Whether you accepted this deal or not, it will hurt us all.
Don't fool yourself, buyers will always take the free image, if it represents their needs, no matter the quality.I hope I am wrong.
I am already seeing the results (one free image), I had just six small downloads this month, none today, I haven't seen this for a long time.

Lets look at the calendar and the "already seeing results" observation. Wow, July 1-6 anyone who watches downloads would recognize a long July 4th weekend is always terrible for sales. You are seeing what you want to see, because you don't like the idea of attracting new customers, with a minimal free offer.

This isn't anything about devaluing our work, it is about bringing in new buyers.

Yes, discounting for purposes of competition is terrible for everyone. We can all see how that works with other agencies, lowering prices and values. No one wins. Well the suits will win, because if they can get volume up and make it appear they are making more money, they get the bonus. In profits, even the company loses by that strategy. Easiest way to make more money is cut the cost of goods. Pay us less!

Anyone here still submitting to Deposit? Why? Talk about devaluing our markets and assets.

DP offers this:

A collection of 1,227,123 files: Get unlimited downloads for just $4.99
Get access to a library of 69,427 free files

While Adobe is simply trying to attract new customers. I'll suspect they make money from the CC subscriptions, and images are a minor side expense. We still get paid the same as they promised when they raised the commissions after buying FT. What other agency has held our values, since 2014 and not cut commissions?

Quote from: Dodie on July 06, 2021, 13:48

Whether you accepted this deal or not, it will hurt us all.
Don't fool yourself, buyers will always take the free image, if it represents their needs, no matter the quality.I hope I am wrong.
I am already seeing the results (one free image), I had just six small downloads this month, none today, I haven't seen this for a long time.

Lets look at the calendar and the "already seeing results" observation. Wow, July 1-6 anyone who watches downloads would recognize a long July 4th weekend is always terrible for sales. You are seeing what you want to see, because you don't like the idea of attracting new customers, with a minimal free offer.

This isn't anything about devaluing our work, it is about bringing in new buyers.

Yes, discounting for purposes of competition is terrible for everyone. We can all see how that works with other agencies, lowering prices and values. No one wins. Well the suits will win, because if they can get volume up and make it appear they are making more money, they get the bonus. In profits, even the company loses by that strategy. Easiest way to make more money is cut the cost of goods. Pay us less!

Anyone here still submitting to Deposit? Why? Talk about devaluing our markets and assets.

DP offers this:

A collection of 1,227,123 files: Get unlimited downloads for just $4.99
Get access to a library of 69,427 free files

While Adobe is simply trying to attract new customers. I'll suspect they make money from the CC subscriptions, and images are a minor side expense. We still get paid the same as they promised when they raised the commissions after buying FT. What other agency has held our values, since 2014 and not cut commissions?

I didn't understand all of your comment because, as usual, you are jumping from one subject to the other (no offence) but I will answer some of your questions.

1. "This isn't anything about devaluing our work, it is about bringing in new buyers."

We've been feed up with this from the beginning of times and it never happened.

2. "Anyone here still submitting to Deposit? Why? Talk about devaluing our markets and assets."

You are always talking about agencies you don't submit to.
DP is my third agency, it earns me more money than DT, so why not?

Also, the DPC of FT earned the most at this agency, much more than the raised commission of AS but how could those who didn't participate know about this?



I wish you are right this time and we will be invaded by new buyers.

Btw, aren't you uploading through Wirestock?

...
  Adobe came to us seeing our assets sitting and doing nothing, and fact that they offered to pay is sight of respect to our work and acknowledgement of our rights to that assets.

SS also does that thru wirestock's instant pay program

Quote from: Uncle Pete on July 07, 2021, 10:53

Quote from: Dodie on July 06, 2021, 13:48

Whether you accepted this deal or not, it will hurt us all.
Don't fool yourself, buyers will always take the free image, if it represents their needs, no matter the quality.I hope I am wrong.
I am already seeing the results (one free image), I had just six small downloads this month, none today, I haven't seen this for a long time.

Lets look at the calendar and the "already seeing results" observation. Wow, July 1-6 anyone who watches downloads would recognize a long July 4th weekend is always terrible for sales. You are seeing what you want to see, because you don't like the idea of attracting new customers, with a minimal free offer.

This isn't anything about devaluing our work, it is about bringing in new buyers.

Yes, discounting for purposes of competition is terrible for everyone. We can all see how that works with other agencies, lowering prices and values. No one wins. Well the suits will win, because if they can get volume up and make it appear they are making more money, they get the bonus. In profits, even the company loses by that strategy. Easiest way to make more money is cut the cost of goods. Pay us less!

Anyone here still submitting to Deposit? Why? Talk about devaluing our markets and assets.

DP offers this:

A collection of 1,227,123 files: Get unlimited downloads for just $4.99
Get access to a library of 69,427 free files

While Adobe is simply trying to attract new customers. I'll suspect they make money from the CC subscriptions, and images are a minor side expense. We still get paid the same as they promised when they raised the commissions after buying FT. What other agency has held our values, since 2014 and not cut commissions?

I didn't understand all of your comment because, as usual, you are jumping from one subject to the other (no offence) but I will answer some of your questions.

1. "This isn't anything about devaluing our work, it is about bringing in new buyers."

We've been feed up with this from the beginning of times and it never happened.

2. "Anyone here still submitting to Deposit? Why? Talk about devaluing our markets and assets."

You are always talking about agencies you don't submit to.
DP is my third agency, it earns me more money than DT, so why not?

Also, the DPC of FT earned the most at this agency, much more than the raised commission of AS but how could those who didn't participate know about this?



I wish you are right this time and we will be invaded by new buyers.

Btw, aren't you uploading through Wirestock?

Supporting agencies that "hurt us all", is the point. DP whether it makes you money or not, hurts the entire market. Your point was that free images used as marketing "hurt us all". I think supporting the bottom feeder agencies, the price and value cutting agencies and the ones that have shown over the years that they can't be trusted = hurts us all.

Yeah, new buyers are always good, I'd agree. I don't think this will cause a big jump or a flood of new buyers and sales. But I also don't think it's going to hurt.

DPC go back and read the forum comments. Seems that just like the one year for one payment of Adobe is just about equally as popular. LOL I know someone else who said his sales from DPC were very good and made more. You aren't alone.

The worst of these schemes had to have been the Dollar Photo Club, with a 10 image a month subscription for $10, with rollovers. Until Getty came up with Premium Access that netted contributors fractions of a cent per download that is

And whatever Connect really is for fractions of a cent?

Also right on target for this new idea from Adobe:

Most of the changes since have been either agencies trying to poach business from one another, not increasing the pool of buyers, or dropping any idea of acceptance standards to increase the supply of images - more of the same, not so much expanding the type of imagery available to buyers.

Except, maybe, and I'm just being hopeful, that more people subscribing to CC who are not already stock photo users, will bring us more income? New Buyers.

Back to your original and my disagreement. You are looking at the first week of July and already seeing negative changes, because of the free images? Give it some time and not the potentially one of the worst weeks of the year.

Oh and I almost didn't answer. I upload to everywhere on Wirestock, because I give up. I'm still uploading to SS and Adobe on my own. In effect, you are correct a contradiction. I dropped DP, 123, and the rest, years ago. I found P5 for photos, a hopeless effort. DT I might make payout by 2024? But correct, new Crapstock is going to all without any concern for ethics, bottom feeders, or that one of them might be out of business in a year.

Show me the money!

I'm saying that trying to fight against the price cutters, the race to the bottom or unethical agencies, does nothing. The petitions, protests or leaving, has no effect. (except make less for me?) I gave up caring. But I do still have control over what goes where, and my best images, go to Adobe.

I got $5 for an image that hasn't earned $5 in it's lifetime across all agencies, including Wirestock. I'm happy. 

I don't know if this free collection will hurt or not or if we'll actually be able to see any observable effect. How does anyone know what caused an increase or drop, as an individual? I'd say we don't. If my Adobe sales go up, am I allowed to assume (incorrectly) that it's a result of the free collection? Neither can I assume that any immediate and recent drop is because of a new free collection.

Quote

Quote from: Uncle Pete on July 10, 2021]Back to your original and my disagreement. You are looking at the first week of July and already seeing negative changes, because of the free images? Give it some time and not the potentially one of the worst weeks of the year.

What is your problem man? I just shared my thoughts just like so many others. You don't need to agree with me, neither do I. If you want to sound credible about other agencies, quote someone who speaks from experience. I really appreciate Joe Ann's input here on the forum but she never participated in DPC, on the contrary, so the wrong example.

Quote

I dropped DP, 123, and the rest, years ago. I found P5 for photos, a hopeless effort. DT I might make payout by 2024? But correct, new Crapstock is going to all without any concern for ethics, bottom feeders, or that one of them might be out of business in a year.

Oh yeah, this business is the best place for concerns for ethics. "No honor among thieves", right?
 
I wish I had $0.10 for each time you criticized people for contributing to agencies you don't like and these unethical people like myself just don't listen to wise advice.


Wish you a nice day!

You could have marked that a hypocrite alert, as I changed when I clicked DP on Wirestock, which means I have some of mine for download there, again. I really shouldn't do that, should I?

No one said you are unethical. (I did say DP was) You started with

"Quote from: Dodie on July 06, 2021, 13:48

    Whether you accepted this deal or not, it will hurt us all.
    Don't fool yourself, buyers will always take the free image, if it represents their needs, no matter the quality.I hope I am wrong.
    I am already seeing the results (one free image), I had just six small downloads this month, none today, I haven't seen this for a long time."

How you could see the effects of the free images already. I pointed out, it was the first week of July which is a crummy week anyway.

"it will hurt us all" and I say so does supporting the price cutting bottom feeders. But you want to stick with, Free on Adobe has already made your earnings worse. 

I say, give it a few months and after that, see what you see. And I also said, individual results are not valid, so if your sales are down and someone has better sales, then what's the point.

I also said, complaining, protesting, dropping agencies and avoiding the bottom feeders, does nothing, so I've changed my position to I'll take the money.

Since I used to contribute to over 25 agencies, writing about any agency is pretty much what you say, one I don't contribute to, and it's not a matter of like or don't like and you don't have to listen to me. I have a personal opinion. Just like I also added that some people said DPC was great and they made good money. Some didn't like the concept and left FT. Personal choice.

Some people think exclusive on IS is the perfect answer. I think it's limiting. Some people say no one should upload anything to SS, but I make more money there than anyplace else. Some don't like the Upfront Payment, I allowed a bunch of images, that don't sell well. That's easy, isn't it.

So do what you want, we all do. Make your own decisions. But please don't tell me that sales are down because of free images, and you can see it already because your sales are down, in a week. My sales are up, and I got $5 for doing nothing besides? Neither proves anything, and in a year, no one else will be able to give a valid opinion of how this free offer changed the market, based on their individual personal sales.

Try to separate personal opinion from unsubstantiated claims.

Curius to know if anybody got that 5 $/image from Adobe uploaded via wirestock and how wirestock inform about it.

I got a few 4.25$ commissions last month, so these might be Adobe instant pay.
Got a few 3.4$ commissions this month, and I guess these are from Shutterstock.

It's only guessing, as these two are buying images for their free collection nowadays.
WireStock doesn't seem to report in which free collection the image ends up, so it might be Freepik as well.

Quote from: kall3bu on July 22, 2021, 08:06

Curius to know if anybody got that 5 $/image from Adobe uploaded via wirestock and how wirestock inform about it.

I got a few 4.25$ commissions last month, so these might be Adobe instant pay.
Got a few 3.4$ commissions this month, and I guess these are from Shutterstock.

It's only guessing, as these two are buying images for their free collection nowadays.
WireStock doesn't seem to report in which free collection the image ends up, so it might be Freepik as well.

Thx for the information!

I just got today some sales for 3,83$ - different again.
I am just curious to know from whom how much and will ask wirestock, who for sure will give clear answer, if they can. Then for the future we will know it better.
BTW: The photos I sold are my worst photos ever I took and just submit because the better ones were from the same shot, so it was easy for keywording. LOL

My instant photos for 3,83$/photo were from shutterstock.
Unfortunally they did not tell me about the other agencies (4,25 and 3,40).

Could one be clarify this? Upfront payment to Wirestock is not limited for one year? It is free forever? Thanks in advance!

Quote from: Brasilnut on July 28, 2021, 10:40

For what it's worth, here's my take on the free-downloads trend including the Adobe Stock Upfront Royalty Payment Opportunity over at the Xpiks blog:

https://xpiksapp.com/blog/free-downloads-microstocks/

Alex

Just read your take....but can you explain in what way do you expect the storm to "finally clear"?

It's an understatement to say that 2020 and 2021 have turned out to be eventful years in this industry.

Perhaps there will be some consolidation and things will come down a bit at least for a while so we can all catch our breaths. No major "exciting news" announcements, I hope.

I'm betting on travel to return in full swing and as most of my port are made of travel images, hopefully get back to something resembling old normal results.

Quote from: Brasilnut on August 02, 2021, 01:33

I'm betting on travel to return in full swing and as most of my port are made of travel images, hopefully get back to something resembling old normal results.

Brutally honest question Alex: do you think that's still possible, considered the half-life of images? The pandemic impacted travel for one year and a half now.
Of course, travel contributors were also impacted with travel restrictions that made it impossible to shoot new content.

Anyhow, keep up the good work, I love reading your articles.

Thanks for the kind words.

No, I don't think that the older images will have much life, hence why I'm not so bothered to give them away for as little as $5.
Wouldn't surprise if SS soon proposes the same scheme and offers to give away our images for $2/lifetime, then it's not so interesting.

As for new travel images, there are plenty of opportunities especially away from the big cities. Don't know about you guys/gals but I want to avoid big urban centres at all cost. Not scared to get Covid as already had it and survived relatively pain-free (although best not to be too complacent) but there's too much hassle with keeping up with restrictions which often change from one week to another. However, the main factor for avoiding large population centres is the growing risk of social unrest and rising crime. My gear simply stands out like a sore thumb and not worth the risk for what they're paying these days. Plus the market is already saturated for the main centres (London, Paris, Rome, etc. come to mind) so there's no point anymore unless content is captured extraordinarily.

So, perhaps the new travel trend will be for smaller cities/towns...I'll look to explore first in Iberia then elsewhere. Oh and I hope to get a drone soon together with a pilot's license so that should open up some new opportunities. Whether I'll get a ROI, not sure but I'll give it a shot!

Alex/brasilnut:
#No, I don't think that the older images will have much life, hence why I'm not so bothered to give them away for as little as $5.#

You meant also in case of older travel photos, photos from cities...

I totally agree, if these photos got uploaded already.

But I stopped uploading photos of travel genre when covid arrived and I hope(!), I will upload these �old� photos from 2020 soon and that they still have a chance to get sales.
Do you agree?

I get that people don't like Freeepik's/Adobe's/Shutter's one-time price model or "free" sites, but I have yet to see any demonstrable correlation between those places and a decrease in earnings for "most of the artists". I'm not trying to pick and argument, but I don't see how you can claim this.

I believe the over-saturation of supply, few innovations by agencies, plus the (ever decreasing) subscription model have done far worse than art sites like Unsplash or this instant pay model. My stats actually show a solid uptick these days.

I didn't make myself fully clear. I was referring to the flat fee unlimited downloads plans, where the income afterwards is divided over contributors in proportion to their downloads. Freepik offers such a plan. (which I don't like, from a contributor perspective)

And for the record: I'm more positive on instant pay programs. They are a good opportunity for squeezing some money out of buried content. How these free collections will impact future sales? I have no idea to be honest.

Edit: a lot of fellow contributors seemingly had a good month in July. Same for me. Certainly not only due to instant pay income, sales in general have been pretty good across all agencies for me in July. Surprising, because it's generally speaking not a good month in microstockworld. I can only hope it lasts.