Author Topic: 9 Million+ AI generated photos - Stock Photography coming to end (Read 33609 times)

Shuttershock · « **Reply #50 on:** June 15, 2023, 06:47 »

Whenever I have used AI software half the results are full of artifacts and would never be accepted.
The next stage may wipe out stock agencies as customers will just use the simple software themselves to create images.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #51 on:** June 15, 2023, 10:11 »

If you do a search on Adobe Stock for "generative" and select the filter to exclude Generative AI, you have 644,228 results. I spot checked a number of them and they (a) look like AI and (b) the title quite clearly says they were generative AI (obviously there will be some that have that search term for another reason, but it's still a large number of improperly identified images).

So these predated the filter, or someone forgot to check the box or something - and reviewers didn't notice or don't have a mandate to get that sort of thing fixed?

This isn't just stuff from a long time ago. The newest image in the collection at time of writing was 611697106 and the newest AI image that didn't have the GenAI tag set was 610830747

This must be corrected. Even Adobe's corporate spin at various public events has included the importance of being transparent - tagging AI generated images as such - and surely that has to include the Adobe Stock collection.

"As a trusted partner to individuals and businesses of all sizes, Adobe develops and deploys all AI capabilities with a customer-centric approach and according to its AI Ethics principles to ensure content and data transparency. Content Credentials provide “nutrition labels” for digital content and are a key pillar of Adobe’s AI principles."

https://news.adobe.com/news/news-details/2023/Adobe-Unveils-Future-of-Creative-Cloud-with-Generative-AI-as-a-Creative-Co-Pilot-in-Photoshop-default.aspx/default.aspx

https://contentauthenticity.org/

https://venturebeat.com/ai/adobe-commits-to-transparency-in-use-of-generative-ai/

"And how will we know whether something we see was created by a human or a computer?"

On Adobe Stock, one would hope you'd know because content was properly handled by the upload and inspection process, and ideally, thumbnails would be overlaid by a "Gen AI" box (like editorial and premium images have)

cobalt · « **Reply #52 on:** June 15, 2023, 10:22 »

ai images are all upsized, usually with Topaz software. They are also often heavily edited in photoshop, because they don‘t come out perfect.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #53 on:** June 18, 2023, 17:11 »

There are multiple thousands of seriously wrong flags in the GenAI collection, particularly US flags, and with Independence Day near, wouldn't it be great if the bogus flags could be disappeared? There are over half a million human-created ones that are fine to use.

And perhaps the "quality" reviewers could be given the rules for flags so they don't let more of this stuff in. What possible advantage is there for Adobe Stock to have tens of thousands of mangled flags in the collection?

There are many examples, but here's just a handful:

This has been removed

wds · « **Reply #54 on:** June 18, 2023, 17:17 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on June 14, 2023, 12:33

Quote from: cobalt on June 14, 2023, 10:51
Like I said, the 8 fingers, 3 claws etc…IMO are „typical“ of ai. Which why for me it makes perfect sense to take it.

How, in any universe, is this a useful image of a roast turkey?

Or this of a boiled lobster?

There are lots and lots of this type of "mistakes of AI" - I'm not just cherry picking a few with flaws.

Or, if this type of could-easily-be-mistaken-for-real content is really important, then slap an overlay on them, like "EDITORIAL ONLY" or "PREMIUM" have. Otherwise it's a fast ticket to getting fired from your job for being mocked on social media instead of promoting whatever it was you were supposed to be pitching.

Good points. I believe AI will "get there" not making "mistakes", but it may take long enough to give AI images a really bad name among commercial users...enough so that they just avoid it and defer to using actual photographic imagery for quite some time.

cobalt · « **Reply #55 on:** June 19, 2023, 08:04 »

I think the flags are ok, because the customer can immediately see what the problem is. If they don't like it, they won't download.

My biggest gripe are with the isolations and everything that is difficult to see and that you will only notice after downloading.

Ai content is clearly labeled, so the customers know that there might be some problems.

But most important: I am comfortable if they take millions of crappy files as long as they don't decline my beautiful perfect ai creations!!

Lina · « **Reply #56 on:** June 19, 2023, 14:27 »

Quote from: cobalt on June 19, 2023, 08:04

I think the flags are ok, because the customer can immediately see what the problem is. If they don't like it, they won't download.

Maybe... if buyer is buying some other country flag, not his own, he won't notice immediately something is wrong with it.

cobalt · « **Reply #57 on:** June 19, 2023, 15:42 »

True, but basically the ai label is also a warning sign. Our customers are professionals.

But perhaps they could make the ai label larger or more visible and add a few more articles or blog posts how ai images are a computer being creative and not documentary photography. Similar to how a chat gpt text is not a scientific paper but has to be fact checked.

They can write the articles with a positive vibe, personally I would put the ai mistakes like the lobster front and center. These images will lead to endless engagements on social media.

Anyka · « **Reply #58 on:** June 22, 2023, 00:32 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on June 15, 2023, 10:11

Even Adobe's corporate spin at various public events has included the importance of being transparent - tagging AI generated images as such - and surely that has to include the Adobe Stock collection.
"As a trusted partner to individuals and businesses of all sizes, Adobe develops and deploys all AI capabilities with a customer-centric approach and according to its AI Ethics principles to ensure content and data transparency. Content Credentials provide “nutrition labels” for digital content and are a key pillar of Adobe’s AI principles."

Adobe also tells its customers they can "trust" Adobe because they compensated their artists for the use of the database ...
Even if they "plan" to do this in the near/far future, it is/was not true when they launched Firefly and started accepting AI images as stock.

gnirtS · « **Reply #59 on:** June 22, 2023, 10:06 »

Whether they like it or not, they've already got a *lot* of AI images sold as stock and unlabelled.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #60 on:** June 22, 2023, 10:43 »

Quote from: gnirtS on June 22, 2023, 10:06

Whether they like it or not, they've already got a *lot* of AI images sold as stock and unlabelled.

I've seen a lot like that too. And from the Adobe Forums, someone pointed out this portfolio which appears to be AI created but isn't labeled in the title or with the Generative AI tag...

https://stock.adobe.com/contributor/211097879/hera-kim

The post was made at the end of April and the portfolio is still there, still not labeled as AI (and no response to the post either).

In the same thread, Mat Hayward had posted 2 days earlier "We have done a deep analysis on photos and illustrations not tagged by contributors as generative AI and have included those detected as AI in the filter. It should be much better for those wishing to eliminated generative AI content from their search results. We are constantly working to improve the Adobe Stock experience for everyone!"

I did a check on one of the images from the hera-kim port (the crazy ornate wedding venues) and it does not show up with "Generative AI Only" and does with "Exclude Generative AI". I obviously don't know if the person who posted this knows how the images were created, but some of the "mistakes" look very much like AI generated mistakes to me

cobalt · « **Reply #61 on:** June 22, 2023, 11:00 »

That looks like a midjourney port.

gnirtS · « **Reply #62 on:** June 22, 2023, 21:57 »

If you trawl the FB groups for example there's one recent guy who (on SS admittedly) submitted some woeful mobile snapshots of his garden to get "approved".
Badly composed, awfully exposed garden growth. 7 of them.

Next day post is "Please visit and buy my portfolio" and the link now contains some 30+ images of clearly AI generated cups of coffee in addition to those weeds.

And yep, he's listed as AS contributor too and far from alone.

Artist · « **Reply #63 on:** June 22, 2023, 22:06 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on June 22, 2023, 10:43

Quote from: gnirtS on June 22, 2023, 10:06
Whether they like it or not, they've already got a *lot* of AI images sold as stock and unlabelled.

I've seen a lot like that too. And from the Adobe Forums, someone pointed out this portfolio which appears to be AI created but isn't labeled in the title or with the Generative AI tag...

https://stock.adobe.com/contributor/211097879/hera-kim

The post was made at the end of April and the portfolio is still there, still not labeled as AI (and no response to the post either).

The portfolio is gone.

WaterView · « **Reply #64 on:** June 22, 2023, 22:28 »

I think nothing will truly replace the spirit and the soul of a human without seeming like a fraud somehow eventually!

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #65 on:** June 23, 2023, 10:16 »

Quote from: Artist on June 22, 2023, 22:06

...The portfolio is gone.

These portfolios don't need to go away, just get tagged as AI - perhaps it'll come back after tagging??

Perhaps the same process/magic can be worked on this portfolio which appears (to me; based on style and all the mistakes) to be 100% Gen AI but isn't tagged as such

https://stock.adobe.com/search?creator_id=211433618

It has levitating ice cream cones, hot dog soup, gibberish text, mangled cutlery, strange laptop keyboards - all the hits

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #66 on:** June 23, 2023, 15:52 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on June 23, 2023, 10:16

Quote from: Artist on June 22, 2023, 22:06
...The portfolio is gone.

These portfolios don't need to go away, just get tagged as AI - perhaps it'll come back after tagging??

Perhaps the same process/magic can be worked on this portfolio which appears (to me; based on style and all the mistakes) to be 100% Gen AI but isn't tagged as such

https://stock.adobe.com/search?creator_id=211433618

It has levitating ice cream cones, hot dog soup, gibberish text, mangled cutlery, strange laptop keyboards - all the hits

AI doesn't get bicycle spokes or machinery right either.

dbvirago · « **Reply #67 on:** June 23, 2023, 18:50 »

Quote from: images on June 13, 2023, 22:45

Stock photography is coming to an end has been the most consistent topic on this forum for the last 15 years. And yet, here we are.

That and how you can't make money in microstock any more. My stock earnings since 2006:

biibii · « **Reply #68 on:** June 23, 2023, 19:07 »

Quote from: dbvirago on June 23, 2023, 18:50

Quote from: images on June 13, 2023, 22:45
Stock photography is coming to an end has been the most consistent topic on this forum for the last 15 years. And yet, here we are.

That and how you can't make money in microstock any more. My stock earnings since 2006:

looks nice if.. , what grid numbers are here missing? in 10 or 100 USD steps?

gnirtS · « **Reply #69 on:** June 23, 2023, 21:09 »

Quote from: Uncle Pete on June 23, 2023, 15:52

AI doesn't get bicycle spokes or machinery right either.

I tried it on marine life and underwater (because thats mostly what i do myself).

Even entering pretty specific fish and species names most of the outputs are wrong to the extent you either think "what is that" or have invented new species previously unknown to science.

I did get a 10 arm octopus spat out once. And one with a claw (only 1 though).

cobalt · « **Reply #70 on:** June 24, 2023, 01:36 »

Quote from: dbvirago on June 23, 2023, 18:50

Quote from: images on June 13, 2023, 22:45
Stock photography is coming to an end has been the most consistent topic on this forum for the last 15 years. And yet, here we are.

That and how you can't make money in microstock any more. My stock earnings since 2006:

For everyone complaing that stock is dead, there is someone else who just uploads and keeps making more money.

There are so many gaps in all the agency collections, endless possibilties.

And so many agencies to work with. Personally exploring the smaller players and uploading older content. It makes money. Even 18 year old files can bring income in the right new environment.

But at least for me, Adobe is currently the most interesting.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #71 on:** June 24, 2023, 09:04 »

The genAI collection at Adobe Stock continues to grow - it's now just over 10.75 million.

I've continued to look at what's being added; the total fantasy stuff is visually rich, although the market for it may not be all that large (all the video game backgrounds look pretty, but will video game companies actually be able to use them instead of making their own?).

The images that attempt to portray the real world (including specific places, something the written rules explicitly forbid) are largely terrible. Here are just two examples (click to see detail page):

And here's something where the terrible quality of the output should have resulted in a rejection (and there are others equally awful in the same portfolio)

Large numbers of similars (from a single contributor) keep appearing - 36 brick wall backgrounds, over 100 beach sunset with palm trees, 50 hamburgers with exploding food bits, over 1,000 abstract wave line backgrounds, 58 whole peach backgrounds . . .

It certainly appears the goal is to bulk up this part of the collection as quickly as possible and whatever criteria are in place are not at all the same as for the "regular" collection.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #72 on:** June 28, 2023, 08:44 »

The collection is now over 11 million gen AI images (there are more but they're not marked. I can't know which the 11 millionth is, but how about this one of a waterslide no one should ever go on:

biibii · « **Reply #73 on:** June 28, 2023, 09:20 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on June 28, 2023, 08:44

..no one should ever go on:

lol i love it, i saw 2 deadly endings already, how many can u find?

gnirtS · « **Reply #74 on:** June 28, 2023, 22:13 »

Won't put the in this thread as it'll detail it but yesterday i decided to try with generative fill on my own images.

Summary:- we stayed up for 5 hours and haven't laughed as much in years.

Literally not a single suggestion worked for inserting specific animals, created some horrific species previously unknown to science.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: 9 Million+ AI generated photos - Stock Photography coming to end (Read 33609 times)

Shuttershock

Jo Ann Snover

cobalt

Jo Ann Snover

wds

cobalt

Lina

cobalt

Anyka

gnirtS

Jo Ann Snover

cobalt

gnirtS

Artist

WaterView

Jo Ann Snover

Uncle Pete

dbvirago

biibii

gnirtS

cobalt

Jo Ann Snover

Jo Ann Snover

biibii

gnirtS

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors