MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: Jo Ann Snover on October 05, 2022, 15:52
-
https://unsplash.com/blog/introducing-unsplash/ (https://unsplash.com/blog/introducing-unsplash/)
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2022/10/05/2528745/0/en/Unsplash-launches-Unsplash-a-new-unlimited-subscription-offering-exclusive-content.html (https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2022/10/05/2528745/0/en/Unsplash-launches-Unsplash-a-new-unlimited-subscription-offering-exclusive-content.html)
There is a special discount as part of the launch - $84 for a year or $12 per month
https://unsplash.com/plus/ (https://unsplash.com/plus/)
-Unlimited royalty-free downloads
-Enhanced legal protections
They want to reassure that the old model isn't gone: "Don’t worry: the Unsplash open library isn’t going anywhere. Unsplash will continue to offer an extensive library of free visuals alongside Unsplash+."
As Getty Images' stock closed at $6.53 today, I guess they're looking for more sources of revenue to cheer up investors...
-
I keep forgetting they are now part of Getty.
They are offering paid work for exclusive content. I guess it will all depend on how many files they take from the briefs.
https://unsplash.com/blog/contribute-to-unsplash/?utm_source=vero&utm_medium=email&utm_content=control&utm_campaign=Unsplash%2B%20Launch&utm_term=Newsletter&vero_id=1770228&vero_conv=PmNPLiUVlfrNjJJhv6DvCZkyoCIhjtrL4OweMQIQD7QTZb7CsWqLnxI8ZoWyhVqumKkPw_XKh71z1r5DNloQB94F1lY3gXDkHw%3D%3D&fbclid=IwAR0YIVU9_PK4jqPhQFT6tyl6uWaNqBPkA3Z5xb2u8w3gWWnvXb6nlGMGB_8
Getting unsplash users used to the idea that you will get better much better quality content if you pay for it, is a step in the right direction. They will still attract millions of users looking for freebies, but a good quality paid collection should show a visible difference.
Sounds like a good move to me.
ETA: as for Gettys stock price, I sincerly doubt regular investors have anything to do with that price. The US stock market is a casino with unlimited naked shorting options and their favorite asset to attack are companies that just IPOed. NOT financial advice, just my personal 2 cents.
-
Nah, that’s a very bad deal for photographers - small dollar amount one time payment per picture for an exclusive image that you can’t ever remove or sell elsewhere. No royalties.
-
“UnSplash+”
JFC, how uncreative.
-
Nah, that’s a very bad deal for photographers - small dollar amount one time payment per picture for an exclusive image that you can’t ever remove or sell elsewhere. No royalties.
But a lot of people will do it. For them it is just another photo gig. Earning income from stock takes a lot of time, upload to multiple agencies, don‘t know when it sells, doing trend research etc…
Unsplash is not the first company to offer this.
There even are teams that work for stock artists and produce content for them and you can sell it in your ports after paying them.
Experienced producers will always upload to their own ports, but many people don‘t want to have a stock portfolio, they just want a paid gig.
-
So the payed services are rushing down to 0, and the free ones are running from 0 in opposite direction towards them.
Where will the hug happen ?
I can hear Semprini's orchestra playing in the background ;D
-
One time payment for briefs. Sounds like a dead end trap.
-
Yes, the interesting question is "how low can they go?". The agencies that literally pay you nothing generally don't have the quality of released content that the agencies that pay you "something" (no matter how little that "something" is in some cases) have.
The question is where is the line between being payed "something" and "nothing" relative to the "quality of content"? If an agency is paying you $.08 per download is that "something" or is that "nothing" with regard to getting quality content?
Will the agencies that push the lower limit on average payouts start to see the "quality of content" submitted start to deteriorate to the point they lose market share and their revenues decline?
If that happens would they reverse and start increasing payouts?
The fact that the "agencies that literally pay you nothing" don't have quality released content says there is a lower limit.