pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Introducing Adobe Stock!  (Read 76735 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #425 on: June 25, 2015, 22:13 »
+4
As in Independent Adobe deal basically matches or betters any other microstock offering I submit to as far as RPD.
Your royalty will be lower than SS by a fairly large margin depending on your level.
Single sales at SS (2 for $29 is smallest package) each $4.35 at Adobe $3.30
On Demand sales at SS $2.85 at Adobe $1.65 or .99.
Subs at SS 38 cents at Adobe 31 cents for same level.

So it's about a 20-70% RPD loss depending on the type of sale.  They also don't have ELs on the site so those will much likely be a lot lower to nonexistent and there won't be any high value SODs.  Bottom line is your RPD will go down and significantly.  If they are successful at nonsubs sales it's likely SS will lower single and on demand pricing so you'll also lose at SS.  If they are successful at subs sales SS may go to a Bigstock style royalty scheme.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2015, 22:20 by tickstock »


« Reply #426 on: June 25, 2015, 22:37 »
0
As in Independent Adobe deal basically matches or betters any other microstock offering I submit to as far as RPD.
Your royalty will be lower than SS by a fairly large margin depending on your level.
Single sales at SS (2 for $29 is smallest package) each $4.35 at Adobe $3.30
On Demand sales at SS $2.85 at Adobe $1.65 or .99.
Subs at SS 38 cents at Adobe 31 cents for same level.

So it's about a 20-70% RPD loss depending on the type of sale.  They also don't have ELs on the site so those will much likely be a lot lower to nonexistent and there won't be any high value SODs.  Bottom line is your RPD will go down and significantly.

Okay my statement was too far reaching. Adobe deal isn't the best of all, but its certainly not the worst.
Yes it would probably reduce the RPD if all sales were taken from SS alone.
RPD last month at IS was $0.44 so I'd happily swap those for the Adobe sales.
only 11% of last months sales at Istock were Credit sales.

This is where you chime in and say how awesome exclusive at IS is and your RPD there are massive.

« Reply #427 on: June 25, 2015, 22:42 »
+1
As in Independent Adobe deal basically matches or betters any other microstock offering I submit to as far as RPD.
Your royalty will be lower than SS by a fairly large margin depending on your level.
Single sales at SS (2 for $29 is smallest package) each $4.35 at Adobe $3.30
On Demand sales at SS $2.85 at Adobe $1.65 or .99.
Subs at SS 38 cents at Adobe 31 cents for same level.

So it's about a 20-70% RPD loss depending on the type of sale.  They also don't have ELs on the site so those will much likely be a lot lower to nonexistent and there won't be any high value SODs.  Bottom line is your RPD will go down and significantly.

Okay my statement was too far reaching. Adobe deal isn't the best of all, but its certainly not the worst.
Yes it would probably reduce the RPD if all sales were taken from SS alone.
RPD last month at IS was $0.44 so I'd happily swap those for the Adobe sales.
only 11% of last months sales at Istock were Credit sales.

This is where you chime in and say how awesome exclusive at IS is and your RPD there are massive.
No, I'm not going to say anything about my RPD you probably don't care much about that.  I think you'll be swapping a very small amount of iStock sales and a larger amount of SS sales.  On top of that if Adobe is successful then SS will lower your RPD by cutting prices and possibly changing how subs are paid.

« Reply #428 on: June 25, 2015, 22:49 »
+3
As in Independent Adobe deal basically matches or betters any other microstock offering I submit to as far as RPD.
Your royalty will be lower than SS by a fairly large margin depending on your level.
Single sales at SS (2 for $29 is smallest package) each $4.35 at Adobe $3.30
On Demand sales at SS $2.85 at Adobe $1.65 or .99.
Subs at SS 38 cents at Adobe 31 cents for same level.

So it's about a 20-70% RPD loss depending on the type of sale.  They also don't have ELs on the site so those will much likely be a lot lower to nonexistent and there won't be any high value SODs.  Bottom line is your RPD will go down and significantly.

Okay my statement was too far reaching. Adobe deal isn't the best of all, but its certainly not the worst.
Yes it would probably reduce the RPD if all sales were taken from SS alone.
RPD last month at IS was $0.44 so I'd happily swap those for the Adobe sales.
only 11% of last months sales at Istock were Credit sales.

This is where you chime in and say how awesome exclusive at IS is and your RPD there are massive.
No, I'm not going to say anything about my RPD you probably don't care much about that.  I think you'll be swapping a very small amount of iStock sales and a larger amount of SS sales.  On top of that if Adobe is successful then SS will lower your RPD by cutting prices and possibly changing how subs are paid.
I'm interested why you think that Adobe will take more sales from SS than IS ?

« Reply #429 on: June 25, 2015, 23:07 »
0
As in Independent Adobe deal basically matches or betters any other microstock offering I submit to as far as RPD.
Your royalty will be lower than SS by a fairly large margin depending on your level.
Single sales at SS (2 for $29 is smallest package) each $4.35 at Adobe $3.30
On Demand sales at SS $2.85 at Adobe $1.65 or .99.
Subs at SS 38 cents at Adobe 31 cents for same level.

So it's about a 20-70% RPD loss depending on the type of sale.  They also don't have ELs on the site so those will much likely be a lot lower to nonexistent and there won't be any high value SODs.  Bottom line is your RPD will go down and significantly.

Okay my statement was too far reaching. Adobe deal isn't the best of all, but its certainly not the worst.
Yes it would probably reduce the RPD if all sales were taken from SS alone.
RPD last month at IS was $0.44 so I'd happily swap those for the Adobe sales.
only 11% of last months sales at Istock were Credit sales.

This is where you chime in and say how awesome exclusive at IS is and your RPD there are massive.
No, I'm not going to say anything about my RPD you probably don't care much about that.  I think you'll be swapping a very small amount of iStock sales and a larger amount of SS sales.  On top of that if Adobe is successful then SS will lower your RPD by cutting prices and possibly changing how subs are paid.
I'm interested why you think that Adobe will take more sales from SS than IS ?
I've posted my thoughts on this earlier but the short answer is that iStock has exclusive content and Adobe seems to be going after SS subscription buyers.  The loss from buyers going to Adobe from SS is a lot more than any gain you would get from them leaving iStock.  You will actually lose on some sales if buyers go from iStock to Adobe, hard to believe huh?  10 image a month annual plans at Adobe will pay 99 cents royalty per image at iStock you'll get paid $1.30-1.45 if you are at 15%. 
« Last Edit: June 25, 2015, 23:09 by tickstock »

« Reply #430 on: June 25, 2015, 23:14 »
+12
Here is Getty's take on Adobe Stock.
 
With the launch of Adobe Stock, it is clear that Adobe believes all imagery is worth a maximum of $10.  We simply do not agree with this view.  Commercial and photographic experience and investments in pre and post-production do matter to quality and are only commercially viable through higher price points and, ultimately, returns to the photographers.  This is a core reason why Getty Images contributors can sell across our offerings versus a one-size fits all, every image is a commodity approach.

The level of hypocrisy is astounding ... actually it's not it's completely normal from Getty. I'm not saying the prices Adobe and Fotolia are okay, but Adobe and Fotolia is just taking the already established low watermark for prices set by companies like Getty and running with it. If every image on Getty was available for $10 or more they would have a leg to stand on. I get royalties from Getty for a few cents.

« Reply #431 on: June 26, 2015, 00:24 »
+16
I'm interested why you think that Adobe will take more sales from SS than IS ?

My guess is cuz there's hardly any sales left on istock to take.

« Reply #432 on: June 26, 2015, 02:52 »
+6
Fotolia has a lot of exclusive content, especially if you browse through local european content. Both istock and SS are weak in Europe and you can see that in their collections.

Istock is the weaker company compared to SS, they have a lot less money for marketing and getty just lost a major deal.

Usually the weak companies suffer first if there is a new gorilla company on the block.

SS has more money and very good tech, they will look at the adobe offer and find a way to distinguish themselves.

They also have the facebook integration, that is a huge marketplace.

Getty doesn't even have a ceo at the moment and any new person coming in, will need time to focus a strategy. In the meantime, SS and Adobe can refine their products.


Semmick Photo

« Reply #433 on: June 26, 2015, 03:08 »
+5
Both istock and SS are weak in Europe and you can see that in their collections.


Where did you get that from ? There is a ton of European contributors submitting a ton of European content. SS even has their EU HQ in Berlin

« Reply #434 on: June 26, 2015, 03:15 »
+3
If you look at the fotolia collection then you much better selection of localized content. Yes, major landmarks are available everywhere, but authentic local stuff is rare. For instance the really typical beer in cologne, served in their typical glasses, in a real cologne envirnoment, fotolia has many choices, SS just had two, when i looked for it.

Europe is much more than the eiffel tower and big ben. And the localized stuff is what many artists leave exclusively at fotolia, the generic content goes everywhere.

It was one of the issues istock tried to adress with opening up foreign language forums, they realized that many people who a are not comfortable in english need an Environment in their own language. Fotolia has always had local language forums, so you get a complete contributor experience in your own language and culture, it is easy to meet up and fotolia has many events in your area.

For localized north american content fotolia is weaker, because it is not the dominant agency there.

sS is doing road shows and is organizing shootings in Germany, again to attract more localized content, but without local language forums where people can connect and meet up to shoot, I don't think they will get very far.

Fotolia also has many people in Germany, france,spain etc that are fully artist exclusive. They have similar returns like istock exclusives, some even higher, because fotolia pays up to 63% to fully exclusive Artists.

In Japan 40% of the stock market is in the hands of a local japanese agency, they simply have the home advantage and a much bigger offer in authentic localized content.

How many of the artists here would sign up with a chinese stock agency if everything on the site is in chinese and there is no english Forum? And a local chinese artist with little knowlegde of english where will he sign up or go exclusive?

There is a huge world beyond the english language market.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2015, 03:39 by cobalt »

« Reply #435 on: June 26, 2015, 03:50 »
+1
my weekly rank dropped more then 2000 places but atleast that means somebody out there earning more because i'm selling less in last week

Semmick Photo

« Reply #436 on: June 26, 2015, 03:58 »
0
I dont understand, what is an English forum?

Ich kan uberall Deutsch reden, brauchen wir dafur spezial ein Deutsches forum?

« Reply #437 on: June 26, 2015, 04:29 »
+2
I spent years trying to attract more localized German content to istock. Believe me, having a local forum with ACTIVE community builders that reach out to people, help organize meet ups, answer questions, call people up if there is a problem...it makes a makes a huge difference. We were really successful, we brought in a lot more content and had a group of very dedicated producers. Just having a forum without anyone looking after people, no, that makes no big difference.

But when talking to a wider group of artist I always encountered the problem that people asked me for exclusive images, like fotolia did. I looked at the royalty rates and thought, well the difference to indie royalties is not that big, why do they give up the option of selling on Shutterstock and istock and dreamstime for that? But people explained to me that exclusive content, which isnt even specially marked at fotolia and there is no special search for the buyer to use, it raises the visisbility of the whole portfolio, especially in your local market, so even the non exclusive localised content seems to sell better. And of course you can keyword and describe everything in your own language. This creates a very strong incentive and feedback loop so putting local content exclusively on fotolia and sending generic content everywhere is a very useful strategy.

So between using your own language, the community actiity, fotolia is present at every major photo event, very active in the german "fotocommunity" etc...everyone knows fotolia. It is really very,very clever they way they work with local communities.


So here Fotolia has something they can use when they grow across the globe, I could imagine they would be very successful in China, or Asia or many other regions where English is not the first language. It takes a lot of experience and money and good IT to build up something with a distinctly local flavor. Now with adobe they have enough of everything.

The number of people who can take great pictures but are not comfortable with English is huge. And since all agencies have enough generic content, having an army of regional producers can make a big differences in the game of thrones between the agencies.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2015, 04:33 by cobalt »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #438 on: June 26, 2015, 05:06 »
+3
If you look at the fotolia collection then you much better selection of localized content. Yes, major landmarks are available everywhere, but authentic local stuff is rare. For instance the really typical beer in cologne, served in their typical glasses, in a real cologne envirnoment, fotolia has many choices, SS just had two, when i looked for it.
Isn't that precisely an example of what should be macro, not micro?
If you've set up a still life, then exclusive micro might work, provided there isn't much competition.
If you have major expenses for location, models, props, time, would the potential buyer mass be worth the effort even as exclusive-micro?
If the buyers want something that specific, they should be prepared to pay for it.

« Reply #439 on: June 26, 2015, 05:41 »
+3
Yes macro has much more local, authentic content and they keep licensing it too each other so they can make better offers to their local customers.

But getting into macro is difficult for beginners and not all customers need super high quality. You see it with the success of mobile stock, which is often out of focus, underexposed, badly framed, but it is authentic for the location and so it sells.

And of course agencies want to distinguish themselves from each other. So having a much bigger selection of local micro content, not necessarily with expensive production value, just the local beer garden, a few friends eating truly local stuff, images from smaller towns and villages, typical local family things, often just your own snapshots, just placed with an agency where you can communicate in your own language, keyword and upload in your own language and make money...it makes a difference.

If people could easily place this on macro, they would probably all do it. But the macro world is a very closed world and usually not avialble in your local language, so micro is the only option for many people.

I think many people here cannot imagine how intimidating a stock site is if everything is in English.

You cant follow the forums, you cannot understand the newsletters, you struggle with the upload process and dont understand the rejections and you cannot write to support because you struggle how to phrase it. some use google translate and then if they get an answer they have to reverse translate that as well. But it is not comfortable. Fotolia makes it easy, everything will be in German, or French or Spanish. All events are in your language, all streamed video presentations are in your language.

That is why I ask people to try to imagine what it would be like to provide stock to an all chinese website, if you have no knowlegde of chinese. Even if you take fantastic pictures and keep hearing you can earn a lot of money there, if you just do a lot of stock on the side, even if you do photography full time, chances are you will never upload there and just stick to a company that is local.

So this "on the ground localeness" is a strength of fotolia that made them the dominant agency in non english speaking Europe. This is nothing new.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2015, 06:03 by cobalt »

« Reply #440 on: June 26, 2015, 06:35 »
+1
That is why I ask people to try to imagine what it would be like to provide stock to an all chinese website, if you have no knowlegde of chinese. Even if you take fantastic pictures and keep hearing you can earn a lot of money there, if you just do a lot of stock on the side, even if you do photography full time, chances are you will never upload there and just stick to a company that is local.

Actually iStock/Getty have sort of addressed the Chinese problem with fotomore.com

Can't tell you whether it's successful or not of course because their sales reporting outside of iStock is so poor.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #441 on: June 26, 2015, 07:00 »
0
That is why I ask people to try to imagine what it would be like to provide stock to an all chinese website, if you have no knowlegde of chinese. Even if you take fantastic pictures and keep hearing you can earn a lot of money there, if you just do a lot of stock on the side, even if you do photography full time, chances are you will never upload there and just stick to a company that is local.


Actually iStock/Getty have sort of addressed the Chinese problem with fotomore.com

Can't tell you whether it's successful or not of course because their sales reporting outside of iStock is so poor.


They haven't actually confirmed whether it is actually officially fully up and running yet, despite several enquiries, most recently (I think) http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=364453&messageid=7104391
Maybe no-one actually knows  ::)

« Reply #442 on: June 26, 2015, 07:32 »
0
But fotomore doesnt give local chinese artists a chance to contribute to istock, or does it? If it does, it would be great, but I havent heard that it was designed to be a chinese community site. You would probably also have a chinese forum section on istock if they were going local. But they dont even have a spanish one and the foreign language forums no longer have dedicated staff.

SS also sells in china, all sites do. The question was how do you attract local producers who dont speak english. Because the people who dont speak foreign languages are obviously the most truly locally oriented. Their whole world revolves around their own culture.

Fotolia has experience in setting up something really local. And it takes time to build up a local community, once you have it, other agencies cannot easily come in and take them away. People are creatures of habit, it doesnt mean it isnt possible, but it is hard work attracting them.

istock still has the lypses which are great events and very focussed on producing high quality content, with art direction and to get people to meet each other. But you still need some basic fluency in English to take part and have fun.

Of course SS and istock can try to push into Europe or other places. Just like Fotolia will be pushing more towards the US.

Now they can also piggyback on the adobe world that has lots of presentations and events for media producers. We will see if it leads to more sales in North America, who knows. And I am curious how the other agencies will respond. Maybe they will consider exclusive images too,who knows.

« Last Edit: June 26, 2015, 07:42 by cobalt »

« Reply #443 on: July 14, 2015, 11:34 »
+2
Surprised to see this:
"55% of Shutterstock users indicated they would shift usage from Shutterstock to Adobe Stock if features were offered in the Adobe Creative Cloud that made importing images easier"
http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2015/07/14/morgan-stanley-highlights-seven-e-commerce-and-media-stocks/

« Reply #444 on: July 14, 2015, 11:51 »
0
How much easier can it be to import images?  I would of thought the hard bit was finding them in the first place and Fotolia must be way behind on that.

« Reply #445 on: July 14, 2015, 12:06 »
+1
It doesn't say easier than what, maybe they mean easier than from SS in which case it already is easier so you can expect a large number of buyers to move to Adobe. 

« Reply #446 on: July 14, 2015, 12:51 »
0
Your royalty will be lower than SS by a fairly large margin depending on your level.
Single sales at SS (2 for $29 is smallest package) each $4.35 at Adobe $3.30
On Demand sales at SS $2.85 at Adobe $1.65 or .99.
Subs at SS 38 cents at Adobe 31 cents for same level.

So it's about a 20-70% RPD loss depending on the type of sale. 

but this would be of no consequence if your upload to fotolia is different from your usual ss port.
i remember when i was with fotolia way before the dollar club issue, my sales there were different from the port i had with ss ,etc

« Reply #447 on: July 14, 2015, 14:00 »
+1
Surprised to see this:
"55% of Shutterstock users indicated they would shift usage from Shutterstock to Adobe Stock if features were offered in the Adobe Creative Cloud that made importing images easier"
http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2015/07/14/morgan-stanley-highlights-seven-e-commerce-and-media-stocks/


That seems to imply that 55% of all users would switch but more likely it was 55% of the polled group of Creative Cloud users that would switch. 

« Reply #448 on: July 14, 2015, 14:05 »
0
Surprised to see this:
"55% of Shutterstock users indicated they would shift usage from Shutterstock to Adobe Stock if features were offered in the Adobe Creative Cloud that made importing images easier"
http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2015/07/14/morgan-stanley-highlights-seven-e-commerce-and-media-stocks/


That seems to imply that 55% of all users would switch but more likely it was 55% of the polled group of Creative Cloud users that would switch.

It costs $2400 per year for a SS subscription, I would bet almost all of the yearly subscribers are using Adobe ($600 per month for complete and only $120 for PS).

« Reply #449 on: July 16, 2015, 11:49 »
+1
It costs $2400 per year for a SS subscription, I would bet almost all of the yearly subscribers are using Adobe ($600 per month for complete and only $120 for PS).

I know a couple of big blogs that use Shutterstock for their 5-20 articles they publish each and every day. I wouldn't know why they would need any Adobe product as they use the images just the way they get them from Shutterstock. Not sure if that looks so much different for most editorial users.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
8 Replies
4574 Views
Last post June 19, 2015, 13:09
by Rage
3 Replies
3525 Views
Last post June 18, 2015, 13:29
by Sean Locke Photography
17 Replies
6569 Views
Last post November 27, 2015, 10:38
by logeeker
6 Replies
7408 Views
Last post August 18, 2017, 17:25
by SpaceStockFootage
323 Replies
37661 Views
Last post April 23, 2021, 03:59
by Mimi the Cat

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle