What I find surprising, but probably @MatHayward can shed some light on this matter, is why, 8 years on, Adobe Stock is still unable to provide a feature that every other stock footage agency has, namely the possibility of choosing a video thumbnail, with some of them even offering you the option to seek to the exact frame you want by using the video playhead.

I take it that the recent introduction of the video subscriptions is a direct response to dwindling (or disappointing) video sales on the platform. Yet, instead of focusing on why some videos don't sell (perhaps because the customer sees a black frame or a blur as a thumbnail, instead of the actual subject matter of the video), the preferred approach seems to be dumping video prices and "hoping for the best".

This coming from a primarily tech company is intriguing (shoemaker's son always goes barefoot?)

All the video agencies I work with repeatedly hammer on the importance of picking the right frame to drive sales, for the obvious reason customers won't have time to play or even hover on hundreds of videos to choose the one they like.

The fact that Adobe doesn't understand this is THE one priority item that would boost video sales is beyond me.

Sad, but true.

One question, how did you do a reverse search for videos?

Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk

Not an easy thing to do to be honest, but possible. You need to pick a still frame, which you believe is representative of the video you've uploaded (typically something close to the thumbnail you can choose on various agencies). Then make a screen grab and look it up the same way you'd do for a still.

Results are not always reliable, depend on the actual frame you pick and on whether the client used your video as a thumbnail or placed it in on a prominent part of their work. So for those videos that sell well, I typically grab multiple frames and look them up.

This is by no means a guarantee of success but has helped me out on a number of occasions.

Hi All,

While doing a Google reverse search, I have recently stumbled upon 3 clips of mine being used on a YouTube promotional video published by a real estate company. I have looked them upon and they appear to be a reputable company owned by a major European bank.

I have only submitted those clips to the Big 4 agencies but I haven't seen the sale of those clips reported anywhere. Initially I thought the videos could have been bought from Getty, since they report sales in arrears, but on closer inspection, I realised that 2 out of the 3 clips used in the YouTube video are still parked for approval at Getty, so I'm excluding that possibility.

The YouTube video was published about a week ago and my clips were uploaded (and all accepted in 3 out of 4 agencies) in early April, so while the sales are recent, they are least a week old.

I checked the YouTube video carefully several times and I couldn't see the faintest hint of a watermark, so for the time being, I'm assuming the purchase was legit.

I have emailed the company today explaining the situation and politely asked if they could let me know where those 3 clips of mine were purchased from.

I was just wondering if someone here has faced a similar situation (either with footage or stills) and if you could provide some advice. At the moment, I'm relying on the goodwill of that company to get back to me and disclose the name of provider, but if they either decline that or simply do not respond, I'm not sure what other avenues I have at my disposal (if any) since the real estate company is not located in my country of residence.

Any ideas or advice you could provide at this stage would be much appreciated.

Thanks a million.

It's so sad. And I was just about to go all in on stock video...... :-(

Would a sign pettion be any idea?

Right... My best piece advice is that, if you were about to go all in (assuming you're not being sarcastic), then go all in. Then draw your own conclusions later on based on your own results and not on someone else's opinion on your results or their results.

Currently, the SS video subscription does not include Extended/Premium video licenses, only the Standard ones. And to be fair, SS is one of the few agencies (if not the only one at the moment) where it's not that uncommon at all to get between $100 to $300 on a single video sale.

Oddly enough, I don't hear much contributor kerfuffle over the fact that the cameras they shoot with or the machines they edit their imagery on now cost a ludicrously tiny fraction and are dozens of times more powerful when compared with what could be bought not that long ago...

I can only imagine the manufacturers of that gear flocking to forums like these moaning over the fact that you can now buy an entry-level laptop for 150 bucks when they used to retail for 10 times as much in the "good old days", and this is the race to the bottom. Same for ballpoint pens, which must have cost a fortune when they first introduced (somehow a premium commodity with elementary school students in the early 80s) and now cost a dime a dozen.

If you look at 99% of the industries out there, you'll hear the exact same rant against the "race to the bottom": food, electronics, translation, paper, hospitality, you name it. That's just the nature of economics. I rather focus on the tiny bit I can control rather than on what I can't.

All the best with your foray into stock video.

I certainly prefer royalties in excess of $100 per clip than $3.33 or whatever they decide to pay, but likewise I don't really fancy being a harbinger of doom (plenty of those around already) and rather strike a more positive note.

To put things into perspective, those are not unlimited subscriptions (� la Storyblocks). Granted, you'll potentially get a lot less per clip, but likewise sales might be more frequent from buyers who wouldn't buy your stuff in the first place, on a per-clip basis. Only time will tell if this works out better or worse. A $100 clip sale per month is great, but 50 sales per month at $3.33 is even better.

Those willing to pull out portfolios and place them elsewhere, well, it's the economy, ... Unless you can shoot (model-released) social gatherings on Mars or have other fanciful concepts no-one else dreamt of, or your are perhaps some sort of Vincent LaForet, then no-one cares. Your stuff is not available, someone else's stuff is, and in plentiful quantity. You may also try to sell direct and see if you can fare any better on your own.

It's the economy, ...

RSS feed also appears to be gone...

http://www.microstockgroup.com/index.php?action=.xml;type=rss

Hi there,

Can any SS contributors confirm if you're able to access the Account Settings of your profile? I'm currently getting a Error code: 500 and want to check out if that's just me.

Thanks in advance.

fiftyfootelvis, I agree with you, last month was jaw-droppingly epic for me, but then again I've only been in stock for about 1.5 years and making money wasn't, isn't and will never be the driver behind me doing stock. My performance so far exceeded my wildest expectations but I couldn't possibly care less if my next month's paycheck will be equal to 'nada'.

Very best,

Filipe