MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Adobe Stock Upfront Royalty Payment Opportunity  (Read 40492 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #150 on: June 15, 2021, 12:43 »
0
is there any chance that a button "nominate all images on thee current page" will be added? Otherwise it is very time consuming task to manually select/deselect images/

Not likely to happen this time around @F9, thanks for the suggestion though!

-Mat


« Reply #151 on: June 15, 2021, 12:44 »
0
Hi Matt. I have a question about completing the nomination process. I have nominated selected images on my dashboard and I am using Firefox at 100%. However I am not seeing a contributor agreement that has been mentioned elsewhere as completion to the nomination process.. Is there something that i need to do to prompt this agreement? Thanks Matt.

Yes, you need to agree to the addendum. Once you nominated a file, that would have popped up automatically. You only need to click it once. You can review the details at the bottom of the FAQ.

-Mat

« Reply #152 on: June 15, 2021, 13:09 »
0
I've been informed the root cause of the grayed out accept button was identified and corrected. If you were previously experiencing this issue, please try again and you should be good to go.

Thanks for your patience,

Mat Hayward
Hi Mat,
I can't find the accept button anywhere, it doesn't show up when I nominate images and I don't see it on the addendum page either. It is not grayed out, it doesn't exist anywhere. I tried FF and Chrome, browser at 100%.

Another question, just to be sure: if I move the slider on the blue bar to the right, all eligible files are selected (nominated) and then I can start unchecking one by one hundreds of files I don't want to nominate.
Is there another way to do this faster?
Thanks.

« Reply #153 on: June 15, 2021, 13:25 »
0
I've been informed the root cause of the grayed out accept button was identified and corrected. If you were previously experiencing this issue, please try again and you should be good to go.

Thanks for your patience,

Mat Hayward
Hi Mat,
I can't find the accept button anywhere, it doesn't show up when I nominate images and I don't see it on the addendum page either. It is not grayed out, it doesn't exist anywhere. I tried FF and Chrome, browser at 100%.

Another question, just to be sure: if I move the slider on the blue bar to the right, all eligible files are selected (nominated) and then I can start unchecking one by one hundreds of files I don't want to nominate.
Is there another way to do this faster?
Thanks.

Are you 100% sure you didn't click it when you first looked? The popup doesn't repeat.

Unfortunately, no, there isn't a faster way to select or de-select beyond the one at a time option if you aren't nominating all eligible files.

-Mat

« Reply #154 on: June 15, 2021, 13:36 »
0
Thanks Mat,
I am 100% sure I didn't click to agree because I was not decided what to do when I first looked. So, if the popup doesn't repeat, shouldn't the button be available at the addendum page?
What can I do now, how can I know?
Thanks.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2021, 13:49 by Dodie »

« Reply #155 on: June 15, 2021, 15:14 »
0
I've been informed the root cause of the grayed out accept button was identified and corrected. If you were previously experiencing this issue, please try again and you should be good to go.

Thanks for your patience,

Mat Hayward
Hi Mat,
I can't find the accept button anywhere, it doesn't show up when I nominate images and I don't see it on the addendum page either. It is not grayed out, it doesn't exist anywhere. I tried FF and Chrome, browser at 100%.



i have the same problem,
my files are in the free section but there is no accept button.

How can I learn Matt?

« Reply #156 on: June 15, 2021, 15:35 »
0
Thanks Mat,
I am 100% sure I didn't click to agree because I was not decided what to do when I first looked. So, if the popup doesn't repeat, shouldn't the button be available at the addendum page?
What can I do now, how can I know?
Thanks.

The system was designed to prevent this. The moment you nominate an asset (either just one, or nominate them all with the button), the addendum dialogue pops up automatically. Once that happens, you have two options.

1.  Click X to close the dialogue without agreeing
     a. If you click the X and close the dialogue, any nominated photos are returned to the un-nominated status immediately.
2.  Click to agree
     a. The addendum box closes, your photo(s) switch to "nominated" status and you never see the dialogue pop up again.

As a reminder, to review the addendum, you must visit the FAQ page linked here: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/free-collection-contributor-information.html

@Dodie, if you are seeing your files are still nominated, that is an indication you did agree to the addendum. Feel free to send me an email to confirm your files are nominated.

[email protected]

Thank you,

Mat Hayward



« Reply #157 on: June 16, 2021, 02:22 »
+2
Thanks Mat,
I am 100% sure I didn't click to agree because I was not decided what to do when I first looked. So, if the popup doesn't repeat, shouldn't the button be available at the addendum page?
What can I do now, how can I know?
Thanks.

The system was designed to prevent this. The moment you nominate an asset (either just one, or nominate them all with the button), the addendum dialogue pops up automatically. Once that happens, you have two options.

1.  Click X to close the dialogue without agreeing
     a. If you click the X and close the dialogue, any nominated photos are returned to the un-nominated status immediately.
2.  Click to agree
     a. The addendum box closes, your photo(s) switch to "nominated" status and you never see the dialogue pop up again.

As a reminder, to review the addendum, you must visit the FAQ page linked here: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/free-collection-contributor-information.html

@Dodie, if you are seeing your files are still nominated, that is an indication you did agree to the addendum. Feel free to send me an email to confirm your files are nominated.

[email protected]

Thank you,

Mat Hayward
Thank you Mat.

My files are still nominated. The problem is that the pages of the entire batch are not sorted by a certain criteria,  each time the images are in different order and some images show up twice on different pages. Last nigh I double-checked all nominated ones and this morning I've found some bestsellers (also on other agencies) that escaped my vigilance and were still nominated.
I'll wait up and see what happens, I just hope not to give away some bestseller, by mistake.

Thanks for your help Mat.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2021, 05:50 by Dodie »

« Reply #158 on: June 16, 2021, 10:10 »
+1
...
My files are still nominated. The problem is that the pages of the entire batch are not sorted by a certain criteria,  each time the images are in different order and some images show up twice on different pages. Last nigh I double-checked all nominated ones and this morning I've found some bestsellers (also on other agencies) that escaped my vigilance and were still nominated.
I'll wait up and see what happens, I just hope not to give away some bestseller, by mistake.

Thanks for your help Mat.
I think that if you sort by Date, instead of by Downloads, it will keep the order through the pages.

« Reply #159 on: June 16, 2021, 11:14 »
+1
...
My files are still nominated. The problem is that the pages of the entire batch are not sorted by a certain criteria,  each time the images are in different order and some images show up twice on different pages. Last nigh I double-checked all nominated ones and this morning I've found some bestsellers (also on other agencies) that escaped my vigilance and were still nominated.
I'll wait up and see what happens, I just hope not to give away some bestseller, by mistake.

Thanks for your help Mat.
I think that if you sort by Date, instead of by Downloads, it will keep the order through the pages.
Good idea, it was helpful to find and uncheck some more images that I didn't want to nominate.
Thank you very much.

« Reply #160 on: June 16, 2021, 11:34 »
+5
I don't see any banner or way to nominate files on my dashboard. Am I missing something? Can anyone screencap what it looks like?

See this snippet from my Dashboard - if you don't have any photos, perhaps that's why you don't see this?

No I don't have photos, I thought it would also count for vectors/illustrations. Makes sense now, thanks!

Adobe has recently added a lot of new images to the free collection, including illustrations and vectors, so I'm not sure why they aren't allowing "regular" contributors to add content other than photos.

I've been tracking the size of the free collection and since June 1, 2021, it has grown by 46,421 (to 113,884) after staying pretty static around 77k to 78k since last October.

Illustrations had been stuck at 17 since the beginning, but it's now at 2,847, and vectors have grown by about 7k since June 1 (again having been largely unchanged since October). Videos have grown by 4k as well. Photos have grown from 51k in October to 73k today

I can't find anything now, but I thought I remembered someone saying that the free section would be capped at 100,000 images. Clearly that's not the case, but if anyone has a link to something saying that, please share.

Perhaps Mat can give updated information on how big the Free section will get after June 23rd? And I assume there won't be any "old" free content dropping out - at the one year expiry - until October 2021, so this isn't about replacing the current collection as it is expiring.

Edited to add links to three contributors whose work is featured on the first page of the free section today. I don't think they were in the free section when it started. Take a look at the excellent work - and the large quantity of it. I know the message from Adobe is that they're going for breadth not depth, but it just hurts to see work like this available at no charge to buyers.


Gorodenkoff (~2,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=200571845

Lightfield Studios (~6,900)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=206713618

Pressmaster (~5,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=280047

Here's a link to the post from October with other portfolio links for free content

https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/introducing-the-free-collection-from-adobe-stock/msg557749/#msg557749
« Last Edit: June 16, 2021, 12:01 by Jo Ann Snover »

« Reply #161 on: June 16, 2021, 11:50 »
0
I don't see any banner or way to nominate files on my dashboard. Am I missing something? Can anyone screencap what it looks like?

See this snippet from my Dashboard - if you don't have any photos, perhaps that's why you don't see this?

No I don't have photos, I thought it would also count for vectors/illustrations. Makes sense now, thanks!

Adobe has recently added a lot of new images to the free collection, including illustrations and vectors, so I'm not sure why they aren't allowing "regular" contributors to add content other than photos.

I've been tracking the size of the free collection and since June 1, 2021, it has grown by 46,421 (to 113,884) after staying pretty static around 77k to 78k since last October.

Illustrations had been stuck at 17 since the beginning, but it's now at 2,847, and vectors have grown by about 7k since June 1 (again having been largely unchanged since October). Videos have grown by 4k as well.

I can't find anything now, but I thought I remembered someone saying that the free section would be capped at 100,000 images. Clearly that's not the case, but if anyone has a link to something saying that, please share.

Perhaps Mat can give updated information on how big the Free section will get after June 23rd? And I assume there won't be any "old" free content dropping out - at the one year expiry - until October 2021, so this isn't about replacing the current collection as it is expiring.

I am only shown 73.636 free photos (from Germany)

« Reply #162 on: June 16, 2021, 11:52 »
0

...I am only shown 73.636 free photos (from Germany)

I saw 73,621 free *photos* this morning, but the free collection includes more than just photos - 113,884 was everything in the Free collection.

In October 2020 there were 51,791 free photos

« Reply #163 on: June 16, 2021, 12:54 »
+11
Gorodenkoff (~2,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=200571845

Lightfield Studios (~6,900)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=206713618

Pressmaster (~5,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=280047


That is absolutely crazy.  It's amazing anyone else can still make money these days.  And imo, they're not too smart for giving that kind of content away.

« Reply #164 on: June 16, 2021, 12:56 »
0

Adobe has recently added a lot of new images to the free collection, including illustrations and vectors, so I'm not sure why they aren't allowing "regular" contributors to add content other than photos.

They allow illustrations (rasters), I have several of them eligible. I don't know about vectors.

« Reply #165 on: June 16, 2021, 13:37 »
0

Adobe has recently added a lot of new images to the free collection, including illustrations and vectors, so I'm not sure why they aren't allowing "regular" contributors to add content other than photos.

They allow illustrations (rasters), I have several of them eligible. I don't know about vectors.

From Mat, earlier in this thread

Any plans to include other content beyond photos?

Currently, we are refreshing the photos in our free collection. We may have an option to nominate additional asset types in the future. I will be sure to post updates in MSG if that comes to be.

-Mat

« Reply #166 on: June 16, 2021, 14:08 »
0

From Mat, earlier in this thread

Any plans to include other content beyond photos?

Currently, we are refreshing the photos in our free collection. We may have an option to nominate additional asset types in the future. I will be sure to post updates in MSG if that comes to be.

-Mat

I know Jo Ann, they say the same thing in the FAQ too. Still I have about 10 illustrations eligible, mostly backgrounds and not just me. It's just the usual inconsistency from these agencies, I think.

« Reply #167 on: June 16, 2021, 14:16 »
+5
... it just hurts to see work like this available at no charge to buyers.


Gorodenkoff (~2,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=200571845

Lightfield Studios (~6,900)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=206713618

Pressmaster (~5,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=280047


"Hurts" is exactly the right word for how one feels looking at those images. No wonder paid content is tanking when marvelous examples like those are given away for free.

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #168 on: June 16, 2021, 16:51 »
+4
Gorodenkoff (~2,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=200571845

Lightfield Studios (~6,900)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=206713618

Pressmaster (~5,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=280047


That is absolutely crazy.  It's amazing anyone else can still make money these days.  And imo, they're not too smart for giving that kind of content away.

That's why I'm very wary of this whole 'nominate your assets for an upfront royalty payment' thing. It's like a trap most people are wandering into blindly, lured in by instant gratification.

In the end, the only real winners are the agencies.
When the price war is over, there will be a handful of powerful agencies left. Only the strongest creatives and some hobbyists will still make some money, a few pennies per download. The once fertile lands of microstock will be a barren wasteland, devoid of any real money-making opportunities for the majority of us creatives.

« Reply #169 on: June 16, 2021, 20:10 »
+1
Gorodenkoff (~2,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=200571845

Lightfield Studios (~6,900)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=206713618

Pressmaster (~5,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=280047


That is absolutely crazy.  It's amazing anyone else can still make money these days.  And imo, they're not too smart for giving that kind of content away.

That's why I'm very wary of this whole 'nominate your assets for an upfront royalty payment' thing. It's like a trap most people are wandering into blindly, lured in by instant gratification.

In the end, the only real winners are the agencies.
When the price war is over, there will be a handful of powerful agencies left. Only the strongest creatives and some hobbyists will still make some money, a few pennies per download. The once fertile lands of microstock will be a barren wasteland, devoid of any real money-making opportunities for the majority of us creatives.

Well said. I fear you are absolutely right.

But I'm old, so I won't likely live to see the dreadful end-point of this once-promising endeavor. I do feel sorry for younger creatives, who will live to see the crack up and have no choice but to live with it.

« Reply #170 on: June 17, 2021, 02:40 »
0
Pressmaster (~5,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=280047

I dont want to blame Pressmaster, who really shoot great and salable images, but I directly remembered that agencies forced us to take authentic images now. But if you look at Pressmaster as just one example: Where is the authentic there? ALL people looks like posing. but it still sells.
Same as diversity: We got forced to shoot more diversity and there might be increased sales for it (and authentic images, too), but still most sales are not these diversity images.
And if I see how clean these images are (indeed professional), well, for me it is a no go, because it again does not look authentic in any way.
But I have to state that I hate advertising in any kind and directly click them away or on TV I change the channel. It is still a dreamworld nearly nobody have.

« Reply #171 on: June 17, 2021, 02:55 »
0
And Adobe still dont want to unfilter people that much. If you filter no people there are still minimum 30% coming up with people and many of them with whole body.
Adobes search engine seems to be very bad, but I am sure it is Adobes plan to show only the images with most sales.
If you search for a name of a small beach in Indonesia, which is not well known from foreigners, Adobe shows alternatives first and ask, if we really want to search for that beach name. It is frustrating!
You could think: Hey, great, I am the only one took photos of that beach (on Adobe), but they show alternatives instead.
So, Adobe is really only supporting special images and contributors and treat the other ones in that way. Now more in a discriminating way since their regional outsourcing. I researched little bit more and found out that not only images shot in these discriminated countries getting outsourced. No! Already images uploaded from that countries getting outsourced, too, even if these images have no connection to a special country like usual backgrounds and so on.

Evangelist in this case getting a new dimension and meaning.

WHEN Adobe will give us clear statements about their regional plans?
Sorry, Mat, I will not stop forcing Adobe or you to answer all the questions which are still not answered!
(The other thread already died, no questions anymore, because we even will not get any answers. Instead Adobe offers this instant pay to make their contributors forget about the regional plans and others.)

« Reply #172 on: June 17, 2021, 03:57 »
0
Gorodenkoff (~2,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=200571845

Lightfield Studios (~6,900)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=206713618

Pressmaster (~5,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=280047


That is absolutely crazy.  It's amazing anyone else can still make money these days.  And imo, they're not too smart for giving that kind of content away.

That's why I'm very wary of this whole 'nominate your assets for an upfront royalty payment' thing. It's like a trap most people are wandering into blindly, lured in by instant gratification.

In the end, the only real winners are the agencies.
When the price war is over, there will be a handful of powerful agencies left. Only the strongest creatives and some hobbyists will still make some money, a few pennies per download. The once fertile lands of microstock will be a barren wasteland, devoid of any real money-making opportunities for the majority of us creatives.
You have both the question and the answer in your posting:

 "nominate your assets for an upfront royalty payment' thing. It's like a trap most people are wandering into blindly, lured in by instant gratification. "

The guy from the first link has 200 free images ($1k) from his 10k port probably because he agrees with you in what "The once fertile lands of microstock will be a barren wasteland, devoid of any real money-making opportunities for the majority of us creatives."
Unfortunately that is how the future looks like.

shutterview

« Reply #173 on: June 17, 2021, 04:02 »
+3
Pressmaster (~5,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=280047

I dont want to blame Pressmaster, who really shoot great and salable images, but I directly remembered that agencies forced us to take authentic images now. But if you look at Pressmaster as just one example: Where is the authentic there? ALL people looks like posing. but it still sells.
Same as diversity: We got forced to shoot more diversity and there might be increased sales for it (and authentic images, too), but still most sales are not these diversity images.
And if I see how clean these images are (indeed professional), well, for me it is a no go, because it again does not look authentic in any way.
But I have to state that I hate advertising in any kind and directly click them away or on TV I change the channel. It is still a dreamworld nearly nobody have.
Authentic images are hard to produce. I worked in newspapers for many years, and sometimes you have to wait for hours to get that spontaneous candid shot. So, photographers, like the one you mentioned, sell posed pictures well, because there is no other choice for buyers, there are not enough spontaneous pictures (and there never will be, it is not profitable to produce).
The other thing, I never shoot what agencies want us to in their monthly shooting lists. It is usually something hard to produce or something lacking in their galleries, and it is lacking because it doesn't sell and noone wants to produce it, but few customers were searching for it without success, so agencies are wishing to have it. Or, there will be sudden oversupply of a specific subject. They don't care if photographers never pay off these shootings. Never, never shoot by agencies' shoot lists. It represents selfishness in its finest form.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2021, 07:33 by shutterview »

« Reply #174 on: June 17, 2021, 16:29 »
+1
Adobe would like to buy 160 photos from me that I took ten years ago as an exercise. With my current equipment, I could easily get much better photos with little effort. Without the slightest doubt, I'm more than happy to accept this offer.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
1849 Views
Last post June 13, 2008, 15:15
by News Feed
10 Replies
5222 Views
Last post March 09, 2020, 15:23
by res
13 Replies
5273 Views
Last post December 05, 2019, 15:54
by chescopar
93 Replies
10340 Views
Last post August 26, 2021, 10:50
by Uncle Pete
46 Replies
7399 Views
Last post October 25, 2021, 15:54
by pancaketom

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle