MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: A.I. Legal cases  (Read 9322 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: May 20, 2023, 16:26 »
+1
in short, as soon as "this thing" is trained one will get 0,00000000...
same like it was with enough images video etc

Ps: may i ask what you define with good money and do you know
    how often and how many images are used and where the outlet goes?



« Reply #26 on: May 20, 2023, 20:29 »
+1
in short, as soon as "this thing" is trained one will get 0,00000000...
same like it was with enough images video etc

Ps: may i ask what you define with good money and do you know
    how often and how many images are used and where the outlet goes?

Don't get me wrong but i think your perspective is limited to the perception of Knowledge you have about AI.

Real authentic images/video have real data/metadata which can produce augmented reality and new perception about things that humans alone cannot do or have. Generative AI Images have "fake" simulated data and are limited to just that - artistic visions about reality.

I.E. If you are training AI for safe driving i bet you won't want "fake" metadata from AI images because it will corrupt the learn of AI itself. In this case the learning curve of AI will be something called "false positive learning" or "false negative learning" depending on the measures of safe drive attributes established primarily.

However, the actual value of each Real image will be less as there is more and more about the subject portrayed in the image. As it becomes increasingly easier to produce generative AI images and their volume increases exponentially, the values of real images will be greater than those of AI images because they got real data and metadata about reality.

The good news is that the research and development industry is far superior to the Hollywood industry. To give you a clue European Commission Spends Trillions in research and only some hundred millions in programmes for Media. In this sense one of the paths for Microstock contributors will not be so much an artistic vision of reality, but rather a perspective of reality like documentary/news and that serves or has potential to be used for AI learning.

I'm not psychic but I think that in the near future AI images are here to stay but Real Images will not disappear - only part will be substituted.

In short: adapt your work/portfolio for this new reality.

 
« Last Edit: May 20, 2023, 21:06 by Evaristo tenscadisto »

« Reply #27 on: May 21, 2023, 01:29 »
0
in short, as soon as "this thing" is trained one will get 0,00000000...
same like it was with enough images video etc

Ps: may i ask what you define with good money and do you know
    how often and how many images are used and where the outlet goes?

Don't get me wrong but i think your perspective is limited to the perception of Knowledge you have about AI.

Real authentic images/video have real data/metadata which can produce augmented reality and new perception about things that humans alone cannot do or have. Generative AI Images have "fake" simulated data and are limited to just that - artistic visions about reality.

I.E. If you are training AI for safe driving i bet you won't want "fake" metadata from AI images because it will corrupt the learn of AI itself. In this case the learning curve of AI will be something called "false positive learning" or "false negative learning" depending on the measures of safe drive attributes established primarily.

However, the actual value of each Real image will be less as there is more and more about the subject portrayed in the image. As it becomes increasingly easier to produce generative AI images and their volume increases exponentially, the values of real images will be greater than those of AI images because they got real data and metadata about reality.

The good news is that the research and development industry is far superior to the Hollywood industry. To give you a clue European Commission Spends Trillions in research and only some hundred millions in programmes for Media. In this sense one of the paths for Microstock contributors will not be so much an artistic vision of reality, but rather a perspective of reality like documentary/news and that serves or has potential to be used for AI learning.

I'm not psychic but I think that in the near future AI images are here to stay but Real Images will not disappear - only part will be substituted.

In short: adapt your work/portfolio for this new reality.

You say that but as has already been shown across various media outlets one of the legal cases centres around a simple request ... write a chapter of a novel in the style that I would write it. And it did. Worryingly well and in the vlog the writer said I found it hard to tell it wasn't me. Similarly a photographer asked it to create a photo of something in his style. And it did. Even at this stage. So as a buyer I can ask it ro create a photo in the style of an artist that is popular and it will. I can then attach that to as many tshirts as I wish. Nothing stopping me. I can piggy back off that person's success. Because their work is popular but they didn't make it . Like Banksy. Now he's a singular example but I could be more subtle. Please don't ask me ro believe if I am specific about my requirements that the A.I. isn't going to dip into his data sets and pluck out all images of a girl with a red balloon and generically create something because I won't believe you. Its going to use barely two images because it's also been trained to be fast and accurate. What's more accurate and fast than a direct copyslightly adjusted to swerve copywrite claims.

You say that the meta data will be hallmark of quality and that its that that will keep true work afloat. I'd call cobblers on that too. If it can fake a style it will fake metadata. Maybe for a photo of a Banksy. But Olivier Crapston ... housewife and part time photographer isn't ever going to have a chance.

Which brings me to your final point. I'd already worked out the area it will fall down on is media events, social gatherings and current affairs generically .... protest outside Walmart etc. Pride event etc. But it's awful arrogant of anyone to say change your area of photography and suceed or don't snd fall by the wayside.

It will not only kill the artistic world it will kill creativity full stop. Pushing all people into narrow cracks it can't cope with or is prevented to by legislation.

As an aside I wouldn't be rushing to buy and collect save NFTs any time soon they'll be worth dirt.

« Reply #28 on: May 21, 2023, 02:19 »
0
In short: adapt your work/portfolio for this new reality.
How are you going to adapt?

« Reply #29 on: May 21, 2023, 02:23 »
0
in short, as soon as "this thing" is trained one will get 0,00000000...
same like it was with enough images video etc

Ps: may i ask what you define with good money and do you know
    how often and how many images are used and where the outlet goes?
People take photos, videos and earn money. The growth of the stock base does not reduce their income. At least everything works.

Good money, AI paid me an amount that is equal to my monthly income. If the AI keeps doing this all the time, I like this customer. As for the statistics, I don't know them; how can I know it.

« Reply #30 on: May 21, 2023, 09:14 »
+1

« Reply #31 on: May 21, 2023, 11:09 »
0

There is no more fight needed, just let he speak!  ;D
Try again Chief!!!, and call it "ballpoint pen" instead!  ;D
Comments on reddit are excellent! Childish, immature, nothing to do with science here. His intelligence is to know that he does not need to use intelligence to talk to sheeps.

What about Sam Altman last statements? propaganda? conspiracy theorist?  ;D all this is so low level...
Perfect invention here... of running knote! by Yann The Gun, I say  ;D
« Last Edit: May 21, 2023, 11:51 by DiscreetDuck »

« Reply #32 on: May 21, 2023, 13:01 »
0
Lowls,
What prevented anyone before AI from writing their own ideas in one style or another?  In fact, all artists start by absorbing styles from other artists that they like and influence them to write. Isn't that the normal learning process for humans?

Taking the example of music. How many bands exist and still exists with a Beatles-style sound all over the world? I would say hundreds if not thousands.I remember the first time I heard the band Oasis and I felt a kind of revival of the Beatles sound. Naturally there were particularities such as themes, some writing and type of voice but in essence it reminds me a lot of the Beatles.
Guitarist Van Halen developed the unique style of "Fingertap" on the guitar. Among others Steve Vai or Joe Satriani use this style in their music/songs. If we are going to talk about good BB King then practically most guitarists use the famous "bending" style which makes the guitar seem to cry especially in Blues, Rock or variants...

Jumping to graffiti how many artists "imitate" banksy?
Despite the Stencil technique, the Grunge style of drawing, and the Transformism of images such as the Clown Ronald Macdonalds and Mickey Mouse holding hands with the Napalm Girl are not his, the originality in the portrait subject marks his authorship.

If you look at Andy Warhol's work well then he took pictures that weren't of him and painted over them (i.e. Marilyn Monroe) Warhol created this masterpiece which consists of 50 images of Marilyn using the same publicity photograph from the film titled Niagara.

So nothing stopped any of them from absorbing and learning styles and bringing originality to our world, right?
AI will not kill creativity. In fact, it will do the opposite. It allow you to explore and develop many more styles or combinations of styles than any artist could do in his lifetime. This is where originality and a sense of art are born. So AI can help you to perform a better drawing, painting, writing or re-write your work. Also can bring new things to your creative table that you may include or not. It's really up to you. If you are having trouble in understand if AI can substitute the artist it can not. AI is only an excellent performer. Do not forget who write the prompt.

On the other hand of course you can use AI to just copycat but we don't need AI for that we've been living with this problem for decades and normally they don't go so far without being noticed.

I will not extend my post any longer since i find you were more interest in AI for Artistic vision which is a small water drop in the AI ocean. AI will assist you in everything you do - literally everything! You cannot use fake data/metadata for research. The first augmented reality device was invented in 1835. It was a telescopic sight for firearms. You cannot use false data to calibrate the aim because the probability of missing the target is high. The more likely thing would be to miss and hit something else or someone's foot. So the redundancy, entropy and risk is too high but you can run simulations based on real data/metadata to help you with accuracy for some diagnosis.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2023, 13:35 by Evaristo tenscadisto »

« Reply #33 on: May 21, 2023, 13:27 »
+2
Lowls,
What prevented anyone before AI from writing their own ideas in one style or another?  In fact, all artists start by absorbing styles from other artists that they like and influence them to write. Isn't that the normal learning process for humans?

Taking the example of music. How many bands exist and still exists with a Beatles-style sound all over the world? I would say hundreds if not thousands.I remember the first time I heard the band Oasis and I felt a kind of revival of the Beatles sound. Naturally there were particularities such as themes, some writing and type of voice but in essence it reminds me a lot of the Beatles.
Guitarist Van Halen developed the unique style of "Fingertap" on the guitar. Among others Steve Vai or Joe Satriani use this style in their music/songs. If we are going to talk about good BB King then practically most guitarists use the famous "bending" style which makes the guitar seem to cry especially in Blues, Rock or variants...

Jumping to graffiti how many artists "imitate" banksy?
Despite the Stencil technique, the Grunge style of drawing, and the Transformism of images such as the Clown Ronald Macdonalds and Mickey Mouse holding hands with the Napalm Girl are not his, the originality in the portrait subject marks his authorship.

If you look at Andy Warhol's work well then he took pictures that weren't of him and painted over them (i.e. Marilyn Monroe) Warhol created this masterpiece which consists of 50 images of Marilyn using the same publicity photograph from the film titled Niagara.

So nothing stopped any of them from absorbing and learning styles and bringing originality to our world, right?
AI will not kill creativity. In fact, it will do the opposite. It allow you to explore and develop many more styles or combinations of styles than any artist could do in his lifetime. This is where originality and a sense of art are born. So AI can help you to perform a better drawing, painting, writing or re-write your work. Also can bring new things to your creative table that you may include or not. It's really up to you. If you are having trouble in understand if AI can substitute the artist it can not. AI is only an excellent performer. Do not forget who write the prompt.

On the other hand of course you can use AI to just copycat but we don't need AI for that we've been living with this problem for decades and normally they don't go so far without being noticed.

I will not extend my post any longer since i find you were more interest in AI for Artistic vision which is a small water drop in the AI ocean. AI will assist you in everything you do - literally everything! You cannot use fake data/metadata for research. The redundancy, entropy and risk is too high but you can run simulations based on real data/metadata to help you with accuracy for some diagnosis.
It is a great relief to read again a voice of reason in here!  I was afraid all reasonable souls had run away scared by the Bandar-log   ;D

« Reply #34 on: May 21, 2023, 14:28 »
0
Lowls,
What prevented anyone before AI from writing their own ideas in one style or another?  In fact, all artists start by absorbing styles from other artists that they like and influence them to write. Isn't that the normal learning process for humans?

Taking the example of music. How many bands exist and still exists with a Beatles-style sound all over the world? I would say hundreds if not thousands.I remember the first time I heard the band Oasis and I felt a kind of revival of the Beatles sound. Naturally there were particularities such as themes, some writing and type of voice but in essence it reminds me a lot of the Beatles.
Guitarist Van Halen developed the unique style of "Fingertap" on the guitar. Among others Steve Vai or Joe Satriani use this style in their music/songs. If we are going to talk about good BB King then practically most guitarists use the famous "bending" style which makes the guitar seem to cry especially in Blues, Rock or variants...

Jumping to graffiti how many artists "imitate" banksy?
Despite the Stencil technique, the Grunge style of drawing, and the Transformism of images such as the Clown Ronald Macdonalds and Mickey Mouse holding hands with the Napalm Girl are not his, the originality in the portrait subject marks his authorship.

If you look at Andy Warhol's work well then he took pictures that weren't of him and painted over them (i.e. Marilyn Monroe) Warhol created this masterpiece which consists of 50 images of Marilyn using the same publicity photograph from the film titled Niagara.

So nothing stopped any of them from absorbing and learning styles and bringing originality to our world, right?
AI will not kill creativity. In fact, it will do the opposite. It allow you to explore and develop many more styles or combinations of styles than any artist could do in his lifetime. This is where originality and a sense of art are born. So AI can help you to perform a better drawing, painting, writing or re-write your work. Also can bring new things to your creative table that you may include or not. It's really up to you. If you are having trouble in understand if AI can substitute the artist it can not. AI is only an excellent performer. Do not forget who write the prompt.

On the other hand of course you can use AI to just copycat but we don't need AI for that we've been living with this problem for decades and normally they don't go so far without being noticed.

I will not extend my post any longer since i find you were more interest in AI for Artistic vision which is a small water drop in the AI ocean. AI will assist you in everything you do - literally everything! You cannot use fake data/metadata for research. The first augmented reality device was invented in 1835. It was a telescopic sight for firearms. You cannot use false data to calibrate the aim because the probability of missing the target is high. The more likely thing would be to miss and hit something else or someone's foot. So the redundancy, entropy and risk is too high but you can run simulations based on real data/metadata to help you with accuracy for some diagnosis.

Thank you for taking the time to respond firstly. I will say that although on the face of it your post is obvious and many would agree but I believe it is shallow in the reality.

Firstly you cannot count music. Music is extremely limited ro scales, chords and melodies. This is very finite which is why Ed Sheeran keeps finding himself in court as do many others. Only tempo and lyrics can have enough variety as to emote different music and then after that comes melody. But it's limited.

Artists that exist and are recognisable do get copied but they are also chased. Not just the usual aspects but patterns etc. BUT and this was my point. Banksy isn't having his artwork yoinked for free is he. We are.

and you are incorrect about it killing creativity. It will. I'll give you an example. Mobile phone cameras. Now everyone is an artist, content creator etc etc. Whilst this hasn't killed it at all it has expanded it massively ... which killed the money which has killed motivation which will kill creativity because why bother for peanuts. The only way to win is to be creative in areas that it cannot yet.

Why get a massive student debt to become a designer of anything. A writer. And that brings me to writing because I don't write anything influenced by anyone. I've never had that issue. I remember going to college and the first week was learning about the American system of plagiarism lol. Because and I quote "no thought is original" so I must research to find where my thoughts have been used before so that I can credit the original authors lol. Utter boll@x. Regarding research of course. Theories on research certainly. But on a fkin story about my experiences in the world lol. Er no. My words are my own from my own experiences and you know that because it has my name on it. Just vecause someone else had the same thought perhaps in a slightly different way ... Good for them that makes two of us. But with A.I. it's got no rules at all. Yet. But they can already see the dollar signs.

Finally the only thing in your post that I found offensive was Oasis had a Beatles vibe. Oasis ... jesus... I don't think we could accuse them of making unique music. Or music. Stereophonics or Crowded House = music. Loic Nottet = masterpieces 🙌

« Reply #35 on: May 21, 2023, 18:52 »
0


Don't get me wrong but i think your perspective is limited to the perception of Knowledge you have about AI.
...

... Please don't ask me ro believe if I am specific about my requirements that the A.I. isn't going to dip into his data sets and pluck out all images of a girl with a red balloon and generically create something because I won't believe you. Its going to use barely two images because it's also been trained to be fast and accurate. What's more accurate and fast than a direct copyslightly adjusted to swerve copywrite claims....

we dont ask you to believe because you continue to prove E.T.'s point and show you dont understand the basics of generative AI. if you don't want to believe the facts, that's of course your choice, but you're then just making things up as you go.  the datasets DO NOT contain any images to pluck out, so your example is nonsense. you obviously haven't read the many posts that have explained how gen-AI actually works.   


« Reply #36 on: May 22, 2023, 02:04 »
+3


Don't get me wrong but i think your perspective is limited to the perception of Knowledge you have about AI.
...

... Please don't ask me ro believe if I am specific about my requirements that the A.I. isn't going to dip into his data sets and pluck out all images of a girl with a red balloon and generically create something because I won't believe you. Its going to use barely two images because it's also been trained to be fast and accurate. What's more accurate and fast than a direct copyslightly adjusted to swerve copywrite claims....

we dont ask you to believe because you continue to prove E.T.'s point and show you dont understand the basics of generative AI. if you don't want to believe the facts, that's of course your choice, but you're then just making things up as you go.  the datasets DO NOT contain any images to pluck out, so your example is nonsense. you obviously haven't read the many posts that have explained how gen-AI actually works.

Would the Datasheets exist without our images?

Doesn't matter how much you try to defend them, it's still the case they took the imagery of millions to make a stack of money for a few which could put the us all out of business and just because you suddenly can use this to submit work you couldn't do before, eventually they will bypass you and you'll find yourself out of pocket, work as well.

« Reply #37 on: May 22, 2023, 03:47 »
0
Evaristo tenscadisto, programs that create AI are not available to everyone. People pay a lot of money to work in them. The income from these programs may not even cover these costs.

« Reply #38 on: May 22, 2023, 04:52 »
+1
Evaristo tenscadisto, programs that create AI are not available to everyone. People pay a lot of money to work in them. The income from these programs may not even cover these costs.

That makes it even worse then... in other words, they're going to make a lot of people redundant for nothing!

Trust me though, they're not doing it for the good of their health, they're doing it as they know they can make a lot of money from it but first, they need to eliminate the competition so they have a monopoly and can charge what they want.

However, who is going to create the new images, styles and trends needed to create the datasets of the future? Eventually it'll be learning from it's own images / mistakes.

Thankfully, the music industry as well as others who have louder voices than illustrators/photographers etc have also seen the danger and are pushing for regulation and challenging the minority seeking to gain at the expense of the many. Even lawyers are now looking over their shoulder.

I'd love to know what the creators of AI and politicians think is going to happen when millions upon millions of jobs are lost with minimal new jobs in return. How is the state going to support them? Who is going to buy the products and services that companies manufacture when people no longer have the work and therefor money to buy what they produce?!?

There are so many things AI can be used for and have a positive effect but I really do think they need to take a step back and fully consider the implications of what may be about to happen. I retire in 10 years or less so for me it's less of a concern but for the younger generation... well, the list of jobs to be replaced by AI is growing by the day and a lot of people are finishing their degrees and finding their chosen jobs are at risk or will be taken by AI. Interesting times indeed.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2023, 04:58 by HalfFull »

« Reply #39 on: May 22, 2023, 06:26 »
+1
Evaristo tenscadisto, programs that create AI are not available to everyone. People pay a lot of money to work in them. The income from these programs may not even cover these costs.

You're guessing without actualy knowing again, right?
Midjourney for example let's you create 200 images for $8 per month and for only $28 you can create an unlimited amount of images.

« Reply #40 on: May 22, 2023, 07:19 »
0
Evaristo tenscadisto, programs that create AI are not available to everyone. People pay a lot of money to work in them. The income from these programs may not even cover these costs.

You're guessing without actualy knowing again, right?
Midjourney for example let's you create 200 images for $8 per month and for only $28 you can create an unlimited amount of images.
A man recently wrote his costs on the forum, there were much more.

« Reply #41 on: May 22, 2023, 10:13 »
0


Don't get me wrong but i think your perspective is limited to the perception of Knowledge you have about AI.
...

... Please don't ask me ro believe if I am specific about my requirements that the A.I. isn't going to dip into his data sets and pluck out all images of a girl with a red balloon and generically create something because I won't believe you. Its going to use barely two images because it's also been trained to be fast and accurate. What's more accurate and fast than a direct copyslightly adjusted to swerve copywrite claims....

we dont ask you to believe because you continue to prove E.T.'s point and show you dont understand the basics of generative AI. if you don't want to believe the facts, that's of course your choice, but you're then just making things up as you go.  the datasets DO NOT contain any images to pluck out, so your example is nonsense. you obviously haven't read the many posts that have explained how gen-AI actually works.

Would the Datasheets exist without our images?

Doesn't matter how much you try to defend them, it's still the case they took the imagery of millions to make a stack of money for a few which could put the us all out of business and just because you suddenly can use this to submit work you couldn't do before, eventually they will bypass you and you'll find yourself out of pocket, work as well.

irrelevant - i was specifically calling them out on their uninformed view of gen AI - completely apart from the copyright issue. if they're going to make an argument - get the facts right!

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #42 on: May 22, 2023, 12:32 »
0
Now he's a singular example but I could be more subtle. Please don't ask me ro believe if I am specific about my requirements that the A.I. isn't going to dip into his data sets and pluck out all images of a girl with a red balloon and generically create something because I won't believe you. Its going to use barely two images because it's also been trained to be fast and accurate. What's more accurate and fast than a direct copyslightly adjusted to swerve copywrite claims.

As an aside I wouldn't be rushing to buy and collect save NFTs any time soon they'll be worth dirt.



 :)

NFT should have a different meaning with No F'ing Tokens


« Reply #43 on: May 22, 2023, 13:03 »
0
Evaristo tenscadisto, programs that create AI are not available to everyone. People pay a lot of money to work in them. The income from these programs may not even cover these costs.

You're guessing without actualy knowing again, right?
Midjourney for example let's you create 200 images for $8 per month and for only $28 you can create an unlimited amount of images.
A man recently wrote his costs on the forum, there were much more.

Probably one of these people who claim that letting AI generate images is sooooo~ complicated, and takes soooo~ much skill and sooo~ much time and apparently also sooooo much money.  ::)

Sorry, but nope, $28 a month for unlimited images, that's really all it costs.  8$ only if 200 images per month is enough for you.
Maybe also a softwear to upscale images if you don't have one already, but even these aren't so expensive that you could not earn back the money within a month and there are also some free options out there that work, though with limitations.

« Reply #44 on: May 22, 2023, 13:51 »
0
Evaristo tenscadisto, programs that create AI are not available to everyone. People pay a lot of money to work in them. The income from these programs may not even cover these costs.

You're guessing without actualy knowing again, right?
Midjourney for example let's you create 200 images for $8 per month and for only $28 you can create an unlimited amount of images.
A man recently wrote his costs on the forum, there were much more.

Probably one of these people who claim that letting AI generate images is sooooo~ complicated, and takes soooo~ much skill and sooo~ much time and apparently also sooooo much money.  ::)

Sorry, but nope, $28 a month for unlimited images, that's really all it costs.  8$ only if 200 images per month is enough for you.
Maybe also a softwear to upscale images if you don't have one already, but even these aren't so expensive that you could not earn back the money within a month and there are also some free options out there that work, though with limitations.
https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/announcing-the-adobe-stock-policy-on-generative-ai-content/200/

Post 213. We are talking about 1000 euros.

« Reply #45 on: May 22, 2023, 15:06 »
+1
Evaristo tenscadisto, programs that create AI are not available to everyone. People pay a lot of money to work in them. The income from these programs may not even cover these costs.

You're guessing without actualy knowing again, right?
Midjourney for example let's you create 200 images for $8 per month and for only $28 you can create an unlimited amount of images.
A man recently wrote his costs on the forum, there were much more.

Probably one of these people who claim that letting AI generate images is sooooo~ complicated, and takes soooo~ much skill and sooo~ much time and apparently also sooooo much money.  ::)

Sorry, but nope, $28 a month for unlimited images, that's really all it costs.  8$ only if 200 images per month is enough for you.
Maybe also a softwear to upscale images if you don't have one already, but even these aren't so expensive that you could not earn back the money within a month and there are also some free options out there that work, though with limitations.
https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/announcing-the-adobe-stock-policy-on-generative-ai-content/200/

Post 213. We are talking about 1000 euros.


1000 spent, 278 accepted gen ai files, 31 downloads ?! These are his numbers? Very obviously this person is not a good example on how to do this with these high costs and small acceptance and download number. Why would anyone even spent 1000 on credit when there are AI that let you create unlimited images of good quality and with commercial usage rights for a few bucks?
 That's  a rate of 3,50 per image created! I don't know of any such expensice AI generator.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2023, 15:14 by Her Ugliness »

« Reply #46 on: May 23, 2023, 00:56 »
+2
Evaristo tenscadisto, programs that create AI are not available to everyone. People pay a lot of money to work in them. The income from these programs may not even cover these costs.

I think you are misinformed. I cannot understand how to spend huge amounts to generate AI images. Perhaps the user who wrote can explain better because the value is much higher than practiced by AI generators. You have essentially 3 Ai generators in first league: Stable diffusion, Midjourney and Dall-e 2.

1) Stable diffusion - You can use it for free. There are a lot ways to use it:
 
              a) They got a friendly website but you can also go to NightCafe Creator which essential is the stable diffusion too
             
              b) you can install in your PC with auto1111 and use your GPU.
             
              c) Download from github and huggingface and use it with google colab to use their GPU. You got a lot youtube tutorials on how to do it.               
                 Also you can add models that people train by install them. it's free and available for everyone. although you have to pay gpu google
                 from colab after a while.

2) Midjourney. You have a website but You need Discord to generate. A lot of tutorials in youtube. it's free first images but after you pay 8$, 24$ or 48$(pro plan). 


3) Dalle 2,When you first sign up for DALL-E, youll receive 50 free credits that are valid for 1 month. These credits will allow you to generate up to 200 images and get a feeling for all of the features that DALL-E 2 has to offer. Once your initial trial credits expire, youll receive 15 new credits every month. So technically, you could continue to use DALL-E 2 forever at absolutely no cost to you.

Once youve used up all your free credits, you can purchase additional credits in incremental packs of 115, which cost $15.  115 credits give you 460 images, which sounds like a lot.  But remember, every single action you do in DALL-E 2 will cost you 1 credit, so those 115 credits are a lot less than you might think. If you use some of DALL-E 2s special features such as Inpainting or Outpainting, your credits are going to evaporate into thin air. Also bear in mind that your purchased credits will expire after 12 months.


In short you can try all for free at the beginning but if you install Stable diffusion in your pc you won't pay.
 
« Last Edit: May 23, 2023, 04:43 by Evaristo tenscadisto »

« Reply #47 on: May 23, 2023, 03:56 »
0
Here are two images created by AI. How long does it take the author to create these images? How difficult is this process?




« Reply #48 on: May 23, 2023, 04:37 »
0
Here are two images created by AI. How long does it take the author to create these images? How difficult is this process?





I do not know the author of these and what Ai generator he or she used.

For me, for the first image it would take me as long as it takes me to write "Photographed Golden retriever dog on blue background with copy space --ar 4:2", so maybe 3 or 4  seconds?
« Last Edit: May 23, 2023, 04:41 by Her Ugliness »

« Reply #49 on: May 23, 2023, 05:02 »
0
For me, for the first image it would take me as long as it takes me to write "Photographed Golden retriever dog on blue background with copy space --ar 4:2", so maybe 3 or 4  seconds?
If everything is so simple and fast, then what's the point of wasting time on AI. Any buyer will soon enter these programs on stock agencies, write such a phrase and download the finished image. A lot of authors will soon make a lot of similar images. In my opinion, in such an easy niche, it makes no sense to even try to compete.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
24 Replies
12198 Views
Last post March 11, 2008, 02:53
by leaf
8 Replies
3834 Views
Last post March 28, 2014, 06:40
by Bibi
9 Replies
8695 Views
Last post January 17, 2017, 11:47
by Jafo2016
298 Replies
55672 Views
Last post March 01, 2024, 03:03
by Andrej.S.
0 Replies
346 Views
Last post January 16, 2024, 07:00
by cobalt

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors