pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 9 Million+ AI generated photos - Stock Photography coming to end  (Read 37804 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

« Reply #250 on: November 14, 2023, 09:50 »
+5
But to be balanceda lot of the ai content coming in is incredibly good.

The low quality work will get cleaned out by the algos.

Yes, they could be stricter, because it feels unfair to the photos, but a lot of the new stuff is fantastic and a real advantage for buyers compared to all the other agencies.


« Reply #251 on: December 13, 2023, 15:18 »
+2
It's interesting to think of this shift as a parallel to the many other technological shifts that have happened in the past. When Microsoft Excel/PCs came out it didn't put accountants out of business, but it surely changed the way they work forever.

« Reply #252 on: December 23, 2023, 15:49 »
+2
30 Million+

« Reply #253 on: December 25, 2023, 18:19 »
+1
Producing 100 images with AI takes just two or three hours?

do you mean to generate unfinished images,just prompts?yes,you can do even more in 2-3 hours,but the work is just started.

I just sent 10 AI images to Adobe and it took me 2 days!

I generated them with AI yes,but then I completely renovated,improved,added particular effects...it takes forever!

photographers and videographers will always be necessary,AI changes the game but cannot replace real content.
...

totally agree - those who keep citing mass quantities of similar images (as if it's new challenge to 'real' artists) seem to have forgotten the thousands of silly images that have been approved over the years ( tomato slices, )

« Reply #254 on: December 25, 2023, 18:28 »
+1
... their upload limit.
...
Agencies needs to take action to control these stuffs to promote more authentic work and real artists.

Sometimes I feel there is a huge requirement for a Microstock Organization and all RF and RM companies should come under them. Through this they can control pricing and authenticity both. Moreover can also organize a annual microstock meet to reward and also motivate people to work for such field.

luckily most of us don't live in a country that would be able to dictate what private companies must do.
-- who would control pricing?
-- how would you force membership?
--  how would this work when agencies are global?
-- who'd decide what is acceptable or authentic?

« Reply #255 on: December 25, 2023, 18:57 »
0
...
At least no one will be fighting over the drumstick on Thanksgiving  8)

but they should give credit to John Madden who invented the multi-drumstick turkey for their NFL Thanksgiving broadcasts

« Reply #256 on: December 25, 2023, 19:00 »
+2
At the beginning of October, Adobe Stock was adding around 900k genAI images per week.

From October 16th for the next three weeks, it was just over 1 million each week.

From Nov 6-13, it was almost 2 million!! 1,930,975.
...
for comparison, what were the numbers for non-AI?   that would help to see how much AI is affecting the total

« Reply #257 on: December 29, 2023, 02:22 »
0
i don't know about Adobe, but back when Shutterstock was publishing these stats it was around 2 million files a week over everything (photo, illustration, video).

Adobe is probably pickier, but with the long inspection times their submission volume must have more than doubled

wds

« Reply #258 on: December 29, 2023, 10:24 »
0
Not sure what the Adobe review waiting time is, but I have a file waiting for inspection 28 days.....frustrating.

« Reply #259 on: December 29, 2023, 22:02 »
+2
As always the question comes down to what we should be doing instead. And unfortunately most of us don't have an alternative figured out yet. So it of habit and compulsion we'll keep sending to stock

ADH

« Reply #260 on: December 30, 2023, 11:32 »
+1
350k a day

« Reply #261 on: December 30, 2023, 18:30 »
+1
Uploading a photo was throwing a drop in a pool. Now, throwing a drop in an ocean...  ::)

« Reply #262 on: December 31, 2023, 12:15 »
+2
And here we are, still making money.

We survived unsplash...what could be worse than free images?

The majority of content uploaded is just duplicates of duplicates.

Once you dig into a genre you see all the glaring holes in the collections.

Huge amounts of content are missing, but most uploaders just sort a search by most downloaded and copy the top 20 files. Again and again.

Give the customers something even just a little bit different and they will be grateful and buy.

« Reply #263 on: January 11, 2024, 07:44 »
+1
We have now reached over 33 million AI photos and illustrations on adobe stock.
Of these, less than 3 million have been sold, which corresponds to a share of just 7%.

The majority is therefore literally data garbage that has no buyers.

@Cobalt
I think that there will no longer be a market for generic motifs (people, life style, interior, etc.) and that this will be completely replaced by the stock providers' own AI models.

Where there is still some market potential are only niches, where AI can't produce high detailed images without errors.
Contributors like https://stock.adobe.com/de/contributor/205024019/ipopba are now melking for short future the current demanded niches.

Some successful contributors specialized on generic motifs have already switched to the video market in time.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #264 on: January 11, 2024, 14:50 »
+2
We have now reached over 33 million AI photos and illustrations on adobe stock.
Of these, less than 3 million have been sold, which corresponds to a share of just 7%.

The majority is therefore literally data garbage that has no buyers.

@Cobalt
I think that there will no longer be a market for generic motifs (people, life style, interior, etc.) and that this will be completely replaced by the stock providers' own AI models.

Where there is still some market potential are only niches, where AI can't produce high detailed images without errors.
Contributors like https://stock.adobe.com/de/contributor/205024019/ipopba are now melking for short future the current demanded niches.

Some successful contributors specialized on generic motifs have already switched to the video market in time.

Just for comparison, what percentage of real photos have been sold from the entire collection?

AI in so much alike and so many that more of the same helps no one. Not us or the agency. When does Adobe say, enough is enough? At 66 Million or when the new images change nothing for the volume of downloads? There has to be a wall.

« Reply #265 on: January 11, 2024, 16:54 »
+1
Just for comparison, what percentage of real photos have been sold from the entire collection?

AI in so much alike and so many that more of the same helps no one. Not us or the agency. When does Adobe say, enough is enough? At 66 Million or when the new images change nothing for the volume of downloads? There has to be a wall.

According to the Adobe search engine in total around 194 million of the 242 million classic photos and illustrations were never sold.
This corresponds to a share of almost exactly 80%.
Conversely, 20% were sold at least once.
In my view, this is a plausible result and can often be observed as the Pareto principle in markets with very unequal concentration distributions.

It is possible that the AI images will sell better in the future after there has been a market shakeout of the bad skilled contributors.
But I'm also very curious to see whether Adobe will close the floodgates for AI content this year.
I can't imagine that they can manage 2 to 3 million new images every few weeks in the long term.
I also fear that the ranking and keyword order will suffer damage. There are so many images either with the wrong tags or in the wrong categories.

All in all I am surprised that nobody tries to individualize the Midjourney image look with own filters.
It's like a collective frenzy at the moment, who can generate more content.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #266 on: January 12, 2024, 12:01 »
0
Just for comparison, what percentage of real photos have been sold from the entire collection?

AI in so much alike and so many that more of the same helps no one. Not us or the agency. When does Adobe say, enough is enough? At 66 Million or when the new images change nothing for the volume of downloads? There has to be a wall.

According to the Adobe search engine in total around 194 million of the 242 million classic photos and illustrations were never sold.
This corresponds to a share of almost exactly 80%.
Conversely, 20% were sold at least once.
In my view, this is a plausible result and can often be observed as the Pareto principle in markets with very unequal concentration distributions.

It is possible that the AI images will sell better in the future after there has been a market shakeout of the bad skilled contributors.
But I'm also very curious to see whether Adobe will close the floodgates for AI content this year.
I can't imagine that they can manage 2 to 3 million new images every few weeks in the long term.
I also fear that the ranking and keyword order will suffer damage. There are so many images either with the wrong tags or in the wrong categories.

All in all I am surprised that nobody tries to individualize the Midjourney image look with own filters.
It's like a collective frenzy at the moment, who can generate more content.

20% of the entire collection with at least one sale is an amazing number. Although people here, have listed their stats for sales, and are higher than that. I'm lower.

Keep in mind that a number of agencies and other places, offer AI image creation, directly for consumers. Anyone can go to many of those and make their own images, get just what they want, without artists, so they don't need to buy one from a stock site.

I have to laugh that you worry about rank, tags and keywords. I think we've been writing the same thing about stock sites since I started and that was 17 years ago. Spam keywords, deceptive tags, just plain wrong locations and tags, and never in the whole time of guessing how image ranks work, has anyone come up with anything that shows a benefit to keyword spam, or incorrect information that leads to more sales or better rank. In fact, if the system works at all, bad data would harm the rank of images with spam or inconsistencies.

Use Alamy clicks and views, and zooms and sales, as a starting point how other agencies are likely to rank images. Too many negative results and the image drops in rank. I don't think any of this is as simple as views and sales, it would be illogical to think and agency is that thoughtless to have some simple rudimentary system.

And then there are the "secret" reviewers rank, when an image is uploaded. Might be AI now, but you could upload 20 of the same image, and one of them will be ranked much higher, show pages higher, and come up more often in a search. Wouldn't they all be equal? Uploads have a rank, before they are live on the site. Spam, bad work, marginal content and junk files, won't have a higher than average starting rank.

wds

« Reply #267 on: January 12, 2024, 14:14 »
+1
Also remember when comparing AI to Photo sales that all the AI images are comparatively very very new.

« Reply #268 on: January 12, 2024, 15:46 »
+3
Not sure how long there have been Premium AI images - $249.99 for large, $119.99 for small.Why on earth would a buyer pay that much for AI generated stuff? None of the typical reasons for the premium collection apply to genAI images. Nothing at all wrong with this image BTW, other than the price


« Reply #269 on: January 12, 2024, 16:10 »
0
This discussion is very reminiscent of comparing the film image to the first steps of digital. The difference is that the quality in AI images develops 10 times faster and here we don't just have pixels, but compositions, light and everything else.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #270 on: January 13, 2024, 15:44 »
0
Not sure how long there have been Premium AI images - $249.99 for large, $119.99 for small.Why on earth would a buyer pay that much for AI generated stuff? None of the typical reasons for the premium collection apply to genAI images. Nothing at all wrong with this image BTW, other than the price



Premium AI images? There's something that just seems all wrong about that.

« Reply #271 on: January 14, 2024, 21:52 »
+1
Why did buyers pay hundreds of dollars for my iphone food snapshots when eyeem was a premium collection on getty?

Same reasons apply to ai.

« Reply #272 on: January 15, 2024, 07:48 »
+1
I do stock as I enjoy photography and fresh air, can't see any enjoyment from doing AI.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
11 Replies
3869 Views
Last post February 09, 2013, 22:01
by qwerty
107 Replies
51562 Views
Last post June 15, 2018, 09:02
by YadaYadaYada
2 Replies
3137 Views
Last post November 11, 2016, 14:00
by Microstock Posts
4 Replies
3121 Views
Last post August 31, 2023, 05:58
by gnirtS
4 Replies
927 Views
Last post February 26, 2024, 13:47
by cascoly

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors