The only way I can give away my images is through my website, to do marketing FOR ME, not for agencies.

So, this year too: opt-out! Not a single image of mine in the Adobe Stock Free collection, if you want them, you pay! 

I nominated a few for the year plan. Mostly images that have very few sales and would be easy to duplicate. Ones that couldn't easily be duplicated or have more sales I kept out. I suspect a low percentage of those I opted in will be selected, but you never know.

Even ChatGPT sayd that 10 dollars for perpetual use is too low 

If you can sell it for more than obviously don't opt in. It's microstock market so not sure why ppl are so emotional... We sell licences for 1c by now and many give it for free hoping to get donation. That's how supply demand works. Next time it will be 5$ or Adobe just remove microstock if they stop making money of it. Just like basicaly over half of microstock markets bankruptcies. Even shutterstock that bought at this point all microstock company's going straight for bancrupcy. There is no demand for microstock anymore.

I'll just click $4 Annual. $10 Perpetual would be crazy to opt into.

Exactly. If they offer 500USD per image, I'm okey with that. Sometime I sell image at SS for 700+USD

Quote from: stocky on May 19, 2025, 12:39

Quote from: f8 on May 19, 2025, 12:08

I wouldn't even accept $4 rate for the annual freebie on all the "quality issue" rejections I get. Who in their right mind would give their work away for $4. Seriously, who is that desperate to give their work away? And we wonder why the industry is in such decline.

Not giving away, getting $4 per image. Drives customers to the site. The images selected are not best sellers. And does increase sales overall.

$4 is giving it away. Ask yourself how much money you have invested in equipment, programs, bills, electricity, internet, then add on the time to go and shoot anything, then add the time for post production. For a pathetic $4 dollars you are driving the customers to their site, not yours. A lot of my content sells on other sites and I see absolutely no reason I should subsidize Adobe to my financial detriment. $4 dollars is a total kick in the noids.

Only a small percentage, a few thousand images, were selected, for a year, low-sellers anyway. History has shown this move Increases my sales.
I wouldn't give away any image either. They are "on loan" for a year. My sales got a nice boost after this promotion went into effect. It it was my best-sellers, then I definitely wouldn't opt in.
The bottom line is: these low-sellers aren't going to earn $4 each in a year. But now they will. Thanks Adobe Stock. 

Quote from: stocky on May 22, 2025, 14:55

The bottom line is: these low-sellers aren't going to earn $4 each in a year. But now they will. Thanks Adobe Stock.

I don't know.  There are different ways to look at this.   Maybe they would earn $4 on Adobe, maybe not.  But if it's free on Adobe you increase chances they wouldn't be licensed elsewhere.  Customers aren't dumb

I guess it depends on a number of factors, like portfolio size. I just know I'm earning substantial more money per year since this was introduced.   

Quote from: stocky on May 22, 2025, 16:25

I guess it depends on a number of factors, like portfolio size. I just know I'm earning substantial more money per year since this was introduced.

Same here.  It really comes down to how to best manage your assets. This type of discussion comes up on Alamy Forum frequently.   

Alamy "exclusives" argument is "Why would you give away your photo for pennies on micros  when it could earn you 100s of dollars, if it was available only on Alamy"

Opposite argument is "Upload only on Alamy and it never gets sold.  At least it will make something if it's available on micros"

At the end everyone has to decide for themselves and one size doesn't fit all.

Both arguments are correct. What works for me is that some images are only supposed to be at Alamy and other images are only supposed to be at micros (they can be at Alamy as well but probably will never sell). I've sold close to 1000 assets at Alamy and can that what sells are on there are mainly editorials of specific places/landmarks/businesses, as well as newsworthy content.

For me I'm seeing such a rapid decline in my average royalties (while inflation has been rampant out in the real world) that I'll take $10 perpetually per asset to cash in their value while they still have some. 

Quote from: stocky on May 19, 2025, 11:59

I'll just click $4 Annual. $10 Perpetual would be crazy to opt into.

Exactly. If they offer 500USD per image, I'm okey with that. Sometime I sell image at SS for 700+USD

what? Where? What kind of license you talking about? At SS right now max commission you can earn is around 100$.

My own thoughts on this. First, AS only take a small percentage of the nominated photos so we're generally talking about a very small percentage of my portfolio. Second, most of my photos don't make $4 in a year and, with the way stock is going, are unlikely to make $10 in their lifetime. Third, the nominated photos are not ones which sell a lot anyway. So I'll take what money I can get from them now.

Quote from: Brasilnut on May 22, 2025, 21:09

what sells are on there are mainly editorials of specific places/landmarks/businesses, as well as newsworthy content.

Yes, but not always true.  Couple of weeks ago this sold for 3-digits (attached)



It's remote back-country of Banff National Park in Canada.  Takes 2 days of hiking just to get here.  Camped by these lakes in the valley, had all this to myself.   Who needed this kind of photo I am not sure, but apparently there is a market for mountain landscapes on Alamy

That's a great shot. On my list of places I want to visit for sure.

Would be interesting to track down the usage.

I still upload pretty much everything to Alamy that I upload to micros but not vice-versa. Some very generic boring commercial shots have sold for me at Alamy and for nice prices, such as this dartboard. Funny that it doesn't really sell on micros (has only earned me $5).

That's a great shot. On my list of places I want to visit for sure.

Would be interesting to track down the usage.

Thanks Alex.  Will try to track the usage.  Overall I find Canadian Rockies fairly good market, despite general opinion that "landscapes don't sell".  Few yrs back book publisher from Banff contacted me directly to license bunch of shots for 10th edition of best known hiking guidebook in Canada;  so if you have web presence, direct sales are possible too.   On the other side, I have some great shots from Spain last winter and very little return - at least so far. 

That pano that sold on Alamy is mid-day, so not optimal light, but scenery makes up for it.  I am probably only hiker that goes this far into wilderness with Canon SLR/Lens in the backpack, lol.  Full account of that trip is https://autumnsky.zenfolio.com/rockies/icefields/devon-lakes  - will take time for all photos to load, Zenfolio really sucks

Quote from: Brasilnut on May 22, 2025, 21:09

what sells are on there are mainly editorials of specific places/landmarks/businesses, as well as newsworthy content.

Yes, but not always true.  Couple of weeks ago this sold for 3-digits (attached)



It's remote back-country of Banff National Park in Canada.  Takes 2 days of hiking just to get here.  Camped by these lakes in the valley, had all this to myself.   Who needed this kind of photo I am not sure, but apparently there is a market for mountain landscapes on Alamy

Did you Photoshop out some people at the bottom left?

Congratulations!
Splendid image, you deserve it 
As far as my experience, Alamy is the only agency where I have 3 digits sales  .

Quote from: Brasilnut on May 22, 2025, 21:09

what sells are on there are mainly editorials of specific places/landmarks/businesses, as well as newsworthy content.

Yes, but not always true.  Couple of weeks ago this sold for 3-digits (attached)



It's remote back-country of Banff National Park in Canada.  Takes 2 days of hiking just to get here.  Camped by these lakes in the valley, had all this to myself.   Who needed this kind of photo I am not sure, but apparently there is a market for mountain landscapes on Alamy