For me, no, Shutterstock's algorithm is much better for 3 reasons:

- It favors quality over quantity
- New photos sell more
- Best sellers continue to sell even after 5 years

On Adobe Stock, new photos sell less and best sellers stop selling well after 4 or 5 years. And, comparing my sales with those of other contributors, I see that large portfolios are favored.

I have over 15 years of experience, I work full time and I have a small portfolio (just under 6,000 images on both agencies) of high quality images.

For those with a portfolio of 20,000 medium quality images, Adobe's algorithm probably works better.

This month I sold three times as many images on SS than on AS. At the moment I am level 4 (30% pay rate) on SS.

Regarding new images (those uploaded in 2024, in my case 600 new images), my statistics tell me that in the month of January I have sold 148 images on SS and 44 on Adobe Stock to date.

As for my best sellers, in January, after 22 days, I sold 92 images uploaded between 2012-2015 on SS, while on AS only 48 uploaded in that period.

I think it is comparable, but it is true Adobe doesn't promote new images - or at least promotes them for a very short time.  It's probably a good idea, but open for discussion.

I must say that Adobe has best sorting and search algorithm amongst other players.
You get even 1 sale, the system starts to work on sorting it by moving it upwards. This drives more sales and is working well.

On the other side, other websites don't know how to do sorting and are still working on the old school model.

So you're saying that Mat and all the webinars are lies? That's where they told us that the image rank is set, in the first 30 days, and unlikely to ever change after that?

I think it is comparable, but it is true Adobe doesn't promote new images - or at least promotes them for a very short time.  It's probably a good idea, but open for discussion.

Yes, no matter where, there's an evident new image boost, but nowhere can we tell how long or how much.

For anyone else comparing AS to SS, it depends on what are your images. Someone can say how much more they sell, in volume, on SS for 30% of a crappy base amount, or how few they sell on AS. I get  much more per download on AS and many more sales also. It depends on what our products are, photos, illustrations, vectors, or video and what are the subjects.

No one can tell me, SS is better for my images, because it's far worse. I get dimes and few sales. But for the same I can't tell someone else, how I get 3 times the sales and money on Adobe, because I'm not making the same things that they do.

My point is, search generalizations, comparing SS and AS, or income generalizations, do not apply to all of us equally. My old and new images, sell just fine on Adobe, and keep selling. Many of my old "best sellers" on SS have gone completely dead. That doesn't mean the same will happen for anyone or everyone else.

For me, no, Shutterstock's algorithm is much better for 3 reasons:


- New photos sell more
- Best sellers continue to sell even after 5 years

On Adobe Stock, new photos sell less and best sellers stop selling well after 4 or 5 years. And, comparing my sales with those of other contributors, I see that large portfolios are favored.

I have over 15 years of experience, I work full time and I have a small portfolio (just under 6,000 images on both agencies) of high quality images.

Not for me!   

Nice going on 6,000 images. I have 5549 and I'll bet you that 4,500 or more of mine, have no overlap with anything you do. (meaning yours are better) But also meaning, we're very different, and so are other people. Also of that 4,500 images, not one is in my Adobe collection of just over 1,000. Yet, Adobe outsells SS by far in downloads and income, and has for many years.

Not for me!   

Nice going on 6,000 images. I have 5549 and I'll bet you that 4,500 or more of mine, have no overlap with anything you do. (meaning yours are better) But also meaning, we're very different, and so are other people. Also of that 4,500 images, not one is in my Adobe collection of just over 1,000. Yet, Adobe outsells SS by far in downloads and income, and has for many years.

Maybe I didn't explain myself well.

My analysis is for MY images and for MY images compared to others.

Well, Adobe Stock does have the most responsive algo, where files that have been downloaded move up in search results almost immediately. Whether this is the best algo or not, idk.

Quote from: synthetick on January 23, 2025, 06:05

Well, Adobe Stock does have the most responsive algo, where files that have been downloaded move up in search results almost immediately. Whether this is the best algo or not, idk.

They move up immediately? Why does Adobe tell us the rank is set in the first 30 days and doesn't change? SS I see more change when I get downloads.

Its more complicated than that anyway.  The transition from initial keyword base to one of ranking over 30 days etc.

Yes, no disagreement. MY point was, YOUR results or MY results, can't be applied to any theories or decisions by others that site A has better search or algorithm results, than site B, based on our personal experiences or our different types, styles or images.

The whole, which is best, is totally personal and subjective. 

I disagree, there is certainly a difference between the algorithms between the agencies. It's not the same and just differentiated because of personal experiences. They are in fact different which might suit ones personal expectations or not. So it's just the other way around I would say.

in my opinion the best is Adobe because it's the best in the long run.

while with IS and SS the gains may seem more immediate,on Adobe it takes more time but is progressive.

Quote from: SimonSays on January 23, 2025, 14:24

Quote from: Uncle Pete on January 23, 2025, 12:04

Yes, no disagreement. MY point was, YOUR results or MY results, can't be applied to any theories or decisions by others that site A has better search or algorithm results, than site B, based on our personal experiences or our different types, styles or images.

The whole, which is best, is totally personal and subjective. 

I disagree, there is certainly a difference between the algorithms between the agencies. It's not the same and just differentiated because of personal experiences. They are in fact different which might suit ones personal expectations or not. So it's just the other way around I would say.

Which is best in your opinion and why?

Like I said before, personally I prefer the algorithms of SS and IS then that of AS. Somehow I sell a bigger part of my portfolio with these two agencies and with AS a much smaller part. Each photo submitted took quite some time to make, edit and submit. With AS, if it doesn't sell with a month, you rarely sell it later on. So you need to be lucky that a buyer will act in these 30 days and otherwise all your trouble was for nothing.
With IS and SS I still can get first sales even if the photo was submitted three months ago or earlier.