Is the Adobe Stock Photo program a rip off for artists?

[Sherwood_Martinelli]

So, have had six sales...one would think I should be excited...I am not.

Six sales each giving someone the right to use my image 500,000 times and I've not even made $4 yet...some sales have paid me as little as 35 cents, and my earnings on six sales is a meager $3.56   At this rate, I'll be dead and buried before I reach the $50 minimum required to get paid by Adobe Stock.  I loaded up 50 pics to give the service a try....I have over 50,000 images.

Is it just me, or are others not satisfied with the profits splits, and lack of sales that provide a modicum of pricing that lets artists earn a living.  I ask, as I also belong to Viewbug, and they are encouraging us to join Adobe Stock, and not sure doing so is in the best interests of those who are on Viewbug.

[BrandonF01]

I'm just starting out, I'm a traditional photographer and videographer. I am also graphic designer, and I create graphics and I have been testing Adobe out as far as what it compares to the other stock photo companies online. It's been nearly three months now, and I'm documenting the entire process. I currently have a selection of 1088 photos for users to choose from. At this point I'll hold off on giving my opinion until I have all the analytics for the year. I must say, at this point I've sold 105 images, and the financials are definitely a bit underwhelming. I will hold off regarding the full analysis as I don't want to misjudge. It's something I thought people were saying they were making good doing, but at this point, I'm roughly around three months and it doesn't look good so far. 

[Jill_C]

It's a matter of expectations. Definitely NOT a get-rich-quick scheme. Many of us regard it as hobby income. Stock sales allows me to monetize my travel images which would otherwise languish unseen on my hard drives...

[daniellei4510]

I assume you meant "not" a get-rich-quick scheme. But me, too. I'm a retired photographer. I'm done lugging equipment around, dealing with models, having husband's calling me and giving me crap for photographing his wife in the nude so she could give him something for Valentine's Day. Talk to HER, not me1 AI keeps me busy in my retirement. If I make a sale, great. If not. I'm OK with that.

[Abambo]

It's been nearly three months now, and I'm documenting the entire process. I currently have a selection of 1088 photos for users to choose from. At this point I'll hold off on giving my opinion until I have all the analytics for the year. I must say, at this point I've sold 105 images, and the financials are definitely a bit underwhelming.

By @BrandonF01

105 sales in a 3 months time is not that bad, especially as you have “only” 1088 assets uploaded. You will need to continue uploading for getting a multiple of 1000 assets. I think that you are doing well. Adobe stock is not for getting rich fast, it's for getting a second use of your assets. You can also try out other stock sites, I doubt that by submitting to several sites, you are hurting your sales on this site.

 I'm roughly around three months and it doesn't look good so far. 

By @BrandonF01

If it were an easy method to make a lot of money, we all would have closed due to wealth.

[BrandonF01]

I have now been approved for nearly 1500 images, and I've made 200 dollars. I devoted countless hours to uploading and getting my images approved. It seems as if Adobe is just getting extremely wealthy while giving their contributors absolutely nothing. Nearly 5 months of work for $200 so far (as I I have nearly 1100 waiting to be approved) Forgive me if you thought I thought that I was going to get rich, I had zero intent on getting rich, more so I was seeing if one could even survive [moderator deleted offensive comments].

[Jill_C]

You have unrealistic expectations for the stock image business. I don't actually know anyone who expects to earn a living wage from stock sales. Every stock contributor I know regards it as a " side hustle". In fact, Adobe's royalties are better than most of their competitors. If your images aren't selling it's because there's a lot of competition in the keyword category you've uploaded, or your titles and keywords aren't descriptive enough, or there's just not much demand for the type of image you're submitting. You say that Adobe is "only designed to take", but if your images don't sell, they make nothing.

[daniellei4510]

I blame YouTube for the high expections. I came across a video the other day entitled, "Earn $2000 a month creating AI for Adobe Stock" or something along those lines. The content of the video itself actually delivered reasonable suggestions for getting work approved, but the title is typical YouTube clickbait and I suspect the guy is making more money off his video than his stock sales.

[Abambo]

I blame YouTube for the high expections. I came across a video the other day entitled, "Earn $2000 a month creating AI for Adobe Stock" or something along those lines.

By @daniellei4510

The tune changed, but the song is the same. The videos before were just the same, but with photography. Some serious, some not so serious. 20 years ago, we paid something about $2000 for a CD with themed stock photos for an event we organized. Those times are over and will never be back again. 

[Jill_C]

Sadly, many people are lulled into believing such "get rich quick schemes", and then are mad at Adobe and the purveyors of such fictions when they don't come true. If it sounds too good to be true, it is !

[RALPH_L]

I think the artist is responsible for his profits. Not Adobe. Like Mat said, it is a numbers game.

Since starting ADOBE Stock, I have received a few thousand dollars, with no effort except keywording.

On my own website, I have earned less than a hundred dollars.

The days of earning good profits for photos is over. Sure there areb exceptions but unless, you are already known to a buyer or spend time in a art fair, forget it. 

I knew the rules of the game before I started uploading to Adobe Stock. I have the choice to play or leave. I choose to stay.

[michaels53414785]

I can't see how it could possibly pay enough to be worthwhile.  In fact I cancelled my account with Adobe Stock because of the very low payment per photo, and the minimum required to get paid ($50).  It would take a huge number of quality images and a lot of work to get anywhere.

[Jill_C]

Minimum payout is $25. The potential royalties are clearly communicated to Contributors and should not be a surprise. In fact, Adobe's royalties are more generous than most other stock sites. It's definitely not a get-rich-quick scheme. I think most contributors regard it as a "side hustle". In my case, it's a way to monetize some of the images that I'm already capturing on my travels.

[Abambo]

 and the minimum required to get paid ($50).  It would take a huge number of quality images and a lot of work to get anywhere.

By @michaels53414785

You cancelled 5 years ago because that payout has been changed meanwhile. And compared to other stock providers, I get a rather generous royalty per licenced asset. My biggest part so far war $3.30 for a single licence. That's much more than the $0.10 that I get elsewhere.

But yes, the more high-quality assets you have, the more sales you generate.

You do as you wish!

[BrandonF01]

Just wait until you have nearly 1500 images approved, and are waiting multiple weeks for them to approve nearly 1200 more. I have been uploading for nearly 4 or 5 months now. It's absurd to think you can make any real money on this platform. It's designed take, not give. It's not designed to share at all. I've been using Adobe's software consistantly for over 13 years now. [moderator deleted offensive comment] I will soon be making a documentary about all of this. People deserve to understand how these corpses or corperations only exist to take. It's a beautiful time we are in where companies are now being created to rival their obvious monopoly. I gave this stock photography platform months. I've made $200 so far, and I sit waiting for half of my uploads to be approved. I can't imagine how anyone living could make any real money through this platform. I have done an exaustive amount of SEO, I have done research on the variable genre's, yet, I have my most popular images that still remain unapproved after 3 months.

[Abambo]

Just wait until you have nearly 1500 images approved, and are waiting multiple weeks for them to approve nearly 1200 more. I have been uploading for nearly 4 or 5 months now. It's absurd to think you can make any real money on this platform. It's designed take, not give. It's not designed to share at all. I've been using Adobe's software consistantly for over 13 years now. [moderator deleted offensive comment] I will soon be making a documentary about all of this. People deserve to understand how these corpses or corperations only exist to take. It's a beautiful time we are in where companies are now being created to rival their obvious monopoly. I gave this stock photography platform months. I've made $200 so far, and I sit waiting for half of my uploads to be approved. I can't imagine how anyone living could make any real money through this platform. I have done an exaustive amount of SEO, I have done research on the variable genre's, yet, I have my most popular images that still remain unapproved after 3 months.

By @BrandonF01

What ever your problem is, you are forgetting that you get paid, so you are a supplier, not a customer. If you contribute to other platforms also, you know that the ROI is less than what Adobe pays. My top site in sales is Adobe, and my top site in payout per sale is Adobe. Could I make a living of my contributions: no. But my profile size is to small for that. 

BTW, given, that Adobe has the same number of moderators, but the moderation time increases, that means that more people are contributing. Is that good for you: probably not, but that means that it may be a good idea to do more.