yes, the current management seems to be very destructive to the places they take over.

now comes the "merger", wonder what will happen now.

but irrespective of what is happening at ss...loads of people keep insisting stock is dead when it is not.

however it needs uploads. hence my question.

I honestly prefer for people to say the microstock it's dead, at least that will not encourage new people to adventure on this field, more chances for the rest of us.

No, stock is not dead. As long as people can see, there will always be demand for visual advertising.

And Competition is a good thing - it pushes you out of your comfort zone and forces you to improve.

Regarding SS, I wonder how much of the variation in sales and income is regional. Maybe SS $$$ have virtually collapsed in the US, but may be doing fine in other parts of the world?...maybe where they spend their advertising dollars?

Maybe it's not dead, but it's a dying business for us contributors. It's definitely not healthy.

I have almost twenty years of experience and everything doesn't seem to work as always.

Today, 4:30 PM, European time:

SS 42 sales $6.25
AS 20 sales $9.40

Total 62 sales $15.65

For over 15 years I've had an RPD higher than $1 ... this month it's between 0.50 and 0.60 ... today it's 0.25.

This business is becoming a win-lose-win ... the agencies that make profits with many zeros win and the customers who buy lots of images at low prices win.

We, contributors, are the ones who are losing.

Then, if someone is satisfied with such a low RPD I'm happy for them.

The problem is not selling images, I sell over 30,000 licenses a year. The problem is the size of our reward.

Then why is my experience so different?

Your experience doesn't seem different from mine. 

I see that your RPD on Adobe is also about 0.70, like mine ... in these 5 days of February the average is 0.74

These are my historical RPD on Adobe Stock (I don't have videos, only photos).

2019 $1.02
2020 $0.98
2021 $0.94
2022 $0.84
2023 $0.81
2024 $0.77

This means that if I sell 10,000 images, in 2019 I earned 10,200 dollars and today I earn 7,700 dollars.

I lost 2,500 dollars selling the same number of images. Are you happy? I'm happy for you. I'm not.

I'm not talking to you about Shutterstock where things are even worse.

I still manage to have a full-time salary, but every year, I work more and more, and sell more and more photos but the income remains the same. Like the hamster in the wheel.

Thank you very much, I have seen your reports sometimes and IMHO your sales on AS are too few to make a valid statistic (sorry about that  ).

I have never given my images in the Adobe free collection. 

Maybe that's why I am punished by Adobe, who has made me stay in the weekly ranking between position 2500 and 3500 for years 

But now I understand what you are saying, with the rpd dropping you will earn less on adobe with the same amount of sales.

No, I didn't lose any profits on Adobe Stock.

My number of sales from 2019 to 2024 increased by 44%, but my earnings only increased by 8%, because my RPD went from $1.02 to $0.77 and I think it's still going down ...

I'm losing earnings on Shutterstock, though it's still my best agency for now.

Definitely yes, inflation has eroded even this small increase. 

I got this increase in sales by increasing my hours of work dedicated to microstock, but it was of no use.

My content doesn't like the Adobe algorithm, and I still don't understand why. And unfortunately for me, all the clients are going there.

As you may remember, I have always believed more in quantity than quality, and the Shutterstock algorithm and other agencies (including POD) have rewarded me for over 15 years ... but now maybe it's time for a change.

Since July I have changed strategy, more quantity and less quality (I have decreased my time for retouching).

In a few months, we will see if it works. My January 2025 was 15% better than January 2024 (on all my agencies), but February started very badly.

I don't know about the death of stock. In a different group I was talking to a young 20 year old who spent the last two years doing only stock and has now reached 1300 a month on adobe with 13k files.

yes, he is an ai uploader, but obviously he also researched what is needed very well.

he is also in the minority in the ai community, while many upload gigantic volumes, most don't have good sales. although for their respective countries even 50 dollars a month is probably a great help for the family.

no, i have not seen his port and it is all on a trust me bro level but he comes across as very genuine.

I don't know if high volume is the answer.

Personally I am going to reduce my uploads and focus on more quality, especially with ai.

more like 8-15 uploads a day, instead of 20-35.

I am really curious how this year develops and what people keep reporting about their sales.

and of course i wil pick up my camera again for video and photo.

Here my RPD numbers on Adobe (note the switch from Euro to USD in 2023 and 2024 if you compare the numbers). Port is 99% well selling photos with a few rarely selling videos.

2016: 1.34 Euro
2017: 1.25 Euro
2018: 1.25 Euro
2019: 1.19 Euro
2020: 1.17 Euro
2021: 1.04 Euro
2022: 0.91 Euro
2023: 0.88 USD
2024: 0.85 USD

Yes, microstock is dying. Admittedly not as fast as I expected, but the trend is clear

It looks like my downward progression... 

I think if the image is useful it will sell just as well as any camera image. Plus getting in early might secure good positions in the algos, one of the main reasons I spent the last two years learning how to use ai.

Ai does not work quickly, you see all the perfect images online, you don't see the thousands of tries it took to get a few good images. For many things doing it with camera is a lot faster and cheaper.

The files then still need a lot of post processing. There are loads of complaints that adobe standards are now getting really strict. Which is good for the customer.

You still need to do research and understand what sells and have basic understanding how visual media works.

This is what the youtubers don't teach you. They sell a fantasy that you need to upload thousands of files (daily?) without any research what is needed. Or they recommend to sort by downloads and then copy all the first pages.

I think the number of newbies doing ai will drop as the magic money never appears.

But like in all cases of crowd platforms, a few people will specialize and become really good.

I don't think camera content is dead.

It has the advantage that you can sell it on all agencies.

And you can receive dataset training royalties or ai creation royalties. Especially the latter might gradually add up.

Ai is a useful tool, but with very few exceptions from some talented producers with a good natural talent for visual media, it is not a magic money machine.

Like you said, it does have the advantage that material like images with cruise ships, oil rigs, hospitals can be included in the content, but you still need to be very careful with copyright, for instance some cruise ships look like famous cruise ships and then you cannot use the image.

It also does not get technical details right.

If you have a "doctor" in a hospital in front as a portrait and then sort of a hospital room in the blurry background it will work, but don't expect the ai to create technology correct interiors.

You will not get a real electronic workbench and even with a nail salon I thin it will be hard to get the technical details right.

But for conceptual images with a fantasy industrial workplace flair in the background and the endless stream of young people with hard hats in front...for that it works.

But details of people working closely on a microscope, or repairing electronics etc...those details will be incorrect.

So that is where the camera has a huge advantage.

Also for animals, plants with a camera you get the real thing, with ai you get fantasy hybrids that do not exist in nature.


So...this came out longer than expected. What I wanted to say is that ai will never replace camera content.
But it is a creative add on media.

With the biggest advantage for a designer that he can use ai to modify existing stock images to get it just right.

I wish you a successful year, will be interesting to see how we all do and if our ports can rise.

RPD Adobe:

2019: 0.64
2020: 0.71
2021: 0.95
2022: 0.87
2023: 1.00
2024: 0.99

the RPD is good,what I lack is the quantity,the number of sales is too low,the increase between one year and another is practically insignificant,only between 2022 and 2023 was there a significant increase.

even in these first 6 days of February I sold the same number as February 2024,two less sales to be exact.

real photos or AI makes no difference,it depends on what it is and how it is made.

one of the biggest problem in my opinion are the free sites,for example I read news every day and every day I see content downloaded for free from free sites,all lost customers.

Quote from: Faustvasea on February 06, 2025, 04:59

I won�t say using a camera is cheaper. I would probably say using Ai is cheaper. To get a decent camera, you need to invest couple of grands, you want awesome quality, you need top notch glass, that ain�t cheaper. But yes, it is quicker at some point to click the button and take the photo.

Not necessarily true, except probably for wildlife, sports and high-end portrait photography. I often sell files made with an entry level DSLR and glass I bought over 10 years ago. Current value of the whole system is probably below $100. If you are on budget, you can get a perfectly fine used camera and glass for maybe below $300-400.

I guess depends what you are shooting. A good glass still won�t be cheap. Example
I have Canon EF macro 100mm L which cost me nearly �1k, and provideds
Me with amazing results compared to the 50mm lens which cost me �130.