.
Such realities. 8) ;D
The gains are also very short term as there isn't a bottomless number of buyers. The first few people to sell their work for pennies rake it in for a short time on these sites until enough people join dilute the earnings pool. In the case of Freepik, for example, the contributor then realises giving work to people who don't think it has value also has additional drawbacks...
This can be said about any stock. Competition is everywhere. Stock sites are also attracting more and more buyers. Like Adobe in this thread. As the practice of recent years has shown, the income on subscription sites does not decrease for authors, if they work, of course.
-
I have been uploading videos to stock sites for over 10 years. And I am open to new offers that bring a stable income. The answer to your questions is here, this is already a statistic that has been around for several years.
https://www.microstockgroup.com/37398/37398/msg581167/#msg581167 (https://www.microstockgroup.com/37398/37398/msg581167/#msg581167)
What statistic?
I have also been on the stock sites for over ten years. I make a six figure income and am well into 7 figures overall. The last two years have been my best in terms of earnings. What's your point?
Ranking stocks by income.
Do you have more than $100,000 per month?
Why are you wasting your time on this forum then. Everyone has their own income and their own strategy for increasing it.
-
I have been uploading videos to stock sites for over 10 years. And I am open to new offers that bring a stable income. The answer to your questions is here, this is already a statistic that has been around for several years.
https://www.microstockgroup.com/37398/37398/msg581167/#msg581167 (https://www.microstockgroup.com/37398/37398/msg581167/#msg581167)
What statistic?
I have also been on the stock sites for over ten years. I make a six figure income and am well into 7 figures overall. The last two years have been my best in terms of earnings. What's your point?
Ranking stocks by income.
Do you have more than $100,000 per month?
Why are you wasting your time on this forum then. Everyone has their own income and their own strategy for increasing it.
When people say "income" they usually mean yearly
-
Justanotherphotographer, so write right away that you have stocks and more than 100 thousand dollars a year and no one will argue with you. I don't think there are many people on this forum with that kind of income. But the rest have to earn some money. Not everyone here is in the professional league.
-
Not everyone here is in the professional league
And this is a very good reason for listening to him, and to profs in general, instead listening to low earners suggestions and tips.
(... Assuming everyone would like to grow up and not to kill his own market... sometimes it seems the opposite....)
-
derby, Everyone has their own limit of possibilities, desires and needs. In big business, there are big expenses, and how much money remains clean in the end is still a question. It's just that in all these conversations, one must immediately draw a line about who these conversations concern and who they do not concern. The approaches of people with different income levels will be radically different. If I had 100 thousand a year, I would not twitch either.
Although I know a stocker who, with such an income, is happy to sell his video on subscription stocks too.
-
Do you have more than $100,000 per month?
Why are you wasting your time on this forum then.
That's the most dumb reply. If someone makes six fig earning, one should appreciate his guts to come out and tell the positive side when everyone talks about the negative.
And he is not wasting his time on this forum, Forum is for everyone.
-
I concur... the forum is to get hints and tips, give hints and tips, keep abreast of the latest news and happenings in the world of stock, have the occasional argument, share the best recipes for homemade doner kebabs etc etc. It doesn't all suddenly become pointless at a certain dollar amount.
-
Justanotherphotographer, so write right away that you have stocks and more than 100 thousand dollars a year and no one will argue with you. I don't think there are many people on this forum with that kind of income. But the rest have to earn some money. Not everyone here is in the professional league.
If that's true? Anonymous can make up anything he wants. He's in Indonesia and 0.0053 Indian Rupee to a pound. 6 figures doesn't include the 2 to the right of the decimal point.
Do you have more than $100,000 per month?
Why are you wasting your time on this forum then.
That's the most dumb reply. If someone makes six fig earning, one should appreciate his guts to come out and tell the positive side when everyone talks about the negative.
And he is not wasting his time on this forum, Forum is for everyone.
If he is and do you believe anything that anyone says. I'm the ruler of a small country, you need to listen to me and believe.
-
If that's true? Anonymous can make up anything he wants. He's in Indonesia and 0.0053 Indian Rupee to a pound. 6 figures doesn't include the 2 to the right of the decimal point.
There is something called reliability in an anonymous internet forum.
Justanotherphotographer is here from years, he wrote a lot of posts and did many good comments; at the end, I don't see any reason at all not to trust him.
By the way, everyone can take his own conclusions and decide who is trustworthy and who's not
-
If that's true? Anonymous can make up anything he wants. He's in Indonesia and 0.0053 Indian Rupee to a pound. 6 figures doesn't include the 2 to the right of the decimal point.
It doesn't matter if he's lying or telling the truth. The only question is the amount of income and at what amount you can not participate in new programs and not take risks. This is what I wrote about. The strategy of each is based only on the amount of income that he has. Therefore, there will always be different points of view.
-
So do we know when will the results come out?
-
So do we know when will the results come out?
Closer to the end of November. Another few weeks, thanks for your patience!
Mat Hayward
-
So do we know when will the results come out?
Closer to the end of November. Another few weeks, thanks for your patience!
Mat Hayward
Thank you Mat.
-
I have thousands of video files on adobe stock but I haven't received any email and I saw just moments ago that nominations are over.
I received the nomination for the free photo collection in the last two years and I don't know if I have received any nomination for the free video collection.
Even for the photo collection I did not receive any email, and I just happened to see on my dashboard that I had been nominated. I never go to the dashboard and I always have the daily earnings page open. I would like to know if I have been nominated for video collection and especially in the future would it be better to receive emails for these communications. Otherwise, as in this case, you run the risk of missing an opportunity.
Please, Mat Hayward, how can I check this? Thanks
-
jovannig, only by reading this forum could you get this information. The train has already left and you are late.
-
I have thousands of video files on adobe stock but I haven't received any email and I saw just moments ago that nominations are over.
I received the nomination for the free photo collection in the last two years and I don't know if I have received any nomination for the free video collection.
Even for the photo collection I did not receive any email, and I just happened to see on my dashboard that I had been nominated. I never go to the dashboard and I always have the daily earnings page open. I would like to know if I have been nominated for video collection and especially in the future would it be better to receive emails for these communications. Otherwise, as in this case, you run the risk of missing an opportunity.
Please, Mat Hayward, how can I check this? Thanks
You need to make sure you are opted in to receive marketing emails at Adobe. We did send out emails to contributors with files eligible for nomination, you might find it in your spam folder.
The window to nominate has been closed so unfortunately, if you didn't nominate during that window, we won't be able to consider your files this round.
Thank you,
Mat Hayward
-
Thanks Mat.
I went to my profile settings and changed the option.
However I did not receive any email from you regarding the nomination, neither now nor in June for photo nomination.
I usually receive an email per day from Adobe, regarding the daily earnings. I also checked in the spam folder but I don't have any email from you.
It's a shame because I definitely would have joined the proposal.
-
Thanks Mat.
I went to my profile settings and changed the option.
However I did not receive any email from you regarding the nomination, neither now nor in June for photo nomination.
I usually receive an email per day from Adobe, regarding the daily earnings. I also checked in the spam folder but I don't have any email from you.
It's a shame because I definitely would have joined the proposal.
The train is lost dear, you can't do anything now.
-
You need to make sure you are opted in to receive marketing emails at Adobe. We did send out emails to contributors with files eligible for nomination, you might find it in your spam folder.
Do you mean the activation of these items? Or something else? I have these 2 items activated, but I also did not receive letters from adobe about the start of the program.
EMAIL PREFERENCES
Email me:
Daily moderation updates
Daily earnings summary
-
Hi Everyone,
I want to let you know that the transfer process from paid to Free for approved opted in videos has begun. Some of you should be seeing your balance already changed. An email will be sent out later today with confirmation of the number of approved files.
Thank you for your participation!
Mat Hayward
-
4 clips were selected by AS, I've nominated 23 only (not my best of course)
-
Hi Everyone,
I want to let you know that the transfer process from paid to Free for approved opted in videos has begun. Some of you should be seeing your balance already changed. An email will be sent out later today with confirmation of the number of approved files.
Thank you for your participation!
Mat Hayward
1. Where can I see which videos have been selected?
2. Is that all, or will you also choose next month? How many more months will the selection last?
-
Hi Everyone,
I want to let you know that the transfer process from paid to Free for approved opted in videos has begun. Some of you should be seeing your balance already changed. An email will be sent out later today with confirmation of the number of approved files.
Thank you for your participation!
Mat Hayward
1. Where can I see which videos have been selected?
2. Is that all, or will you also choose next month? How many more months will the selection last?
To see the approved files, visit the Dashboard section of the contributor portal. Click the button that says "filter by price tier." Select "Free" and then filter by video if you have multiple asset types approved.
I do not anticipate more selections being made this round.
Thank you,
Mat Hayward
-
lol.. I'm so bad at making stock footage that my clips are not good enough even for the free collection :-[ --> none selected :P
-
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.
-
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?
-
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 weren’t 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.
-
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.
-
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 weren’t 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.
-
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 don’t worry too much, I don’t 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.
-
If there are those who take part in this program and think that adobe did not fool them, write about it.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
Her Ugliness, did you have at least one video nominated?
-
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:
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:
The text said:
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?
-
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.
-
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 weren’t 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:
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.
-
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. ;)
-
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?
-
And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:
The text said:
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?
-
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...
-
And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:
The text said:
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.
-
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?
-
And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:
The text said:
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.
-
And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:
The text said:
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.
What is the size of your video portfolio? How many videos do you sell per year?
You probably did not know, but adobe takes into its free collection only the video that has not been sold even once in the last year.
Perhaps you want to say that all your videos are sold within a year. Which I highly doubt.
-
You probably did not know, but adobe takes into its free collection only the video that has not been sold even once in the last year.
While they did say that, I had videos eligible for nomination that had 0, 1 and 2 sales.
-
You probably did not know, but adobe takes into its free collection only the video that has not been sold even once in the last year.
While they did say that, I had videos eligible for nomination that had 0, 1 and 2 sales.
me too...even videos that had 3 sales and videos uploaded within 6 months that we can consider brand new videos with a good chance to have a sale soon...
I think that adobe wants the free collection to be appealing to the viewer that's why the choose only good staff....
-
And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:
The text said:
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.
What is the size of your video portfolio? How many videos do you sell per year?
You probably did not know, but adobe takes into its free collection only the video that has not been sold even once in the last year.
Perhaps you want to say that all your videos are sold within a year. Which I highly doubt.
I have 500+ videos. And about 100 video sales I think, 7x €70, 40x €20-€28 range and many below €20 all the way down to €2.80.
So they definitely did not all sell, I have a couple of strong sellers and many duds, but Adobe also nominated strong sellers that have been sold at least once this year. So giving up those videos would be a bad choice.
-
...
What is the size of your video portfolio? How many videos do you sell per year?
You probably did not know, but adobe takes into its free collection only the video that has not been sold even once in the last year.
Perhaps you want to say that all your videos are sold within a year. Which I highly doubt.
amazing Chutzpah! you demand from others what you refuse to supply!
What is the size of your video portfolio? How many videos do you sell per year?
-
And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:
The text said:
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.
What is the size of your video portfolio? How many videos do you sell per year?
You probably did not know, but adobe takes into its free collection only the video that has not been sold even once in the last year.
Perhaps you want to say that all your videos are sold within a year. Which I highly doubt.
I have 500+ videos. And about 100 video sales I think, 7x €70, 40x €20-€28 range and many below €20 all the way down to €2.80.
So they definitely did not all sell, I have a couple of strong sellers and many duds, but Adobe also nominated strong sellers that have been sold at least once this year. So giving up those videos would be a bad choice.
If out of 500+ videos you only sell 10-20 videos, and the number of these sales is 100, then 480 videos are not of high quality. It if to argue following your logic.
-
...you only sell 10-20 videos...
Did I miss the part where he said that?
-
Will there be any new additions to the collection in December? Program closed?
-
I'm guessing that...
2. Is that all, or will you also choose next month? How many more months will the selection last?
Plus
I do not anticipate more selections being made this round.
Plus no new updates, and it being the 29th of December... means that's almost certainly a no. I'm sure you'll be informed here, and/or via email, if that changes.
-
Will there be any new additions to the collection in December? Program closed?
No, there will not be new additions to the Free collection in December.
Thanks for asking,
Mat Hayward
-
Will there be any new additions to the collection in December? Program closed?
No, there will not be new additions to the Free collection in December.
Thanks for asking,
Mat Hayward
And in January?
-
Will there be any new additions to the collection in December? Program closed?
No, there will not be new additions to the Free collection in December.
Thanks for asking,
Mat Hayward
And in January?
This work devaluation only happens once a year, man!
You are really desperate to sell your low demand items!
-
Today I received an email that about 30 of my videos have been added to the free collection. Adobe pays me money for this, but I still don’t see an increase in the amount of income in my account.
It's strange that suddenly in June Adobe decided to post a my new video.
Why not every month then?
-
Today I received an email that about 30 of my videos have been added to the free collection. Adobe pays me money for this, but I still don’t see an increase in the amount of income in my account.
It's strange that suddenly in June Adobe decided to post a my new video.
Why not every month then?
Thanks for calling this out @Stoker2014. Yes, the Free collection team has selected another wave of video clips from the files you nominated in October to fill gaps identified in the collection. The email you received went out before the move into Free has happened. We expect the selected clips to be switched soon. Once done, the payment of $8 per clip will be automatically added to your account balance. I'll post an update here when that process is complete.
Thanks again,
Mat Hayward
-
I’ve been informed the payments for this wave of video approvals have been processed. You should see the change in your account balance if any of your files were approved.
Thank you!
Mat
-
Today I received an email that about 30 of my videos have been added to the free collection. Adobe pays me money for this, but I still don’t see an increase in the amount of income in my account.
It's strange that suddenly in June Adobe decided to post a my new video.
Why not every month then?
Thanks for calling this out @Stoker2014. Yes, the Free collection team has selected another wave of video clips from the files you nominated in October to fill gaps identified in the collection. The email you received went out before the move into Free has happened. We expect the selected clips to be switched soon. Once done, the payment of $8 per clip will be automatically added to your account balance. I'll post an update here when that process is complete.
Thanks again,
Mat Hayward
When that happened? I had no notification about video. I did nominate photos but had no idea video is nominated as well. Was that at same time with photos and on default is it nominated or i would have to swich it to nominate all option ? Looks like i missed Video nomination...
-
I've got some money to my account yesterday but no email notification.
Should I expect the email to come? I'm completely in the dark what I'm being paid for. Is it for photos I nominated at the beginning of June? Is it for videos? No idea.
Anyone else with the same situation?
-
If you received money yesterday, then they came for the nominated video. This program opened and closed in October 2022. Adobe does not decipher which videos were selected. If you didn't receive money yesterday, then your video was not nominated.
-
I've got some money to my account yesterday but no email notification.
Should I expect the email to come? I'm completely in the dark what I'm being paid for. Is it for photos I nominated at the beginning of June? Is it for videos? No idea.
Anyone else with the same situation?
Yes me too. I received a nice sum of money yesterday but no email notification. I went through my spam and trash but I didn't receive any adobe email. It would be nice to know how many and which clips were selected just out of curiosity.
-
If you received money yesterday, then they came for the nominated video. This program opened and closed in October 2022. Adobe does not decipher which videos were selected. If you didn't receive money yesterday, then your video was not nominated.
What do you mean October 2022 ? You mean they picked videos year ago and just now adding them to free collection ? I thought it's new campaign. Have no recollection what videos of mine got picked year ago...
-
If you received money yesterday, then they came for the nominated video. This program opened and closed in October 2022. Adobe does not decipher which videos were selected. If you didn't receive money yesterday, then your video was not nominated.
What do you mean October 2022 ? You mean they picked videos year ago and just now adding them to free collection ? I thought it's new campaign. Have no recollection what videos of mine got picked year ago...
Yes exactly. In the letter, they wrote that they decided in June to select more video from what was agreed with the authors in October 2022. Nothing new, everything old. And in October, they nominated far from everything that they chose.
-
Yes me too. I received a nice sum of money yesterday but no email notification. I went through my spam and trash but I didn't receive any adobe email. It would be nice to know how many and which clips were selected just out of curiosity.
Same here. Checked everything, no email notification anywhere, including mail server of my mail host. Just got money yesterday with no notification whatsoever.