Adobe Stock vs. Getty Images Enterprise Solutions

If you're looking for quality professional images for sales and marketing collateral, presentations, social media pages, and graphics, it's great. If you have a very specific industry or subject, sometimes it is too cumbersome to find what you need. They need a better variety of people in their images as well.

Incentivized

Working in the medical field it can be difficult to find specialized imagery without shooting it yourself in-house however Getty has a pretty vast library. They've also done a nice job staying up with 'mask' imagery during the current COVID pandemic which my organization had a very high demand for. You will also find the photography to be more diverse than competitors and their search engine's suggestions are usually pretty spot on.

Incentivized

• Presents a huge collection of distinctive graphics with all sorts of options to fit the user's particular need of the day.
• Allows for easy grab-and-go, cut-and-paste of the sample proofs so that a graphic designer can work up an idea and present it to the team before purchasing it.
• Operates a user-friendly platform so that team members who haven't used the program but is suddenly needed to jump in on a project can figure it out quickly.

Incentivized

• Variety of images
• Excellent suggestions and search tool
• Sharable light boards
• Comp images of higher quality and don't contain annoying watermarks

Incentivized

• I really do wish Adobe Stock would offer editorial-based content. There are no historical photos, photos of world figures, or other event-based content. We have to go to Getty for that.
• Their video offerings are OK, but there is room for improvement.
• The current enter-level monthly plan does not provide for any video downloads at all.

Incentivized

• The price point is typically not workable for smaller orgs
• Video/Music assets are not as strong as the photography library
• Vector-based assets are often built in strange ways that aren't always easy to manipulate

Incentivized

In comparison to other options, Adobe Stock is far more user-friendly. Adobe Stock has helped me find quality photos. One-stop licensing's convenience and variety were important. Instead of buying photos per image, we usually find something similar at Adobe and license it under our subscription. I prefer Adobe's curated resources over other services. Adobe Stock's filters make finding the right image easy.

Incentivized

I could probably rattle after a dozen 'stock' photo companies that tout claims such as '$1 downloads, etc.' but don't bite on them, their libraries are extremely limited and you'll end up seeing photos you've used all over the place. For example, we once used a woman for a magazine cover who I also saw on a Southwest flyer, a Home Depot ad and on a poster at my kid's school all within a few months. It waters down your brand.

Incentivized

• I used stock photos for my blog posting on medium and website creation. I found adobe stock a very amazing site for high-quality images.
• It has resolved the issue where I would spend countless hours looking for a photo on Google or other stock-image websites, no other stock photos website is perfect and stunning like Adobe Stock. Overall, it's a fantastic time-saver.
• Overall, I found images impact more than words while blog posting on medium and other social media, so I can say that Adobe Stock helps me in growing my startup…

Incentivized

• Saved on the expense of buying our own photography equipment
• saved time of conducting in-house photo sessions
• Cloud storage of all your download save on local IT costs

Incentivized