Adobe Stock Photos Going Bye-Bye
Why was Adobe trying to sell stock photography via its Bridge application? I’ve scratched my head over that one for a while. Well, the question no longer needs answering, as Adobe has “decided to concentrate its efforts in other areas,” according to this Web page.
Apparently, you have until March 4 to complete any image searches you may be in the middle of, and until the end of March to complete those purchases. Adobe is also offering software to remove the Adobe Stock Photos application and files from your hard drive (you can get it from a link on that same Web page).
In theory, the idea of buying stock photos from within InDesign (or Bridge, I suppose) seems like a good one. But while I found a few images I liked with Adobe’s service, I never found one I could afford. Perhaps it’s time for a third-party plug-in that takes advantage of more services and does it right from within InDesign itself? For example, Andromeda has a plug-in that lets you grab photos from your own Flickr account. But why not any flikr account, plus istockphoto, Fotosearch Stock Photos, and others?
Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Do you remember “Adobe Image Library”? I have some of their photo CDs. Also, once upon a time, Adobe bought Image Club, a cool little royalty-free graphics company, and it more or less sank into oblivion. They can’t seem to do content, but they’re tools are great for making content!
thank god for that! One less preference to change in the bridge…
This is the 2nd time Adobe hits it head on trying to integrate ‘extra features’ in their software. Anyone remember when they made a deal with that print service company in Acrobat Reader? What were they smoking? I’ve payed several thousand euro’s for these CS3 tools. At least give me a preference-panel to turn that stockphoto-stuff off or let me choose my own supplier in bridge. When they pull stunts like this it does not make me feel like Adobe thinks of it’s loyal costumers first. It just tries to ’sell’ us to the highest bidder…
Here’s a bit more informtion, too, from creativepro.com.
I sort of liked adobe stock photos. I never bought any of that stock photography, but their downloadable low resolution versions were always pretty useful for school projects for my younger siblings, or just for fun personal use. The images came from many sources, and on the plus side, even the low resolution versions didn’t have a watermark as they did when you looked for them at their original site. For instance, let’s say the photo was from gettyimages. if you found it on the gettyimages site, it had the gettyimages watermark on it, but in adobe stock photos, it didn’t.
Too bad they’re getting rid of it. I better look for all the cute kitten pictures I wanted before they’re gone!
>I sort of liked adobe stock photos. I never bought any of that stock photography, but their downloadable low resolution versions were always pretty useful
Second that, I used it a lot for examples in my lessons. Shame.
There are tons of more cost-effective photos out there to purchase. I guess they figured people with deep enough pockets to buy the suite might go for the photos as well?