iStock by Getty Images headquartered in Seattle is presented as a complete creative resource for original content, with millions of photos, illustrations, videos & audio to choose from.
N/A
Shutterstock
Score8.6 out of 10
N/A
Shutterstock is a global technology company headquartered in New York, offering a creative platform boasting high-quality assets, tools and services. With it, users can license images, video, music, and editorial assets -- as well as custom content tailored to a brand’s needs. Shutterstock offers a variety of plans for individuals, teams, and enterprise customers as well as creative editing and collaboration capabilities.
$379
per month (2 users)
Pricing
iStock, from Getty Images
Shutterstock
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Single User - 10 Images
$29 ($49)
monthly, annual contract (no contract)
On-Demand Packs - Standard License
$29, $49, $299
number of images (2, 5, 25)
Single User - 50 Images
$99 ($125)
monthly, annual contract (no contract)
Single User - 350 Images
$169 ($199)
monthly, annual contract (no contract)
Single User - 750 Images
$199 ($249)
monthly, annual contract (no contract)
On-Demand Packs - Enhanced License
$199, $449, $1,699
number of images (2, 5, 25)
Teams (750 images per month)
$379
per month (2 users)
Teams (750 images per month)
$479
per month (3-10 users)
Teams (750 images per month)
Contact Sales
per month, 11+ users
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
iStock, from Getty Images
Shutterstock
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
iStock, from Getty Images
Shutterstock
Considered Both Products
Getty Images
Verified User
Chose iStock, from Getty Images
Compared to these others I feel that iStock has better variety and selection, better ease of use/interface/search features, fresher selection, and better pricing options. I don't like that Adobe Stock only has subscription options (last I checked) and I do not use them for that …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Verified User
Chose iStock, from Getty Images
Again, I think when I consider iStock, from Getty Images I think of their tool as one of the more 'traditional' styles of stock imagery, but also one of the more reliable. While other competitors can have what we need 'here and there' I don't know that I can say confidently …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
The best examples I have of my experience with iStock, from Getty Images comes from times I am creating prototypes or design concepts to show off a new content type or provide visual examples of how a page could look with the addition of good photography. My only downside is sometimes it can be a struggle to find organic looking stock images which is a key part of the brand identity we have.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
It is best suited for medium enterprises who get a lot of workload for their video productions and have many clients but lack of creative individuals. because it is a bit expensive than other competitors, but for some studios having good budget and looking for improving their work quality then shutterstock is the best platform with very good quality and quantity of graphics, photos and videos. for small studios who are just starting out i think it is bit costly you can even go for some subscription based platforms which offer unlimited downloads but their is a bit downside you will have to compromise with quality of work. so in short if you have a decent budget then shutterstock is best for your creative needs.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Shutterstock is easy to use. The UI is intuitive. Queries produce applicable assets. My only major gripe with the program is that there are sometimes "preimum assets" that are in queries that I wish there was a way to filter those out as they do not come with my subscription
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Compared to these others I feel that iStock has better variety and selection, better ease of use/interface/search features, fresher selection, and better pricing options. I don't like that Adobe Stock only has subscription options (last I checked) and I do not use them for that reason. I don't like the interface of Shutterstock as much and it's harder to download a test image to try out.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Shutterstock library and pricing is better than Adobe Stock also the preview is far better than Adobe Stock that's why i am still using shutterstock rather than Adobe Stock, their have a huge collections of images, videos than Adobe Stock. also the user interface of shutterstock is easy than Adobe Stock
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
