JumpStory review: Lying to you or themselves?

By Matic Broz, editor-in-chief of Photutorial covering stock media, Adobe, and design. He founded Photutorial while finishing his PhD in computational biosciences.

Updated on | 0 Comments

If you buy something from a Photutorial link, we may earn a commission. See our ethics statement.
JumpStory review

Usually, my stock photo reviews adopt a more standard format, but given the circumstances, I felt it pertinent to personalize this critique and lay bare my unique perspectives.

So, what exactly is JumpStory?

JumpStory, with its roots in Denmark, was brought to life in 2018. This platform positions itself as an oasis in the seemingly endless desert of stock photography websites. They have an intriguing proposition – they assert that their repository is devoid of all the clichés that have become synonymous with the realm of stock imagery. They pledge to provide original, authentic, and high-impact visuals, ensuring that their users won’t have to navigate through the cheesy, staged, and overused visuals that have become the staple of many other stock photo services.

They’ve painted an enticing picture – a safe haven for professionals looking for unique and inspiring imagery, different from the mundane and often repetitive choices elsewhere. Their promise, in theory, seems like a breath of fresh air in the stock photo industry. But does it hold up under scrutiny? That’s what I am here to dissect.

My concerns with JumpStory

Patently wrong information

JumpStory’s partner page places itself in the same bracket as industry heavyweights such as Getty Images, Shutterstock, Pexels, and Unsplash. Using a low-resolution JPG table (a blunder in itself), they purport to offer a collection of authentic, high-performing images ostensibly superior to their competitors.

This assertion, to say the least, is quite audacious. Both Shutterstock and Getty Images have an extensive collection, running into hundreds of millions of stock images. While some images may be of lower quality, the vast majority are of high resolution and premium quality. Moreover, their combined catalog includes more than 230 million editorial photos, which, by definition, are authentic representations of events, people, and places.

JumpStory goes on to assert that their images are ‘high-performing’ compared to those on other platforms. This statement seems to mirror another on their ‘About’ page, where they claim their images ‘have a higher impact (up to 80%)’. While that’s an impressive figure to boast, it’s unfortunate that they don’t provide any tangible evidence to back it up. No data, no research, no statistics – nothing that would lend credibility to such a lofty claim. In the absence of any substantiating evidence, this declaration comes across as a baseless assertion rather than a fact.

Misleading ‘free’ account

JumpStory mandates the creation of an account before you can commence your image search. While they label this as a ‘free account’, you quickly discover that it’s anything but free. To sign up, you must activate a free trial. Essentially, what you’re signing up for is a paid account that offers a free trial period of 7 days. Should you forget to cancel during this period, you’re automatically charged the full subscription fee.

Contradiction in visual content

JumpStory’s primary marketing strategy revolves around the claim that typical stock photos are of inferior quality and that their library is the only source of ‘authentic’ images. However, when examining their practices, I find a striking inconsistency. Are they utilizing their own so-called superior stock photos? Surprisingly, no!

Throughout their site, you’ll find stock images sourced from other photo platforms, including Pexels – a platform that JumpStory critiques for allegedly lacking insurance on images and failing to provide high-performing visuals. Their use of images from the very sources they criticize raises serious questions about their credibility.

JumpStory Pexels image
This image was uploaded to Pexels by Picjumbo (Source)

Big talk of security, low indemnity

Security is undeniably a crucial aspect in the realm of stock photography. This is typically guaranteed through indemnity, which at reputable stock image sites ranges from $10,000 to over $250,000. However, JumpStory falls significantly short in this aspect. They offer one of the industry’s lowest indemnities at $5,000 – a figure similar to the indemnity provided by Depositphotos, a platform not particularly renowned for high indemnity. This disparity between their claims of security and the actual indemnity offered is disconcerting.

JumpStory pricing

JumpStory has three subscription plans: Solo, Pro, and Teams. The Solo plan ($39/mo; $228/yr) is for one user only and grants you unlimited downloads of all JumpStory images and videos. The Pro plan ($59/mo; $348/yr) can be used by up to 5 users and also grants you global insurance, TextMatch, image editor, and background removal. The Teams plan ($99/mo; $1,188/yr) is available to unlimited users and also grants you a dedicated account manager (why) and 24/7 support.

Compared to the most popular stock image site with unlimited downloads, Envato Elements, JumpStory doesn’t shine either. Envato Elements is cheaper at $16.50 per month ($11.50/mo for students) while offering a more diverse set of assets, including images, videos, graphics, fonts, audio, plugins, templates, and even add-ons.

Is JumpStory worth your money?

No, JumpStory isn’t worth your money. You can get similar yet free images at Unsplash or Pexels or pay a small fee at Envato Elements to get a broad selection of paid images.

Comments

Leave a Comment