Author Topic: New Photoshop plugin for search and purchase (Read 8429 times)

Jo Ann Snover · « **on:** September 08, 2016, 11:46 »

I received e-mail linked to this page

http://www.shutterstock.com/lp/adobe-photoshop-plugin-shutterstock

and there's a blog article here

http://www.shutterstock.com/blog/announcing-shutterstock-plugin-adobe-photoshop

Either they want to head Adobe Stock off at the pass or they're already seeing customer feedback that Adobe's integration is a key feature.

I'd have tried the plugin but I use Photoshop CS6 and the plugin is only for CC 2014 and 2015. I signed up for notification when it's available on other versions (smart move; it would have been smarter to ask which version the person was interested in so they could gather data on popularity at the same time)

Edited to add links to some blog/press coverage of this:

http://petapixel.com/2016/09/08/shutterstocks-new-photoshop-plugin-steps-adobe-stocks-toes/

https://www.dpreview.com/news/5332220717/shutterstock-adds-photoshop-cc-plugin

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2016/09/08/shutterstocks-custom-built-plug-in-allows-for-photoshop-integration

http://resourcemagonline.com/2016/09/shutterstock-must-be-feeling-adobe-stock-announces-plugin-to-photoshop/70509/

Pauws99 · « **Reply #1 on:** September 08, 2016, 11:52 »

Lets hope it works.......I wonder how easy abode will make it for them ;-). Could be some interesting shenanigans

Shelma1 · « **Reply #2 on:** September 08, 2016, 11:57 »

Just got the email. Obviously trying to battle Adobe/Fotolia. Interesting. Now if only they'd use some of their resources to fix the freaking site.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #3 on:** September 08, 2016, 12:09 »

I seem to remember an old piece of management advice ...once you start worrying about what your competition is doing rather than your own performance you are finished.

Shelma1 · « **Reply #4 on:** September 08, 2016, 12:27 »

Just saw a "commercial" for it on FB. They gave six designers the plugin and let them build on each other's work to create a truly ugly design. Lol.

wordplanet · « **Reply #5 on:** September 08, 2016, 17:41 »

Got the email too - I thought it seemed like a great idea. Always better for us if fotolia and shutterstock are competing - we don't want one to overtake the other to the point where they can write all the rules - it's enough of a buyer's market as it is.

Adobe's purchase of fotolia could turn out to be a real game-changer for the industry, and this move puts SS back on a level playing field. Seems like a smart strategy to me.

Haven't tried the plug-in yet but it would be good to see how it works.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #6 on:** September 08, 2016, 17:46 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on September 08, 2016, 12:27

Just saw a "commercial" for it on FB. They gave six designers the plugin and let them build on each other's work to create a truly ugly design. Lol.

I don't need 5 other people to help me produce an ugly design I can do that on my own ......but if it means 6 images sold when one would do I'm happy with that!

stockastic · « **Reply #7 on:** September 08, 2016, 19:48 »

Nothing said about the price. Are we sure this isn't another giveaway, where we get reduced payments but are supposed to believe it's a good deal because these are "sales we would otherwise not have gotten"?

Shelma1 · « **Reply #8 on:** September 08, 2016, 20:05 »

I would assume the buyers would pay the same amount they would have paid otherwise, whether that's a subscription or large SOD.

stockastic · « **Reply #9 on:** September 08, 2016, 20:42 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on September 08, 2016, 20:05

I would assume the buyers would pay the same amount they would have paid otherwise, whether that's a subscription or large SOD.

I'd like to assume that too, but I also assume Adobe wants a cut, and when a new middleman gets into the chain, his cut typically comes out of ours.

sharpshot · « **Reply #10 on:** September 09, 2016, 05:46 »

Quote from: stockastic on September 08, 2016, 20:42

Quote from: Shelma1 on September 08, 2016, 20:05
I would assume the buyers would pay the same amount they would have paid otherwise, whether that's a subscription or large SOD.

I'd like to assume that too, but I also assume Adobe wants a cut, and when a new middleman gets into the chain, his cut typically comes out of ours.

What about competition laws? I'm not sure Adobe could take a cut. Lots of businesses make photoshop plugins, do they all pay Adobe for that?

Pauws99 · « **Reply #11 on:** September 09, 2016, 05:58 »

Quote from: sharpshot on September 09, 2016, 05:46

Quote from: stockastic on September 08, 2016, 20:42
Quote from: Shelma1 on September 08, 2016, 20:05
I would assume the buyers would pay the same amount they would have paid otherwise, whether that's a subscription or large SOD.

I'd like to assume that too, but I also assume Adobe wants a cut, and when a new middleman gets into the chain, his cut typically comes out of ours.
What about competition laws? I'm not sure Adobe could take a cut. Lots of businesses make photoshop plugins, do they all pay Adobe for that?

Probably a lucrative area for the lawyers.

memakephoto · « **Reply #12 on:** September 09, 2016, 07:02 »

Quote from: stockastic on September 08, 2016, 20:42

Quote from: Shelma1 on September 08, 2016, 20:05
I would assume the buyers would pay the same amount they would have paid otherwise, whether that's a subscription or large SOD.

I'd like to assume that too, but I also assume Adobe wants a cut, and when a new middleman gets into the chain, his cut typically comes out of ours.

Why would Adobe get a cut? Do they get a cut when someone buys any other third party plugin for Photoshop? You download the plugin, drop it into the plugins folder and it works. Adobe won't even know it's there.

cathyslife · « **Reply #13 on:** September 09, 2016, 07:33 »

Quote from: memakephoto on September 09, 2016, 07:02

Why would Adobe get a cut? Do they get a cut when someone buys any other third party plugin for Photoshop? You download the plugin, drop it into the plugins folder and it works. Adobe won't even know it's there.

In the old days, I would say yes. But now, they might. When you connect to the CC, can't they see all things related to their programs?

stockastic · « **Reply #14 on:** September 09, 2016, 10:21 »

Quote from: memakephoto on September 09, 2016, 07:02

Quote from: stockastic on September 08, 2016, 20:42
Quote from: Shelma1 on September 08, 2016, 20:05
I would assume the buyers would pay the same amount they would have paid otherwise, whether that's a subscription or large SOD.

I'd like to assume that too, but I also assume Adobe wants a cut, and when a new middleman gets into the chain, his cut typically comes out of ours.

Yes but this plugin is a sales channel for someone else's product. And Adobe owns Fotolia, a competitor. Surely they're not inviting SS in to play for free.

Why would Adobe get a cut? Do they get a cut when someone buys any other third party plugin for Photoshop? You download the plugin, drop it into the plugins folder and it works. Adobe won't even know it's there.

Yes but this plugin is a sales channel for someone else's product. And Adobe owns Fotolia, a competitor. Surely they're not inviting SS in to play for free. Whether they could actually block a plugin like this, I don't know, maybe not and in that case they couldn't demand a piece of the action.

memakephoto · « **Reply #15 on:** September 09, 2016, 14:02 »

Quote from: stockastic on September 09, 2016, 10:21

Quote from: memakephoto on September 09, 2016, 07:02
Quote from: stockastic on September 08, 2016, 20:42
Quote from: Shelma1 on September 08, 2016, 20:05
I would assume the buyers would pay the same amount they would have paid otherwise, whether that's a subscription or large SOD.

I'd like to assume that too, but I also assume Adobe wants a cut, and when a new middleman gets into the chain, his cut typically comes out of ours.

Yes but this plugin is a sales channel for someone else's product. And Adobe owns Fotolia, a competitor. Surely they're not inviting SS in to play for free.

Why would Adobe get a cut? Do they get a cut when someone buys any other third party plugin for Photoshop? You download the plugin, drop it into the plugins folder and it works. Adobe won't even know it's there.

Yes but this plugin is a sales channel for someone else's product. And Adobe owns Fotolia, a competitor. Surely they're not inviting SS in to play for free. Whether they could actually block a plugin like this, I don't know, maybe not and in that case they couldn't demand a piece of the action.

They can block it. The Photoshop SDK (Software Developer's Kit) is only available by request meaning Shutterstock had to ask Adobe for access to write a plugin. No doubt Adobe knew what Shutterstock had in mind.

Can they legally demand a cut of royalties? I don't know, I doubt it, but why would they allow the plugin to be built in the first place, knowing they would be going head to head in competition all for a small cut of royalties when they could block the development and have no competition.

noodle · « **Reply #16 on:** September 09, 2016, 16:00 »

Quote from: memakephoto on September 09, 2016, 14:02

Quote from: stockastic on September 09, 2016, 10:21
Quote from: memakephoto on September 09, 2016, 07:02
Quote from: stockastic on September 08, 2016, 20:42
Quote from: Shelma1 on September 08, 2016, 20:05
I would assume the buyers would pay the same amount they would have paid otherwise, whether that's a subscription or large SOD.

I'd like to assume that too, but I also assume Adobe wants a cut, and when a new middleman gets into the chain, his cut typically comes out of ours.

Yes but this plugin is a sales channel for someone else's product. And Adobe owns Fotolia, a competitor. Surely they're not inviting SS in to play for free.

Why would Adobe get a cut? Do they get a cut when someone buys any other third party plugin for Photoshop? You download the plugin, drop it into the plugins folder and it works. Adobe won't even know it's there.

Yes but this plugin is a sales channel for someone else's product. And Adobe owns Fotolia, a competitor. Surely they're not inviting SS in to play for free. Whether they could actually block a plugin like this, I don't know, maybe not and in that case they couldn't demand a piece of the action.

They can block it. The Photoshop SDK (Software Developer's Kit) is only available by request meaning Shutterstock had to ask Adobe for access to write a plugin. No doubt Adobe knew what Shutterstock had in mind.

Can they legally demand a cut of royalties? I don't know, I doubt it, but why would they allow the plugin to be built in the first place, knowing they would be going head to head in competition all for a small cut of royalties when they could block the development and have no competition.

Maybe it has to be made available for fairness business practices or it would open the way to be challenged legally?
I dont know- just musing.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #17 on:** September 10, 2016, 00:58 »

"Maybe it has to be made available for fairness business practices or it would open the way to be challenged legally?
I dont know- just musing.". I'm sure you are right. But only an expert in international commercial law could really answer this one I reckon

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #18 on:** September 10, 2016, 01:20 »

We could see some legal wrangling over this. I wonder if Adobe will be tempted to block the app? SS could then take them to court over competition law or similar

It does show how important competition is to innovation . Why didn't ss come up with this years ago in the pre adobe stock world?

Dodie · « **Reply #19 on:** September 12, 2016, 05:29 »

I just received the email with the download link. Why on earth would I download the app as a contributor? I don't buy images. I think SS just wants to brag with download numbers.

increasingdifficulty · « **Reply #20 on:** September 12, 2016, 05:37 »

I think that out of 7.4 billion people there is a slight possibility that a photographer somewhere might also need to buy another photographer's picture at some point...

Pauws99 · « **Reply #21 on:** September 12, 2016, 05:42 »

Quote from: increasingdifficulty on September 12, 2016, 05:37

I think that out of 7.4 billion people there is a slight possibility that a photographer somewhere might also need to buy another photographer's picture at some point...

Yep cos only photographers use photoshop and adobe products........

PixelBytes · « **Reply #22 on:** September 12, 2016, 13:44 »

Anyone else bothered that they can edit and alter the watermarked images BEFORE licensing them? Shouldn't you at least need a license to alter someone else's copyrighted material?

Also, for the SS plugin will we be getting OD pricing, or are they going to slip this in with subscription royalties?

Noedelhap · « **Reply #23 on:** September 12, 2016, 18:22 »

Quote from: PixelBytes on September 12, 2016, 13:44

Anyone else bothered that they can edit and alter the watermarked images BEFORE licensing them? Shouldn't you at least need a license to alter someone else's copyrighted material?

Also, for the SS plugin will we be getting OD pricing, or are they going to slip this in with subscription royalties?

Why would you need a license for altering a watermarked image? As long as the watermarked design isn't published, you can tinker with it all you like. You can already download a comp image from SS (or any other site) and alter it in Photoshop without paying in advance.

ravens · « **Reply #24 on:** September 13, 2016, 02:51 »

Yes.

Even more, I am very worried that they can alter EDITORIAL IMAGES.
We photographers have strict rules as to what to do, how to crop & enhance the photo, but general public are now INVITED to do whatever.
Guess who will face the blame of that "result".

Quote from: PixelBytes on September 12, 2016, 13:44

Anyone else bothered that they can edit and alter the watermarked images BEFORE licensing them? Shouldn't you at least need a license to alter someone else's copyrighted material?

Also, for the SS plugin will we be getting OD pricing, or are they going to slip this in with subscription royalties?

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: New Photoshop plugin for search and purchase (Read 8429 times)

Jo Ann Snover

Pauws99

Shelma1

Pauws99

Shelma1

wordplanet

Pauws99

stockastic

Shelma1

stockastic

sharpshot

Pauws99

memakephoto

cathyslife

stockastic

memakephoto

noodle

Pauws99

Justanotherphotographer

Dodie

increasingdifficulty

Pauws99

PixelBytes

Noedelhap

ravens

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors