If it�s a cityscape of a bunch of buildings, you are (usually) fine, but if it�s just of one or two buildings, they have to be editorial. One catch is even if it�s a cityscape, you have to Photoshop out any logos on the buildings unless you�re going for editorial only.

. I don't think I will ever get to the $100 payment which is a shame because the agency ethos is good, SS on the other hand, my sale DLs are over 10x more for similar photos.
Why do the horrible (mean to contributor) agencies get more sales?
https://www.dreamstime.com/duns123_info

My sales on Dreamstime are also about 10 times less than what I get on Adobe. It�s definitely a lower volume site. The big thing I would say makes a difference is in what you upload. Several years ago on this forum someone asked, �Why would someone buy this image?� It sticks with me when I take photos. What would someone use Image X for? Some of your photos are really nice, but some of them seem more like snapshots that don�t have as much utility. Don�t get me wrong, there�s a part of me that thinks micro stock sites only deserves snapshots anymore, but people arent going to buy my images that way.

My last uploads took 30 days to be reviewed.

I have done exactly zero AI work, but that AI warning in Adobe stock when I submit photos scares the crap out me. Does sky replacement count as AI? Probably not, but I�m still spooked.

We still hold the copyright, but they have taken an perpetual license to use our images and are paying us a one-time payment of an amazing $0.069 per image. At least that's the amount I got for each image. None of us would agree to something like that. But the way the agencies set it up, if you don't leave, you agree.

On a purely per-image uploaded basis, my total is different: $0.118, so the metric must be something else. Mat said it was heavily weighted toward sales totals, so they must be ignoring the pictures I have of box elder bugs that no one has ever bought

I must admit I�m surprised not even one person donated. Not even one?! I�m not one to upload to the free sites, but seriously!

The addition of the portfolio categories intrigues me even more, as the major categories are pretty closely balanced with his sales percentages. I�ve got a significant imbalance in my portfolio sales as I have all of ten industry images but one of them makes up probably 20% of my total sales across my entire portfolio. I got really lucky with it and keeping trying to replicate it unsuccessfully.

How is this comically oversized. I�m writing this on a 37� laptop as we speak.

They could consider balancing that by paying out 35%-40% instead of 33...

Can you imagine how the other agencies would cringe and die if Adobe raises royalties?

Even 1% more would send a message.

Back in 2020 Adobe restructured royalties, which was a raise for most contributors. I thought that would lock in the other agencies. Instead, shutter stock cut everybody a few months later

i have redeemed my code too!

it's been two weeks now that I only have sales on Mondays,Thursdays and Fridays

Your other buyers and I got together and decided to golf on Wednesdays.

I received a revised 1099 from DT in the mail this week, so it appears they're fixing the problem.

Quote from: Diana Herrmann on February 20, 2023, 10:17

Quote from: cascoly on February 17, 2023, 14:18

Quote from: cascoly on February 06, 2023, 11:47

i've had same experience -100% rejection on 23 lots of 25 submitted a week apart - and i had selected only images that had been taken at other sites

update - next batch had about 50% accepted, latest was 100% accepted, including a dozen Dall-e images.  content from same shoots

How do you get Dall-e images accepted? All of mine are rejected for quality.

Well at least Adobe is trying to avoid flooding the database with poor quality images. Hurray to Adobe, I guess

How dare you insult my catalog of 52,000 photos of the same tomato.