Thank you for supporting my point. As cutting edge technology became available to those who could afford it, those old “cheesy” effects stopped being implemented. The industry is even increasingly monopolized, which means there’s thousands of great ideas getting shut out. Buyers don’t want to buy a photo and then see a competing website using that exact same photo, so diversity should still be a priority.
Unless of course is was small enough to be perfectly crisp, like something someone would use in a blog post.
Well, that’s why I suspect that the rejection rate is only going to get higher. But instead of simply saying that, they wrote multiple paragraphs implying it.
Weren’t the images on Unstock also a lot more weird and unique than most of the stuff on Photodune?
All of their results could simply be explained by the fact that they concentrated so many niche pictures in one small platform that it was bound to generate lots of revenue, as it was the easiest means to find something out of the ordinary that normally wouldn’t be found on any other platform.
Simplifying pricing options is also economically irrational and would eventually lead photodune to hemorrhage money due to disproportionately higher prices at a set pixel size as opposed to competing platforms that would allow buyers to only pay for what they want at varying sizes. Not that Envato has done any analysis to make a strong case for simpler licensing causing an increase RPI, but that is merely a cosmetic element, which means all they would need to do is package the culmination of licensing options in a more pleasing and more easily perceivable way.