MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Organic Photo Label for representations of Natural Creation and not AI  (Read 3303 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: August 25, 2023, 05:46 »
+14
Tip for Stock Agencies: when the "non AI images" option is chosen by customers, let propose as a result to the query only images from portfolios of contributors who do not submit AI images at all, portfolios that are AI free, with no risk... Or at least, make it possible for contributors to tick images that are real photos.

Customers will be delighted and reassured to have representations of Natural Creation and not of Artificial Creation made by IA.
They will know that if they feel pure emotion for a visual representation, if they see an exceptional performance, natural charm, a feeling expressed, a depth felt, a unique moment captured, a simple and magical performance, an exceptional true place, true outstanding event, previously unknown species, a rare representation of natural diversity, a unique moment captured and eternalized, Artist's soul that transcends, but also the simple photo of an appetizing culinary plate... it is NOT betrayal, nor manipulation.

I'm sure there will be a market for it, a way to stand out when AI is everywhere.
A kind of Organic Photo Label, or Real Photo Label. Make it!!!

(Please readers, tick +1 if you approve this!)
« Last Edit: August 25, 2023, 07:20 by DiscreetDuck »


« Reply #1 on: August 25, 2023, 06:45 »
+2
AI wants to make the exceptional Ordinary. Let's continue to make the ordinary Exceptional! :)

« Reply #2 on: August 25, 2023, 07:26 »
+2
I actually think this is a good idea.

But since probably more and more artist will be trying ai and in 2 years it might be completely mainstream, due to photoshop integration, I would suggest that agencies put together special

natural, real world collections that they can heavily promote to customers.

Also maybe a beautiful label to make non ai content stand out more, especially once the majority of content coming in, might be at least partially produced with ai (removing or adding a beard, changing the scene from summer to winteretc)

I think especially for travel images and real places it would be very valuable if customers had a quick click resource page with beautiful premium highly edited best of content.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2023, 07:29 by cobalt »

« Reply #3 on: August 29, 2023, 16:30 »
0
Thank you! readers and voters  :)

« Reply #4 on: August 29, 2023, 18:14 »
+6
I've been a professional landscape photographer for almost 30 years and I don't think I'll ever send an image taken from my desk by typing words into a prompt. My job is another.

My photography is done with a camera, while walking, cycling or driving to a place. It is made up of emotions, effort, heat, cold, clear or stormy skies and a lot of satisfaction. As Seth Godin says, it's a practice.

I agree with your proposal and I think that in the future there will always be many people who will ask for real photography for their stories to tell and not all these identical images copied here and there.

And it will have to cost more than an AI image, because the marginal cost of an AI image is very close to zero, while a real photograph requires expensive equipment, travel costs, and in some cases, real models.

It will be like the vinyl record in music.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2023, 18:17 by Bauman »

« Reply #5 on: August 30, 2023, 04:26 »
+2
I've been a professional landscape photographer for almost 30 years and I don't think I'll ever send an image taken from my desk by typing words into a prompt. My job is another.

My photography is done with a camera, while walking, cycling or driving to a place. It is made up of emotions, effort, heat, cold, clear or stormy skies and a lot of satisfaction. As Seth Godin says, it's a practice.

I agree with your proposal and I think that in the future there will always be many people who will ask for real photography for their stories to tell and not all these identical images copied here and there.

And it will have to cost more than an AI image, because the marginal cost of an AI image is very close to zero, while a real photograph requires expensive equipment, travel costs, and in some cases, real models.

It will be like the vinyl record in music.

I was happy to read your message  :)
As I wrote somewhere else:

AI knows how to take steal photos
AI prompters know how to control obei AI
Adobe knows doing business in ethic prolific way

« Reply #6 on: August 30, 2023, 13:45 »
0
...

I agree with your proposal and I think that in the future there will always be many people who will ask for real photography for their stories to tell and not all these identical images copied here and there.

And it will have to cost more than an AI image, because the marginal cost of an AI image is very close to zero, while a real photograph requires expensive equipment, travel costs, and in some cases, real models.
...

buyers dont care about how the artist traveled to get a picture or the cost of their equipment - they want an image for their needs & dont care whether AI or not.

AI isnt there yet for most actual locations and model-type images need improvement, as  Jo Ann & others have documented. but as AI evolves it will be to the buyers' benefit to use AI generated people rather than the model release hassles for editorial usage.

« Reply #7 on: August 30, 2023, 16:57 »
+2
I think an actual photograph label would be a good idea if there was any veracity to it.

We all know how much spam there is in keywords and how many AI images have been uploaded without mentioning that they are AI - or sending them to places that don't even accept AI images.

An "organic" or other label that doesn't really mean anything doesn't do anyone any good.

« Reply #8 on: August 31, 2023, 05:09 »
+1

buyers dont care about how the artist traveled to get a picture or the cost of their equipment - they want an image for their needs & dont care whether AI or not.

AI isnt there yet for most actual locations and model-type images need improvement, as  Jo Ann & others have documented. but as AI evolves it will be to the buyers' benefit to use AI generated people rather than the model release hassles for editorial usage.

I think you are right for very low-quality work, but you are wrong for those who want to differentiate themselves from others.

And today, in marketing, it matters a lot to do different things to stand out from the crowd. Even for those who buy images.

Maybe you need to read some Seth Godin books to understand where the world is going. Seth says: People do not buy goods & services. They buy relations, stories & magic. Today a good photograph is not enough; there is too much competition, but we also need the stories and emotions of those who take it.

Stock photography and especially AI images will serve to fill low-quality blogs and websites at a price close to zero. It will probably no longer be a lucrative market for creators.

We need to do as RedBubble did which divided the contributors between Premium and Standard, giving more visibility to the Premium ones.

« Reply #9 on: August 31, 2023, 11:48 »
0

buyers dont care about how the artist traveled to get a picture or the cost of their equipment - they want an image for their needs & dont care whether AI or not.

AI isnt there yet for most actual locations and model-type images need improvement, as  Jo Ann & others have documented. but as AI evolves it will be to the buyers' benefit to use AI generated people rather than the model release hassles for editorial usage.

I think you are right for very low-quality work, but you are wrong for those who want to differentiate themselves from others.

And today, in marketing, it matters a lot to do different things to stand out from the crowd. Even for those who buy images....
Stock photography and especially AI images will serve to fill low-quality blogs and websites at a price close to zero. It will probably no longer be a lucrative market for creators.

We need to do as RedBubble did which divided the contributors between Premium and Standard, giving more visibility to the Premium ones.
much of microstock is 'low-quality' but what's the incentive for agencies &who would make the subjective labeling?  even at this young age AI many AI i mages are better than  'low-quality' digital images

we were talking about microstock where there's no indication buyers care at all for artist stories or look for a specific artist they're too busy buying cheap images

i participate in several groups on FAA (and admin for 5) and have never heard anyone on Redbubble reporting significant income.  more income from those using twitter & mastodon, but still dwarfed by microstock income

« Reply #10 on: August 31, 2023, 15:42 »
+5
Only people who have produced quality images, at the cost of effort, time, renunciation of mediocrity, self-challenge, and perhaps ultimately talent can understand this turning point. And they see absolutely no benefit in what AI produces.
AI enthusiasts can only be delighted to finally be able to produce what they have never been able to produce.

« Reply #11 on: August 31, 2023, 16:38 »
+1
much of microstock is 'low-quality' but what's the incentive for agencies &who would make the subjective labeling?  even at this young age AI many AI i mages are better than  'low-quality' digital images

we were talking about microstock where there's no indication buyers care at all for artist stories or look for a specific artist they're too busy buying cheap images

i participate in several groups on FAA (and admin for 5) and have never heard anyone on Redbubble reporting significant income.  more income from those using twitter & mastodon, but still dwarfed by microstock income

I think microstock has opened up to too many amateurs and is getting too close in quality to freemium sites like Pexels, Unsplash, Pixabay and Freepik.

The race to the bottom of prices will penalize the contributors. Especially the quality ones that risk becoming invisible. And it will be even worse with AI available to everyone.

I have a portfolio of 5,000 images and sell much more than contributors with 50,000 images. Quality matters, but with this invasion of AI my images risk becoming invisible.

I am full time and until 3 years ago microstock was 90% of my earnings.

Now I earn the same amount but the microstock is now at 50% and the rest is print-on-demand and commissioned work.

I achieved this by working hard on my personal branding with blog, social media, and personal website.

If microstock agencies don't change, I don't see a brilliant future, they will look more and more like sites like Unsplash, Pexels because the best contributors are all leaving.


« Reply #12 on: August 31, 2023, 16:42 »
+1
Only people who have produced quality images, at the cost of effort, time, renunciation of mediocrity, self-challenge, and perhaps ultimately talent can understand this turning point. And they see absolutely no benefit in what AI produces.
AI enthusiasts can only be delighted to finally be able to produce what they have never been able to produce.

I agree with you 100%, great post!

« Reply #13 on: August 31, 2023, 16:56 »
0
Only people who have produced quality images, at the cost of effort, time, renunciation of mediocrity, self-challenge, and perhaps ultimately talent can understand this turning point. And they see absolutely no benefit in what AI produces.
AI enthusiasts can only be delighted to finally be able to produce what they have never been able to produce.

I agree in part,the first part of what you wrote in my opinion is better than the second part.

I don't produce AI images,but I'm mostly waiting for the storm to pass and the technology to improve,but this can also be a disadvantage,because first come first served,and I believe there are many advantages with AI,although I prefer old fashioned content without a doubt.

I believe that in the future I will produce AI content,but I'm not entirely sure,I'm thinking about it.

« Reply #14 on: September 29, 2023, 15:09 »
+1
I think microstock has opened up to too many amateurs and is getting too close in quality to freemium sites like Pexels, Unsplash, Pixabay and Freepik.

The race to the bottom of prices will penalize the contributors. Especially the quality ones that risk becoming invisible. And it will be even worse with AI available to everyone.

I have a portfolio of 5,000 images and sell much more than contributors with 50,000 images. Quality matters, but with this invasion of AI my images risk becoming invisible.

I am full time and until 3 years ago microstock was 90% of my earnings.

Now I earn the same amount but the microstock is now at 50% and the rest is print-on-demand and commissioned work.

I achieved this by working hard on my personal branding with blog, social media, and personal website.

If microstock agencies don't change, I don't see a brilliant future, they will look more and more like sites like Unsplash, Pexels because the best contributors are all leaving.


I totally agree too. Thank you for your post.  :)

« Reply #15 on: September 29, 2023, 15:54 »
0
Fare traid photography  :D.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
31 Replies
9703 Views
Last post December 16, 2010, 13:01
by cthoman
4 Replies
4883 Views
Last post April 18, 2013, 02:14
by jareso
2 Replies
3235 Views
Last post May 08, 2013, 10:14
by Microbius
2 Replies
1901 Views
Last post July 01, 2013, 20:32
by grsphoto
31 Replies
8774 Views
Last post August 04, 2013, 06:25
by cathyslife

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors