Quote from: stoker2014 on December 05, 2022, 16:10

And does anyone even know what programs can generate these images? And what are the PC requirements?

I agree - I'd be interested in checking out the software too. Which application(s) are people using to do this? Thanks! Please feel free to PM or post here, thanks!

i've been using DALL-E & pleased w the results when i use it for illustrations - it's expanded my reach as it's an area i could approach.  you get 15 free tries each month

First part. LOL. 2 points re. that

    1. You know anyone can log into Midjouney and see exactly how "hard" it is in real time don�t you? (you get to see the prompts and the images produced in real time, highly recommend if you want to know how seriously to take these comments). Alternatively watch a YouTube video or two.

    2. You know we can still see older work in the portfolios of people claiming this is just a new tool in an �artists� toolbox? (and how they instantly made a quantum leap not only in craft but also in composition, artistic vision etc.)

These arguments are silly. The evidence is right there in the open, at least until Midjouney comes off a discord server and artists delete their older work so we don�t get to witness the process anymore.

I know I can copy prompts; but learning how to write a prompt to obtain your unique image it's completely different job.
Yes of course you can copy, and it's far from necessary to copy. You can also obtain hundred of nice images for (let's say) valentine's day with really simple inputs: copy prompts it's not an issue if you can have a good image only asking "valentine's day".

But: creating an original different work you are thinking about is completely different: it takes time and several inputs; and midjourney it's not free, and not cheap at all (you pay for a year more or less the same than Adobe creative cloud subscription).
When you finally have a good image (or series of), that's not enough: upscaling is a pain, takes more time, and once again it's not free, you have to pay software.
Finally you can do title and keyword.

Are you sure that so many people will  pay so much to obtain few money flooding agency with hundred of similar images? I don't think it will go this way.
In my opinion, at the beginning (now) there will be the flood; but soon many people will realize that earn money from AI it's not automatic, not fast, not easy.

EDIT: I would like to add an example from my real last days.
I went in a music studio to shoot musical instruments, interiors, details, various eqwuipment and so on... It takes three hours to produce about 100 good photos.
Then three hours more for post production, and I have 100 photos ready to go; total six hours of work.

100 good images with AI with same subject... it will take not less than three/four days of full immersion job in front of computer.  Of course I'm talking about GOOD images, not one hundred of random musical instruments.

(keywording is the same for both works so it doesn't matter)

This is what I mean when I say "it's hard to work on it"

Quote from: ravens on January 10, 2023, 23:32

Wonderful, Adobe & Mat! This new policy is totally in line with abolishing the bonus code for 2023. Screw human artists! Bring on the robots!

I don't think I'll bother with photography any more. I'll get an army of robots and train them to blab text commands to robotic AI software night and day. These smart robots will vacuum pics generated by other robots, re-order pixels  and create brilliant new pictures. (some say that's crap but they're only jealous, and live under a rock or something) Soon I'll have a portfolio of 100 Million brilliant AI images on Adobe Stock. I will be so rich! I will buy a villa in some place tropical, heck, I will buy an island of my own! I will buy a luxury plane that makes royalty, presidents and celebs jealous!

Thank you Adobe, you made my day. Screw artists, Robots are our future.

I'm old enough to remeber quite similar comments in the 90's when digital cameras comes out for large consumer audience.
Using these words means you've really never tested the AI tools. It's super exciting; but it's absolutely not easy to generate real good images.
It's not easy to use.
It costs money and it costs a lot of time.
It's relatively easy to produce in random way some incredible images, but it's abosultely hard to manage the tool to produce series of images with steady style.

Of course it will be easier in the next future; and it will become also cheaper.
But, as for photography, you always have to start from a good idea, and you also need cultural, and technical, skills.

Back to Adobe: I think at the contrary that giving contributors the option to produce (and sell!) AI images is a great opportunities to partecipate in production; at the opposite, other agencies like SS seems that will cut contributors, pushing their clients to produce images by ourselves. In my opinion this last way is absolutely wrong, starting from the idea that anyone have clear idea and skill to create any image they need.

One last example I know very well: in movie production I come from times when editing was made with film, scissor, glue... with big pain and time lost. Digital non linear editing completely changed the game but directors always need good editor to work, also to make choices. To have a digital machine that gives you thousand option in a single second doesn't mean that you don't need human time anymore to make your decisions and choices. Machine is fast, human mind has its own timing.

Finally, AI development is impossible to stop: refusing it and complaining about AI is totally useless, it will be the next future for all of us

I totally agree, make decisions and choices is the difference 

I don�t see a lot of charcoal drawings, sketches, oil paintings or abstracts. There is less variety in style.

Other than actually use it as an art print to hang on a wall or maybe greeting cards  there isn't really much usage to customers for charcoal drawings, oil paintings and the likes. I am not saying there was no market for this, but it's a limited one.
The typical midjourney style AI images though that look like computer graphic art? The possibilities are almost endless. You can also use them to hang on a wall or as a postcard like with charcoal or oil paintings, but you can also use them for book covers (fantasy and Sci-Fi for example have drawn covers 90% of the time) , RPG books and advertisement, computer and online game art and advertisement, shirts, CD covers (especially in the metal genre art is more poular on covers than photos) and so on. It just makes sense to use a style that has a much wider range of application, thus more sale potential.

Thank you for the checkbox, very helpful.

Do we still have to avoid using the names of the art technique used, i.e. we should still NOT include watercolor style, Oil Painting style, 3d render style?

I am doing test searches and without art techniques all I can do in searches is color and subject or maybe copy space.

Thank you for the checkbox, very helpful.

Do we still have to avoid using the names of the art technique used, i.e. we should still NOT include watercolor style, Oil Painting style, 3d render style?

I am doing test searches and without art techniques all I can do in searches is color and subject or maybe copy space.

What is most important is that you do not imply the image is something other than generative AI.

Thanks Cobalt,

Mat Hayward

I have generated a few files with WOMBO Dream AI Art Tool app on the iphone.
It's not clear if I can submit these images to adobe stock.
Can you please tell me if I can.
I don't want to infringe any copyright and I want to be sure.
This is what I found about copyright policy on the site of the software I would like to use:

Creators have full freedom over their artwork and are free to distribute or share them for personal, entertainment or educational reasons. For commercial use, please credit or provide attribution to WOMBO for the generation in some way. We recommend using the trading card output if possible, but a mention in a credits page is fine too.

So I can use the generated files for commercial purpose but still I have to provide attribution. But in this case I don't know how to provide attribution to them and so I don't know if I can go on and submit those files to you.
Can you please help me?

or use an AI generator that gives you complete ownership w no
need to give credit to the app (after all, we dont need to credit PS when we use their AI filters or other smart tools)

I just received another email from them. after telling them I have not the possibility of crediting them:

In this case, feel free to sell your creations without crediting us!

Is this answer sufficient? Can I start uploading the generated files?

The problem is it's not completely clear and I don't want to my adobe account. Are content generated from Dall-E and Midjourney ok for commercial use and to upload to adobe stock?

I found this on the dalle page, so I use dalle and upload to Adobe without problems.

https://help.openai.com/en/articles/6425277-can-i-sell-images-i-create-with-dall-e

Can I sell images I create with DALL�E?

Commercial use of DALL�E


Written by Raf
Updated over a week ago
Subject to the Content Policy and Terms, you own the images you create with DALL�E, including the right to reprint, sell, and merchandise � regardless of whether an image was generated through a free or paid credit.

But the majority of great content on Adobe comes from Midjourney, so there must be a legal announcement somewhere.

I am not a lawyer, use any info you find at your own risk.

I do pay dalle for credits. I don�t want to upload anything for commercial use without paying for the usage.

I just hope that the customers could be opt out AI products in the search result 

why would they if AI images meet their needs?