I imagine that with images produced by AI the inventory of images would overflow, even more. The higher the supply, the lower the prices. Well, for those who are lucky to sell! Very excited about AI image generation programs, welcome to the progress! I love it!

Did a search on illustrations at various agencies. If you sort by new, it looks like a very large percentage is already being created with ai.

So it is good to have a clear path forward.

It is still work, I need many different prompts and then photoshop to get the results I want, even on very, very simple images.

I don�t think ai will replace us, because I don�t think customers can quickly generate the images they need if they have no creative background.

But for creatives this is an opportunity. If you know how to draw, but don�t know how to do an oil painting, the ai can help you with that.

Great at watercolors, but cannot do charcoal? The ai can help you with that.

But unless you have professional creative training or background, i think it will be extremely difficult to create sellable content.

But for the creatives at Adobe this is a great opportunity to do something new and have fun experimenting.

I have been playing around with various ai�s for two years now, would be great if I could earn back all the credits I spent.

there're some confusing stds listed:

2 very different requirements for tagging:

 https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/generative-ai-content.html

Do: Specify that these depictions are fictitious and generated


https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/generative-ai-faq.html

Tag your generative AI content to help customers find it:
   � Titles should include the phrase, in English, "Generative AI"
        - Example title: Beautiful landscape. Generative AI.
   � Keywords should include the English phrase "Generative AI" as well as "Generative" and "AI" in the          language you are submitting your assets.
        - Example keywords: Landscape, No People, Generative AI, Generative, AI.



so tags have to include all these:
fictitious, generated ,"Generative AI" , "Generative" , "AI"  ??


-----------------------------


"Don�t tag generative AI content with real place names."
   
what is considered specific?  castle in Wales, Everest, Taj Mahal, Matterhorn??


---------------
I submitted "Imaginary ancient Egyptian papyrus of Horus from the Book of the Dead - original CGI illustration "

rejected saying it needed a property release - i questioned & was told to re-submit, but concerned next reviewer would still reject

Well there go five tags from the 49?

If I upload a photo I took of (place name here) which I filtered, and then create a version, using AI,  then I can't tag it as (place name here) because it's a "fictitious", "generated", "Generative AI" , "Generative" , "AI" Image? And we can't use a real place name to help ID the original subject for someone? Or maybe we should be required to name the place because it's based on a real subject? That's confusing.

I'm not going to touch that Public Domain or out of copyright subject, because Adobe doesn't take those?  Honestly, there does seem to be a time period where antique, becomes ancient and they do, but unlike IS that says 1900, AS just says they are not allowed.

I like that they have come out with some guidelines and ideas how we might be able to contribute AI assisted images.

This is going to end up being a case for the lawyers and courts, and maybe Adobe doing this will press the issue instead of running away scared, and we'll get some clarity to what's allowed and what's not. I mean by the law, not from some agency lawyer who decides what his opinion is. We need legal precedent to start making the limits and rights of our images, clear.

Or maybe, it's just that Adobe cannot distinguish an AI image from a real one and that's why they are doing this?
But then they have admitted accepting them, which does not make their case in court any stronger if the sh*t hits the fan.
Even though they have a way to sue the artist who submitted the image to begin with since you promised you have all the rights

I want to be able to opt out my images for use in AI training.

Seems like a much better response than others like SS which have stopped people from uploading AI art, and then have turned around and said that they will make it themselves, giving a very unclear payment structure method.

I guess its evolution, and its upto the artist to learn how to best manage this tool and get something amazing. Its the same as saying that just buying the most expensive DSLR does not automatically make you an artist same will be with this.

The better question is where do we start learning? And what software to pick up?

@MatHayward

May I check a couple of points please?

I read in the instructions that keywords for a location shouldn't be included. What should I do if I am basing the generated AI on my own uploaded photo of a specific location. If the image is clearly of the Pyramids in Egypt or the Eiffel Tower, as an example, can these keywords be included?

If the AI software is used on my own image purely as a means of transforming it into a digital painting, does this still get submitted as AI content, or can it be submitted just a an illustration?

Thanks

Quote from: SVH on December 06, 2022, 15:22

Or maybe, it's just that Adobe cannot distinguish an AI image from a real one and that's why they are doing this?

Mmmm... Adobe use its own AI in its software, it's in Lightroom and Photoshop, so I think their legal dept knows well the issue about it. They know much more than shutterstock or others. It would be really strange to think that they don't know and cannot disinguish an AI image from others.

By the way, it's curious that no one ask how Adobe trained its own AI that they put and offer to use in its own applications ;-)

Quote from: SVH on December 06, 2022, 13:36

Adobe is scared of missing the boat and is now accepting AI images.

Scared for missing the boat? Well, if so, they could do as others, telling us that submit AI images is against their rules.
I think the opposite: Adobe is one step ahed other agencies, they know what is AI and the legal implications, so they decide to cross the river and give contributors ability to use the technology.
Personally I like this way, much better than tell us "you can't use it, only us can use the new technology"

The AI in Lightroom is just a tool to distinguish and select something in your photo (sky,object etc..) which is different in my opinion. But sure, they have somehow trained it to be able to do that. Does it also mean then they can automatically distinguish a JPG file that is real or made by AI? I wonder.

Your second point would mean that Adobe is not afraid of any lawsuit coming from whoever regarding copyrights or at least think that the claimer will have no leg to stand on.

I still think though that with this new AI tools, when it is getting near perfection, companies will not be using microstock agencies anymore or at least way less. Employees, in these big companies, are pretty competent enough to use those tools. They have to pimp your photo as well, don't they? So, then only small customers without that competency will remain but that is peanuts in the end. Editorial, obviously not included in that argument.

 

The AI in Lightroom is just a tool to distinguish and select something in your photo (sky,object etc..) which is different in my opinion.

You miss that there are several "neural filters" in photoshop, wich cover different aspects of postproduction, and there is a "portrait generator" in coming soon tab that seems very interesting
They are using A LOT of AI potential.

Does it also mean then they can automatically distinguish a JPG file that is real or made by AI? I wonder.

I don't know for sure, of course it's only my opinion; anyway, for what I can see, they are building great experience in using AI in their software so I wouldn't be surprised to see they have something that can deeply analyze the image to understand if it's made by generative AI.
Something like AI that can recognize AI... not with metadata of course

Your second point would mean that Adobe is not afraid of any lawsuit coming from whoever regarding copyrights or at least think that the claimer will have no leg to stand on.

Once again it's only my opinion, and it's based on the experience that Adobe had already done, also from a legal point of view: as the AI in Lightroom and photoshop had been trained of course, so they know how and which terms they are legally using for these.

I still think though that with this new AI tools, when it is getting near perfection, companies will not be using microstock agencies anymore or at least way less. Employees, in these big companies, are pretty competent enough to use those tools.

Well, about this, I'm not so sure. It's hard to get good results with AI, and it takes time. For sure it takes more time than to find and buy a good ready-to-use image.

Let's think positive:
I can hazard a guess: AI will be the end for the 0,01 cent sales, but at the same time big sales for really good images designed and produced by humans will climb to new life with bigger money for who is able to produce them.
Maybe a dream, or a bet who knows, let's see

@Mat , please, let us know all the secrets of AI in Adobe 

I will get right back to you on that!

-Mat

@mat
Wondering if you could shed some more light on the model/property release guidelines. I submitted some ai images which show a generic face. Sent a property release with these (following the guidelines) but they were rejected for the reason that they need a model release?

If a generative AI image is submitted with what could be perceived as a recognizable person in it, then you must submit a release no matter what.

If the person represented in the image is based on a real human, either via text prompt or image prompt, then a model release is required.

If the person is completely fictional and made up through generic text prompts not based on real people, then a property release is required.

@Dhav, will you please provide me with an image number as an example of a compliant file rejected in error? I would like to take a look. It's possible the release is non-compliant with our requirements. 

This is a new and evolving process for us, so your patience is very much appreciated.

thank you,

Mat Hayward

I'd had AI images accepted before the new requirements. i submitted several images yesterday with the combined tags from the 2 posts and they were accepted.

still wondering if frequently photographed landmarks like taj mahal are acceptable, when no release needed for photographs

I recently had a conversation on Behance Live with the Adobe Stock content lead for vectors and illustrations, Shea Molloy about creating and submitting generative AI content for Adobe Stock. During the talk, we covered some of the basics of the content requirements that you have already seen. We did a deeper dive into some of the topics that people have asked for additional clarity on, such as release requirements, keyword requirements, etc.

If interested, you can watch the recording here: https://www.behance.net/videos/d5886b09-7fa7-4c0e-8a27-0d4b9451884a/Submitting-and-selling-generative-AI-images-on-Adobe-Stock-with-Mat-Hayward-and-Shea-Molloy

Thanks,

Mat Hayward