pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Introducing the free collection from Adobe Stock  (Read 5903 times)

4 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

« Reply #100 on: October 15, 2020, 10:44 »
+4
To all on this forum. Who is a competitor to Photoshop software. Is their any ?


https://www.gimp.org/


« Reply #101 on: October 15, 2020, 10:45 »
+15
Giving photos away for free is not going to attract new customers, it's just going to attract people who don't want to pay for anything.

If Adobe really wants to help and support contributors they should raise the royalty rate. It's as simple as that.

« Reply #102 on: October 15, 2020, 10:52 »
+8
The News app on my iPhone gives me free access to tons of great stories from many sources.  Some are only available on News+ and they are always trying to get me to upgrade.  While some of those stories look interesting, the same content often becomes available for free in a few days from the same or a different source, so I can get access to 97-plus percent of what I want for free, and I have gotten very good at just skipping over any that are listed in News+.  The probability that I am ever going to sign up for the paid news is basically zero.  I suspect the same is going to happen here.  Once we get it in our minds that the price for something is free, getting people to pay for it later is unlikely.  After the word gets out that you can download over 36,000 high-quality images for free every year there will be no need for anyone to pay for them ever again - I certainly wouldn't.  Commercial clients might occasionally if they can't get exactly the image they want but within a few months I expect those will be very few and far between.  I hope I'm wrong but I won't be holding my breath on this one.

« Reply #103 on: October 15, 2020, 11:10 »
+7
I'm guessing a lot less than the paying users who will now turn into free users.

That seems like the only reasonable thing to assume.

After all, if just by signing up at Adobe one can get 100 x 30 = 3,000 free photos per month x 12 = 36,000 free photos per year

Why on earth would one even bother looking at the other images that are not free???

Geez.
  Why would anyone buy images on Shutterstock, Istock or any of the other sites when they can get over 30,000 free images a year on Adobe. This will hurt/damage image makers. It will grow the Adobe business.  ....

« Reply #104 on: October 15, 2020, 11:12 »
+5
I'm guessing a lot less than the paying users who will now turn into free users.

That seems like the only reasonable thing to assume.

After all, if just by signing up at Adobe one can get 100 x 30 = 3,000 free photos per month x 12 = 36,000 free photos per year

Why on earth would one even bother looking at the other images that are not free???

Geez.
  Why would anyone buy images on Shutterstock, Istock or any of the other sites when they can get over 30,000 free images a year on Adobe. This will hurt/damage image makers. It will grow the Adobe business.  ....
A loss leader where the contributors make the loss.

Dio

« Reply #105 on: October 15, 2020, 11:13 »
+16
So there you have it folks... Adobe Stock seemed to be the sweetheart of the stock business, the one who played fair and square above everyone else and "respects the artist" (how many times have I heard this...), right?...Not.

You just hit Download on ANY free items and get the media straightaway. 'Clients' can simply sign up with their Google or FB account if they don't have an AS account. No fuss, no questions asked. If you happen to have multiple Google accounts, voil, that's 100 times those accounts on a daily basis, if those 100 items per day are not enough (which I suspect won't).

I rarely show up in this forum, and much less often to rant, but I'm still shell-shocked by this piece of news. This move will likely undermine our sales not only in AS but throughout other marketplaces and seriously jeopardize our already ailing bottom line in the long run, if not earlier.

Other agencies give away free items, but in very limited numbers and somehow (in)directly tied to paid content. The fact AS left out any references to paid content as an 'afterthought' that will/might be implemented 'in the due course' (like the infamous Editorial images/videos and the possibility of choosing video thumbnails, features that have been requested time and time again for over 5 years, right Matt?), means that AS has something else in the cards, something that could prove to be entirely disruptive to our industry as a whole and to those who struggle to make a living out of this.

Already salivating for the next piece of exciting news...

JaenStock

  • Bad images can sell.
« Reply #106 on: October 15, 2020, 11:26 »
+9
Please, all stock agencies, stop doing stupid experiments.

With 70,000 free premium photos, any topic is covered.

The thief is not educated by giving him what he does not pay

« Reply #107 on: October 15, 2020, 11:40 »
+5
Mat has apparently sweet-talked the powers that be into including a row of paid results into free searches!

And this is hot off the presses - I was doing some test searches this morning and the feature wasn't there, but just in the last 10 minutes or so it is. It doesn't make this new Free section good, but it is an important step that paid content is now on any page for a free search.

One request for multi-word searches with no free results (like the example I posted yesterday): I still get two rows of alternate two word searches in the free section before I get the paid row of images, a paid row of videos, etc.

It'd be fine to see some alternate searches suggested (with just words) for the free section, but as it is, it looks as if a wrong search in the free section is preferable to paying for anything :)

PZF

« Reply #108 on: October 15, 2020, 11:50 »
+1
Early on Mat mentioned another piece of 'news' coming our way soon...

Anybody seen it yet? While we are on a roll....

Shelma1

« Reply #109 on: October 15, 2020, 11:50 »
+5
Sorry, but this is like someone punching you in the face ten times, and then after you ask them to stop because theyre hurting you, they punch you in the face nine times.

wds

« Reply #110 on: October 15, 2020, 11:52 »
+3
I am not making light of this at all, this is how I felt after reading first post announcing the free program:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK9odsWwfIo


« Reply #111 on: October 15, 2020, 11:58 »
+3
Mat has apparently sweet-talked the powers that be into including a row of paid results into free searches!

And this is hot off the presses - I was doing some test searches this morning and the feature wasn't there, but just in the last 10 minutes or so it is. It doesn't make this new Free section good, but it is an important step that paid content is now on any page for a free search.

One request for multi-word searches with no free results (like the example I posted yesterday): I still get two rows of alternate two word searches in the free section before I get the paid row of images, a paid row of videos, etc.

It'd be fine to see some alternate searches suggested (with just words) for the free section, but as it is, it looks as if a wrong search in the free section is preferable to paying for anything :)

Thanks for this post Jo Ann. I don't know about how much "sweet talking" I did, but I was pleased to see such a quick response and fix. I was told yesterday this was happening but did not want to give any promises until I saw the update live. Content from the paid collection is now showing up in the free collection search results in an effort to convert free users to paying customers.

Thanks for all the feedback everyone. I appreciate the passion.

-Mat

« Reply #112 on: October 15, 2020, 12:05 »
0
Is there anywhere where we can read about the Licensing terms for the free images, I couldn't find it.
Is there uses they cannot be used for such as Print on demand etc?

Its the regular standard license.  Which is crazy.  Even Getty made their free editorial images come in a labeled box with rules.

Even worse, videos come with an extended license.  For free.

Thanks Sean. To clarify, videos come with an enhanced license, not an extended license. This is the case with all video downloads at Adobe Stock.

The difference can be found here: https://stock.adobe.com/license-terms#enhancedLicenses

-Mat

« Reply #113 on: October 15, 2020, 12:09 »
0
I just went on the Adobe Free section. I went through about 1000 images... 99% of these images are model/people images. Very good model/people images. If you shot models I would guess your sales will go to zero in the future. It will be interesting to see if Adobe adds more diversity to this collection with different types of images. One of the big contributors was  Rawpixel.com. I do not know this photo house but very heavy on the typical stock model picture. Typical but very good images. 
 

« Reply #114 on: October 15, 2020, 12:13 »
+2
My bad.  I thought "enhanced" was Adobe's term for "extended".

« Reply #115 on: October 15, 2020, 12:15 »
+1
To all on this forum. Who is a competitor to Photoshop software. Is their any ?

In some countries the abuse of a dominant position is an offence punishable by law.
And yes, there is software as Gimp (free) or Afinity Photo (no subscription - Available on iPad)
« Last Edit: October 15, 2020, 12:18 by Chichikov »

« Reply #116 on: October 15, 2020, 12:24 »
+3

« Reply #117 on: October 15, 2020, 12:37 »
+1
Is anyone else seeing an effect so far from this?

I don't want to jump to conclusions, but I had great sales on Tues and Wed, and today -- apparently the first full day of this being in effect -- my sales are in the toilet.  I'll probably end up 70% down from the last few days. Possibly lower than a Saturday.

Anyone else seeing this effect already?

« Reply #118 on: October 15, 2020, 12:43 »
+9
I usually never come on the forums, but this announcement, this was just too much. Bad news for all contributors who spend their time uploading good work.

In this difficult time, when we're already making such a small cut from our own content

- instead of help, you Adobe decided to hammer a nail into the coffin.

PZF

« Reply #119 on: October 15, 2020, 12:56 »
0
I usually never come on the forums, but this announcement, this was just too much. Bad news for all contributors who spend their time uploading good work.

In this difficult time, when we're already making such a small cut from our own content

- instead of help, you Adobe decided to hammer a nail into the coffin.

Same old, same old for me....... Bit better than recent days which have, though, been utterly feeble.

« Reply #120 on: October 15, 2020, 12:57 »
+2
The News app on my iPhone gives me free access to tons of great stories from many sources.  Some are only available on News+ and they are always trying to get me to upgrade.  While some of those stories look interesting, the same content often becomes available for free in a few days from the same or a different source, so I can get access to 97-plus percent of what I want for free, and I have gotten very good at just skipping over any that are listed in News+.  The probability that I am ever going to sign up for the paid news is basically zero.  I suspect the same is going to happen here.  Once we get it in our minds that the price for something is free, getting people to pay for it later is unlikely.  After the word gets out that you can download over 36,000 high-quality images for free every year there will be no need for anyone to pay for them ever again - I certainly wouldn't.  Commercial clients might occasionally if they can't get exactly the image they want but within a few months I expect those will be very few and far between.  I hope I'm wrong but I won't be holding my breath on this one.

I think your news app analogy is very appropriate for this conversation. My question for you is this...did you ever pay for a News app before you started getting the articles for free? If not, then they have lost nothing from you. Do you however, believe that other people are willing to pay for the news app that were drawn in through an article they found for free? My gut says the answer is yes. How many people were subscribing to have the paper delivered to their door until the digital era kicked in and completely disrupted the industry? How many papers went out of business because they didn't adapt to the changes fast enough?

The people that only visit stock sites that offer content for free had no chance of ever buying a license from you. As was illustrated earlier in this thread, those sites have picked up a lot of momentum and that hasn't seemed to be slowing down. Now, there is at least a chance to convert the people visiting for the free collection into paying customers. This has already proven to be true in just the first day of the program as I've learned multiple visitors through free converted and made purchases yesterday which is very good news. The collection size, content, the download use, everything about this is being closely monitored by people much smarter than I am whom I trust. They will be reacting appropriately.

I've heard your concerns loud and clear and I promise that I understand them. I'm in constant communication with the team and I will continue to keep you updated as I learn anything that you may find important.

Thanks,

Mat

« Reply #121 on: October 15, 2020, 12:57 »
+8
I just went on the Adobe Free section. I went through about 1000 images... 99% of these images are model/people images. Very good model/people images. If you shot models I would guess your sales will go to zero in the future. It will be interesting to see if Adobe adds more diversity to this collection with different types of images. One of the big contributors was  Rawpixel.com. I do not know this photo house but very heavy on the typical stock model picture. Typical but very good images.

If you want to take a look at the major contributors to the free section - and I agree that for the most part the content is excellent - I made a list of links yesterday.

There are some really odd (ironic) elements to the deal these contributors & Adobe made with each other:

Jeremy Bishop (~4,000 assets free) also has a portfolio on Unsplash. One of his free photos on Unsplash is a paid download at Adobe Stock. Not only is he undermining the rest of contributors with his decision to do the free section, he's undermining Adobe with his Unsplash portfolio

This guy's photos are gorgeous. I can't square his Unsplash bio "I love supporting and inspiring creatives around the world...." with all of the above.

https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=207154988

Another of the free collection contributors, Artinspiring, is also at Freepik (premium section). I'd give him/her an award for keyword spamming (this Santa showed up in a beach search I did). These aren't a few accidental, slightly relevant terms...

https://stock.adobe.com/images/isolated-santa-claus-standing-on-white-background/127807443

vector woman swimming suit standing little dog flat girl beach beautiful bikini body cartoon cute female power happiness holiday illustration lady person young attractive background positive carefree caucasian character cheerful chubby dance enjoyment fashion fat fun happy isolated joy jump long hair overweight party plus size pretty puppy self acceptance

https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=206203859

Here's the rest of the list. It was very dispiriting to see Jacob Lund's great work in this collection - remember he was setting up software for direct sales and came here to gauge interest?

The only weak link/good news for paid contributors here is Wirestock. For all the other contributors of illustrations or images (I didn't look at video as I don't really have a clue how to evaluate it), these portfolios show you what not to bother shooting during the coming year.

No one can compete with free.

Which also makes me wonder how the agencies that are selling the now-free images will feel about what Adobe has done. This free image is $25 at Pond5, $19.99 to $199 at Alamy (at least in theory) and also at Shutterstock, Dreamstime and Deposit Photos. There are lots of other examples like this as the factories spread themselves around

Oct 20,2020: Edited to add that I noticed today that at Dreamstime, the above image is still there but has a banner I've not seen before: "This image is no longer available to download". Pond5 no longer shows it "Oh no! It appears this item is no longer available on Pond5. Try searching again to find something else you might like." Shutterstock, Deposit Photos and Alamy are still showing the image. No idea if this is something the agencies initiated or WavebreakMedia did

WavebreakMediaMicro (over 10,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=200849471

wavebreak3(~4,200)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=206922540

Rawpixel.com (over 10,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=204567087

Wirestock (~5,300)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=208428317
 
Caia Image (~4,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=209253708

Jacob Lund (~7,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=224608

Hero Images (~7,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=209254274

Good Studio (~3,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=206710010
 
Gstudio (~4,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=201303411
 
Visual Generation (~4,000)
https://stock.adobe.com/search/free?creator_id=201052191
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 13:37 by Jo Ann Snover »

Mir

« Reply #122 on: October 15, 2020, 12:58 »
+3
Is anyone else seeing an effect so far from this?

I don't want to jump to conclusions, but I had great sales on Tues and Wed, and today -- apparently the first full day of this being in effect -- my sales are in the toilet.  I'll probably end up 70% down from the last few days. Possibly lower than a Saturday.

Anyone else seeing this effect already?


The effect won't be immediate. It will take some time until it is posted on all the forums, groups etc. We will now start seeing happy people sharing the great news.

« Reply #123 on: October 15, 2020, 13:04 »
+12
Now, there is at least a chance to convert the people visiting for the free collection into paying customers.

Maybe, but there's a better chance of converting paying customers to the free content.  I mean someone who isn't likely to pay, who is drawn in by high quality free content might buy one or two of something they find missing in that tier.  But the paying customer, I would imagine, is more likely to not buy as many as possible and choose from the free section instead.

JoAnne, none of those links are working for me.

« Reply #124 on: October 15, 2020, 13:13 »
0
JoAnne, none of those links are working for me.

I just tried a couple and they worked. Chrome, MacOS, I am logged in to Adobe Stock (although that shouldn't matter)...

Tried on my phone too (Android, Chrome) and that worked as well
« Last Edit: October 15, 2020, 13:36 by Jo Ann Snover »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
5680 Views
Last post February 23, 2010, 17:35
by MicrostockExp
13 Replies
7863 Views
Last post November 24, 2014, 13:13
by J_Stock
474 Replies
64246 Views
Last post July 18, 2015, 11:50
by cobalt
8 Replies
2300 Views
Last post September 12, 2016, 13:46
by PixelBytes
3 Replies
2016 Views
Last post January 06, 2017, 04:28
by MarcvsTvllivs

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle