MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Introducing the free collection from Adobe Stock  (Read 8208 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: October 14, 2020, 14:06 »
0
I guess it comes down to how much the contributors get paid and how long is that while and are they going for best sellers of undiscovered gems.


Will it always be the same chosen few who get paid? If so, it probably is a good deal for them.

Not so much for the unchosen rest of us.

I hope and assume that they will diversify, it just makes sense.  Will all contributors take part? I assume not. If they want to buy good images that got buried for no reason, for a year and for an honest and fair price, which will be very low for images that have never sold...this can work if done fairly.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


« Reply #26 on: October 14, 2020, 14:30 »
+4
If selected, can contributors opt out?
Many of us have some media that sells very well, regularly on many sites.
We certainly wouldn't want the main paid images given away for free anywhere as it'll clearly affect sales.

« Reply #27 on: October 14, 2020, 14:34 »
0
I guess it comes down to how much the contributors get paid and how long is that while and are they going for best sellers of undiscovered gems.


Will it always be the same chosen few who get paid? If so, it probably is a good deal for them.

Not so much for the unchosen rest of us.

I hope and assume that they will diversify, it just makes sense.  Will all contributors take part? I assume not. If they want to buy good images that got buried for no reason, for a year and for an honest and fair price, which will be very low for images that have never sold...this can work if done fairly.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't want to speculate as to who, how or when additional contributors will be added so I can't answer this. When I know, I'll be sure to share here in the forum.

-Mat

« Reply #28 on: October 14, 2020, 15:03 »
0
If selected, can contributors opt out?
Many of us have some media that sells very well, regularly on many sites.
We certainly wouldn't want the main paid images given away for free anywhere as it'll clearly affect sales.

Yes

« Reply #29 on: October 14, 2020, 15:14 »
+8

...I reached out to the team ... I expect changes will be made in the future.


Mat, I don't envy your situation, and I know you're relaying information on our behalf, but...

We - contributors - have heard a lot about things Adobe will be doing on the contributor side of things, but not much has been delivered. Getting the stats back to what Fotolia had, searching our portfolios (on the contributor side) by keywords, and on and on - you know the list, I know.

If we could get a commitment from the development team and a rough date for when these changes (to ensure paid content shows in free searches) would happen, that would make this more than "let's do lunch sometime". Jim Pickerell's article says "Adobe intends to monitor and fine tune the collection on a daily basis". It doesn't provide details, but if work is ongoing, let's make this less of a gut punch for existing contributors by keeping paid content visible.

If I were in a position to define what should happen, in addition to showing paid content in searches with very few results, I'd also say that every single page of search results of free images should have one row of paid content (preferably up top, but even below would be OK). IMO, there should never be any page without some paid content visible. You could make the paid content row smaller thumbnails if you wanted, but it should just be there somewhere so the site doesn't look like Unsplash.

Shelma1

« Reply #30 on: October 14, 2020, 15:23 »
+29
I just dont know which sites to recommend to my colleagues any more. Or whether its worth doing this any more. All the sites seem to be finding exciting ways to rip us off. You pull your work from iStock because theyre giving stuff away for a penny, and you concentrate on Shutterstock. Then Shutterstock slashes royalties, and you pull your work from SS and upload more to Adobe...only to have Adobe give away competing images for free. Pond5 and Alamy must be working on their own exciting news now that weve migrated to them. But its a really fun year otherwise! Ha ha.

« Reply #31 on: October 14, 2020, 15:25 »
+3
And so it starts....

« Reply #32 on: October 14, 2020, 15:28 »
+7
I just dont know which sites to recommend to my colleagues any more. Or whether its worth doing this any more. All the sites seem to be finding exciting ways to rip us off. You pull your work from iStock because theyre giving stuff away for a penny, and you concentrate on Shutterstock. Then Shutterstock slashes royalties, and you pull your work from SS and upload more to Adobe...only to have Adobe give away competing images for free. Pond5 and Alamy must be working on their own exciting news now that weve migrated to them. But its a really fun year otherwise! Ha ha.

It's not worth doing stock any more... been like that for a while.

« Reply #33 on: October 14, 2020, 15:30 »
+2
@MatHayward

Is there any download limit per day/week? Can someone download all 70.000 assets without any time limit if they want?

« Reply #34 on: October 14, 2020, 15:35 »
+15
Free....many years ago I put an image on Can Stock as a free image. it stayed free for nearly a year. I guess I could of ask them to take it down. It was a picture of a football on fire. I think it was given away to the tune of 15,000 times. I never got any more sales by having a free picture on Can Stock. Then Can Stock is third tier at best. I really think free dose not work. If free worked the hookers down by the dock would give it away free. Good luck Adobe....

« Reply #35 on: October 14, 2020, 15:46 »
+2

...I reached out to the team ... I expect changes will be made in the future.


Mat, I don't envy your situation, and I know you're relaying information on our behalf, but...

We - contributors - have heard a lot about things Adobe will be doing on the contributor side of things, but not much has been delivered. Getting the stats back to what Fotolia had, searching our portfolios (on the contributor side) by keywords, and on and on - you know the list, I know.

If we could get a commitment from the development team and a rough date for when these changes (to ensure paid content shows in free searches) would happen, that would make this more than "let's do lunch sometime". Jim Pickerell's article says "Adobe intends to monitor and fine tune the collection on a daily basis". It doesn't provide details, but if work is ongoing, let's make this less of a gut punch for existing contributors by keeping paid content visible.

If I were in a position to define what should happen, in addition to showing paid content in searches with very few results, I'd also say that every single page of search results of free images should have one row of paid content (preferably up top, but even below would be OK). IMO, there should never be any page without some paid content visible. You could make the paid content row smaller thumbnails if you wanted, but it should just be there somewhere so the site doesn't look like Unsplash.

Totally fair feedback and you're right. I'm not going to make promises on timelines for overdue portal fixes including statistics. I can promise you I'm bringing up these requests/needs every time it is appropriate to do so.

Regarding the improvement of paid collection integration into free collection, I'm confident this will happen VERY soon. I'm reluctant to make a specific date/time promise because anything can happen but clearly this is a necessary fix that will ultimately work to drive additional sales which as mentioned before, benefits all parties involved. It's a no-brainer and you have my word, it will be happening soon.

-Mat

« Reply #36 on: October 14, 2020, 15:59 »
+10
Free....many years ago I put an image on Can Stock as a free image. it stayed free for nearly a year. I guess I could of ask them to take it down. It was a picture of a football on fire. I think it was given away to the tune of 15,000 times. I never got any more sales by having a free picture on Can Stock. Then Can Stock is third tier at best. I really think free dose not work. If free worked the hookers down by the dock would give it away free. Good luck Adobe....

You keep forgetting that Matt works for free because Adobe gives away all their products for free. My housing is also free just as my food and other living expenses. I also take pictures with my free camera and use my free computer to upload content via my free internet.


« Reply #37 on: October 14, 2020, 16:04 »
+28
In my opinion this is way too many assets at way too high a quality level for a free collection. It would be one thing to offer a much smaller rotating collection of free content meant to showcase as many contributors as possible and actually highlight the paid content.  This just looks like giving up and saying even Adobe apparently can't/won't stand up to the Pixabay crowd.

This line from the FAQ is particularly tone deaf to me:

Why does Adobe Stock offer a free collection? Won't it directly compete with the paid collection?
There is a growing demand for free content.

So what? There are always people who want everything for free. There is a growing demand for free software too, will there be a rotating free app in Creative Cloud each year? Adobe's contributors are also it's customers, and it certainly feels like a slap in the face to people who've paid thousands of dollars for Adobe apps over many years.

I feel a little silly now for singing Adobe's praises so loudly over the last year, and sending all my clients there. I was so pleased with all the open communication, the Discord communities, the webinars, the time and patience Mat spends here answering questions....but a move like this from the last agency I can say I actually trusted is just exhausting and deeply disheartening.

I've patiently explained to people countless times the advantages of properly licensing images from a trusted agency over downloading from the free sites.  This just muddies the waters further for people who think all images should be free in the first place.

« Reply #38 on: October 14, 2020, 16:05 »
0
@MatHayward

Is there any download limit per day/week? Can someone download all 70.000 assets without any time limit if they want?

@theendup...yes, there is a download limit. For customers without a paid subscription or credits, they are limited to a maximum of 100 downloads per day. This number is subject to change as we gather more data on customer behavior.

Thanks for the question.

-Mat

« Reply #39 on: October 14, 2020, 16:24 »
+8
Well... maybe the free collection is the reason why my sales dropped to almost "zero" during the last 2 weeks... 4x 0.33 sales last week, 1x 0,33 sale this week.
Or maybe the search pattern has been changed due to the new announced collection, who knows...

Am I getting the following questions right:

(a) Only handpicked (by Adobe) contributors can show their content in the free collection or can anyone offer images there?

(b) The free collection should attract new customers to AdobeStock, so Adobe is trying to get new people with free images to their site and make those people pay for images in the future? (Has this ever worked somewhere?)

(c) Free Download is limited to 100 downloads per day per user? Who would need more than 3000 images a month, why pay if you can get them for free?

Thanks :)

Shelma1

« Reply #40 on: October 14, 2020, 16:41 »
+7

...I reached out to the team ... I expect changes will be made in the future.


Mat, I don't envy your situation, and I know you're relaying information on our behalf, but...

We - contributors - have heard a lot about things Adobe will be doing on the contributor side of things, but not much has been delivered. Getting the stats back to what Fotolia had, searching our portfolios (on the contributor side) by keywords, and on and on - you know the list, I know.

If we could get a commitment from the development team and a rough date for when these changes (to ensure paid content shows in free searches) would happen, that would make this more than "let's do lunch sometime". Jim Pickerell's article says "Adobe intends to monitor and fine tune the collection on a daily basis". It doesn't provide details, but if work is ongoing, let's make this less of a gut punch for existing contributors by keeping paid content visible.

If I were in a position to define what should happen, in addition to showing paid content in searches with very few results, I'd also say that every single page of search results of free images should have one row of paid content (preferably up top, but even below would be OK). IMO, there should never be any page without some paid content visible. You could make the paid content row smaller thumbnails if you wanted, but it should just be there somewhere so the site doesn't look like Unsplash.

They were much too busy cutting deals with a few contributors and setting up a free section to have time to make any improvements for the rest of us.

« Reply #41 on: October 14, 2020, 16:42 »
0
In my opinion this is way too many assets at way too high a quality level for a free collection. It would be one thing to offer a much smaller rotating collection of free content meant to showcase as many contributors as possible and actually highlight the paid content.  This just looks like giving up and saying even Adobe apparently can't/won't stand up to the Pixabay crowd.

This line from the FAQ is particularly tone deaf to me:

Why does Adobe Stock offer a free collection? Won't it directly compete with the paid collection?
There is a growing demand for free content.

So what? There are always people who want everything for free. There is a growing demand for free software too, will there be a rotating free app in Creative Cloud each year? Adobe's contributors are also it's customers, and it certainly feels like a slap in the face to people who've paid thousands of dollars for Adobe apps over many years.

I feel a little silly now for singing Adobe's praises so loudly over the last year, and sending all my clients there. I was so pleased with all the open communication, the Discord communities, the webinars, the time and patience Mat spends here answering questions....but a move like this from the last agency I can say I actually trusted is just exhausting and deeply disheartening.

I've patiently explained to people countless times the advantages of properly licensing images from a trusted agency over downloading from the free sites.  This just muddies the waters further for people who think all images should be free in the first place.

I'm really sorry you feel that way Amanda. I have no intention of lowering my threshold for contributor advocacy and will continue to answer as many questions as I can in as transparent a way possible here in MSG, in the Adobe Stock Contributor Discord channel, in the Adobe Stock contributor forum, in the webinars, my personal social media, frankly anywhere and everywhere people will listen to what I have to say. In other words, I respect your position and the opinions you have shared in your post and I will do everything I can to see to it your faith is restored and that you will again be singing the praises of Adobe soon.

I've seen a number of tongue-in-cheek comments here about Adobe giving away software. I would like to remind you that we have given away tens of thousands of complimentary subscriptions through the Adobe Stock contributor Bonus Progam over the past couple of years and that we are continuing the tradition again with the 2020 program. So to answer your specific question... yes, for productive contributors Adobe is giving away a free app each year. If qualified, you can choose which app you want so technically, that could be considered a rotating app should you want it to be. I'm not trying to make light of your point but rather am pointing out that we've put a lot of heart-felt effort into making sure contributors know how much they are appreciated and to do so, we are willing to make considerable investments.

On that note, there was another big announcement from Adobe Stock today. While the other offical announcement was in tandem with the free collection, I feel it warrants a separate thread and conversation and will be posting about it here shortly.

Thanks again for the feedback. It is important for us to hear.

Mat

« Reply #42 on: October 14, 2020, 16:47 »
+10
I must admit I'm not very excited by these exciting news!
Any free content is adding fuel in the race to the bottom.

Shelma1

« Reply #43 on: October 14, 2020, 16:56 »
+5
I see when I go to stock.adobe.com not signed in, the default search is free.

« Reply #44 on: October 14, 2020, 16:58 »
0
Well... maybe the free collection is the reason why my sales dropped to almost "zero" during the last 2 weeks... 4x 0.33 sales last week, 1x 0,33 sale this week.
Or maybe the search pattern has been changed due to the new announced collection, who knows...

Am I getting the following questions right:

(a) Only handpicked (by Adobe) contributors can show their content in the free collection or can anyone offer images there?

(b) The free collection should attract new customers to AdobeStock, so Adobe is trying to get new people with free images to their site and make those people pay for images in the future? (Has this ever worked somewhere?)

(c) Free Download is limited to 100 downloads per day per user? Who would need more than 3000 images a month, why pay if you can get them for free?

Thanks :)

Thanks for the questions. To your first point. At the moment, I'm writing this the free collection has been available for 6 hours and 55 minutes. It has not impacted the sales of any contributors in any way prior to 8AM PST today.

a) Yes, you are correct. Only a small number of contributors has content in the free collection at this time. It's not open to submissions from other contributors right now but that will likely change in the future.

b) Yes, that's the plan. The free only sites are attracting a lot of potential customers. Our goal is to showcase Adobe Stock content and educate them on the value of having a safe license on released content. The end goal is to attract them to the larger, paid collection to entice them to purchase licenses for content outside the free collection. I don't know the answer to the second part of your question.

c) As to the download limit, it's a fluid process and as mentioned is subject to change as the data comes in. "Why buy the cow when you get the milk for free?" you ask? There is a wider selection of milk in the paid section...almond milk, coconut milk, rice milk, goat milk, pea milk (????), soy milk and even hemp milk (yes, I Googled this to make my point). You get the idea. Sure the cows milk is good, but is it perfect for your needs? I switched to Almond milk from cows milk and haven't had an issue paying more for it. It better suits my needs. I believe people that traditionally download free content will see the alternative options available in the paid collection and be willing to pay for them too.

Mat


« Reply #45 on: October 14, 2020, 17:12 »
0
I see when I go to stock.adobe.com not signed in, the default search is free.

I looked into this Shelma with various computers and browsers. Based on an informal look into it, the default appears to be set by your previous search parameters. If you do a search with "All" then click out entirely and go back, you'll find "All" to be your default search parameter.

Thanks for raising this with me.

-Mat

« Reply #46 on: October 14, 2020, 17:15 »
+1
After reading Adobe's announcement, i wanted to measure the demand of free photo sites.

I used similarweb.com for my quick search. According to similarweb.com; unsplash.com had 34.4 million, pixabay had 40.87 million and pexels.com had 27.17 million visitors between august 20th and september 20th.

In the same time period; dreamstime had 23.36, istockphoto had 31.83, pond5 had 2.14 and shutterstock had 67.63 million visitors.

I just wanted to leave this note here in case anyone is curious.

« Reply #47 on: October 14, 2020, 17:34 »
+1
When I go to the doctor, the first thing they ask me--"Who is your insurance carrier"?  No insurance you will not get service ist class. So, why should I not get paid for my creative work?  I am a professional musician (Trumpet) and a retired music professor with a PHD in music and also the Ist Grand Prize winner in the Smithsonian Magazine Photocontest.  To make the story short.  What goes around comes around.  So don't worry be happy.---Oscar Williams--Karma is a Bit##.

« Reply #48 on: October 14, 2020, 17:36 »
+4
Thanks for the answer Mat, your efforts here and everywhere you communicate truly are appreciated.

You make a fair point about the free subscriptions that are given away, between that and things like the creative residency programs there is definitely a lot that Adobe gives back to the community that you don't see from other companies.

I guess the part that worries me most is with it seeming like every site is moving in the direction of either cheaper images, lower commissions and/or free image sections I worry about being able to pay the other bills even if we manage to earn the software for free.

I'm not totally opposed to the idea of giving some things away, I've done it on my own sites occasionally for promotion, done free projects for charity and even contributed a few times to some open source projects.  Free can be good when done right for sure.

It's just the size and quality of this free collection and the fact that the main exposure of it seems like it will be limited to those artists who are hand picked that makes this feel more like a threat to potential sales than a benefit if that makes sense.  I will be watching for updates though, maybe if promotion of the paid content is worked in more efficiently it will be okay.

Also I'd love to see more details about the plans to educate free image users on licensing content. That sounds like a nice idea but in my experience it's really tough to turn someone looking for free goods into a paying customer without a really clearly defined plan.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2020, 17:40 by Amanda_K »

« Reply #49 on: October 14, 2020, 17:40 »
+1
Well... maybe the free collection is the reason why my sales dropped to almost "zero" during the last 2 weeks... 4x 0.33 sales last week, 1x 0,33 sale this week.
Or maybe the search pattern has been changed due to the new announced collection, who knows...

Am I getting the following questions right:

(a) Only handpicked (by Adobe) contributors can show their content in the free collection or can anyone offer images there?

(b) The free collection should attract new customers to AdobeStock, so Adobe is trying to get new people with free images to their site and make those people pay for images in the future? (Has this ever worked somewhere?)

(c) Free Download is limited to 100 downloads per day per user? Who would need more than 3000 images a month, why pay if you can get them for free?

Thanks :)

Thanks for the questions. To your first point. At the moment, I'm writing this the free collection has been available for 6 hours and 55 minutes. It has not impacted the sales of any contributors in any way prior to 8AM PST today.

a) Yes, you are correct. Only a small number of contributors has content in the free collection at this time. It's not open to submissions from other contributors right now but that will likely change in the future.

b) Yes, that's the plan. The free only sites are attracting a lot of potential customers. Our goal is to showcase Adobe Stock content and educate them on the value of having a safe license on released content. The end goal is to attract them to the larger, paid collection to entice them to purchase licenses for content outside the free collection. I don't know the answer to the second part of your question.

c) As to the download limit, it's a fluid process and as mentioned is subject to change as the data comes in. "Why buy the cow when you get the milk for free?" you ask? There is a wider selection of milk in the paid section...almond milk, coconut milk, rice milk, goat milk, pea milk (????), soy milk and even hemp milk (yes, I Googled this to make my point). You get the idea. Sure the cows milk is good, but is it perfect for your needs? I switched to Almond milk from cows milk and haven't had an issue paying more for it. It better suits my needs. I believe people that traditionally download free content will see the alternative options available in the paid collection and be willing to pay for them too.

Mat

Thanks a lot for your answers and your time, which cannot be taken for granted
(hopyfully my english is not going wring here)

I really hope this will lead to a success for Adobe and for all of us contributors, but I doubt that.
Lately there hasn't been any kind of good news for contributors within the stockfoto/video area - we will see :-)

Thanks, Michael


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
5702 Views
Last post February 23, 2010, 17:35
by MicrostockExp
13 Replies
7904 Views
Last post November 24, 2014, 13:13
by J_Stock
474 Replies
64536 Views
Last post July 18, 2015, 11:50
by cobalt
8 Replies
2334 Views
Last post September 12, 2016, 13:46
by PixelBytes
3 Replies
2042 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