pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: AI vs. Us - Should Our Pics Cost More?  (Read 4081 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: June 26, 2023, 09:51 »
0
How about promoting human-created imagery by showing off "epic AI fail" pictures?

There are lots of examples, particularly where AI tries to show the real world. Case in point, some pictures of beach loungers (that I can't see being used 'cause who'd want to look like an idiot?)

Over 14,000 images in the regular collection where the beach loungers are set up in a more useful and enjoyable arrangement - facing the ocean and where you can actually get into the chairs!



I was told that there are APIs which accept prompts and generate image results, so it's not necessary even to look at what you created if you're trying to spew out lots of images - which might explain submitting such bizarre images. It doesn't explain why they were accepted though....

A long time ago, another stock photographer who had lots of great images showing construction & electrical work faced lots of cheesy-fake stock images of construction (pretty women posing with a drill in a hardhat sort of thing). She started appending an "authentic" note to all her titles: "All work being performed according with industry code and safety standards." was one example. "Authentic construction worker on actual construction site." another example.

I'm not sure what the right phrase is - human-created from a real-world setting? - but I found a recent example where two AI copycats had lifted my image title verbatim to create AI "look-alikes". Their identical titles have "Generative AI" appended. Both AI  image numbers are more recent than mine.

The end results were pretty much useless, so I think that's why my image continues to sell, but I may append "This is my actual basement" to the title of mine!

My title: "Unfinished basement mechanical room with tankless water heater, storage tank, plumbing and heating systems"
My image (click on the thumbs to see the detail page)


The least bizarre of the AI copies





« Last Edit: June 26, 2023, 17:33 by Jo Ann Snover »


Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #26 on: June 26, 2023, 14:13 »
0
People embrace tech, but there is always room for the real deal.
It's what defines our identity, makes us human, is what's life is all about I guess.

As said, when customers can't tell apart AI generated images and human created photos and illustrations, none of this matters.

Everyone can tell a classic vintage car from a modern Tesler. People buy it for prestige or sentimental values. No one would buy a classic car if they looked EXACTLY the same as modern cars and no one could tell them apart.

Just a bit about classic cars and authentic vs looks real. And you are right, they are for prestige or sentimental reasons. But there are fakes, tributes and continuations. Reproductions and restorations. When you see one, you don't know anymore if it's authentic, original, reproduction or a copy.

Also right, as much as I'd like to get paid more for being "real", none of that matters is the buyer gets what they need. Hardly anyone is going to want an oil painting, or a film photo, not often, and the days of a real digital photo vs an AI creation are about to be the same.

Art... does the medium define the usefulness nearly as much as the content?

Wow is there something that says, limited data set?  :o Lack of diversity?



"Happy Dog and Smiling Playful Young Woman Swimming in the Sea on Sunny Day. Taking Selfie Posture. Summer activities with Pet."
« Last Edit: June 26, 2023, 14:25 by Uncle Pete »

« Reply #27 on: June 26, 2023, 16:29 »
0
How about promoting human-created imagery by showing off "epic AI fail" pictures?

There are lots of examples, particularly where AI tries to show the real world. Case in point, some pictures of beach loungers (that I can't see being used 'cause who'd want to look like an idiot?)

Over 14,000 images in the regular collection where the beach loungers are set up in a more useful and enjoyable arrangement - facing the ocean and where you can actually get into the chairs!



 ;D ;D ;D
Well, I love Adobe, but to be honest it's simply unbelievable how so many failed images has been approved

« Reply #28 on: June 27, 2023, 05:18 »
0
I often add authentic or real food to my mobile phone food snap shots from the real world. I think it helps customers looking for that type of content. Basically the opposite of adding studio shot.

It is probably a good idea to add appropriate keywords to images from real life.

Customers can of course simply exclude ai images from a search. But enhancing keywords and titles is probably a good practise.

As for the images acceptedall agencies take endless redundant boring images of ducks in the park. What Adobe takes in ai is not better or worse than that.

Only the images customers deem useful will rise to the top of the searches. The rest will be weeded out by sales and algorithms.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2023, 05:45 by cobalt »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
4946 Views
Last post July 03, 2007, 01:36
by Bateleur
19 Replies
9511 Views
Last post June 19, 2019, 08:36
by Uncle Pete
2 Replies
4368 Views
Last post January 22, 2017, 09:23
by noodle
31 Replies
27283 Views
Last post July 20, 2017, 13:09
by stockastic
14 Replies
4022 Views
Last post August 13, 2017, 03:21
by Chichikov

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors