While Adobe Stock does provide similar services like that to Shutterstock, Shutterstock still has a more diverse assortment of content. As of now, Adobe Stock provides only over 60 million content as a sum. In contrast, Shutterstock has almost thrice the amount of content. However, Shutterstock is more expensive than Adobe Stock.
The most usefull answer is: shutterstock is a giant in stock photography that has slowly lost in popularity, while Adobe Stock caught up to it in just 5 years. While both stock photo agencies offer images for just a few cents, Adobe Stock has been innovating, and it’s paying off!
The most usefull answer is: shutterstock Vs. Adobe Stock Evidence indicates that Adobe Stock is emerging as a strong contender to soon overtake Shutterstock as a stock-photography cash-cow for many contributors. In this exclusive stats-heavy blog post I’ll explore potential trends emerging in this rivalry for the coveted first spot in contributors’ hearts and wallets.
An answer is that Meanwhile, Shutterstock — one of Adobe Stock competitors — has been playing in the microstock photography industry for years. Shutterstock firstly launched in 2003 and became one of the most well-known microstock photo agencies.
Adobe finally entered the microstock photography industry starting by 2015. In that year, the company released Adobe Stock, a microstock photo website, to compete with similar websites like i. Stock and Shutterstock. For microstock photographers, it’s obviously a huge news since they now have a new place to sell their stock photos.
Can I Sell my Microstock photos on Shutterstock?
For microstock photographers, it’s obviously a huge news since they now have a new place to sell their stock photos. Meanwhile, Shutterstock — one of Adobe Stock competitors — has been playing in the microstock photography industry for years. Shutterstock firstly launched in 2003 and became one of the most well-known microstock photo agencies.