pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Organic Photo Label for representations of Natural Creation and not AI  (Read 5433 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: August 25, 2023, 05:46 »
+14
--> (Please readers, tick +1 if you approve this!) <--

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: April 22, 2024, 02:43 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 »
+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....
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.

« Reply #16 on: April 22, 2024, 02:48 »
0
^ Little Up!  ;)


« Reply #17 on: April 22, 2024, 04:11 »
+2
I think that quality is important,but in any case there can be different ways of making microstock,I focus more on quality,I like to take care of the details.

It's more important to produce real content than AI,especially if you have some skills and experience,it's better to use it,but it is always better to try to do everything possible.

Regarding the growing number of beginners who start microstock,it doesn't worry me much,because I'm more than sure that most of them abandon after a year or two,when they realize how difficult it is today to earn real money with microstock,only a small portion of these beginners will continue.

Then for many this is just a hobby,and for them that's fine,this is the fastest growing category in my opinion,which can somehow clog up the microstock agencies.

But as I have already underlined several times,in my opinion there is a huge difference between Adobe Stock and the other "traditional" microstock agencies.

a label for real content is a good idea,i actually don't know if it's necessary,since if it's not AI it's real,but perhaps it can somehow highlight real content more. :)



« Last Edit: April 22, 2024, 05:09 by Injustice for all »

« Reply #18 on: April 22, 2024, 16:32 »
+1
...

It's more important to produce real content than AI,especially if you have some skills and experience,it's better to use it,but it is always better to try to do everything possible.
...
...
a label for real content is a good idea,i actually don't know if it's necessary,since if it's not AI it's real,but perhaps it can somehow highlight real content more. :)

right - "do everything possible." is why we use AI

what makes it real to use a highly automated machine that measures light and turns it into a series of pixels, themselves descrbed by 1 & 0's?

in ultimate terms NO art is 'real' but that's its beauty - an artist's interpretation of the physical world

« Reply #19 on: April 23, 2024, 02:04 »
+2

right - "do everything possible." is why we use AI

what makes it real to use a highly automated machine that measures light and turns it into a series of pixels, themselves descrbed by 1 & 0's?

in ultimate terms NO art is 'real' but that's its beauty - an artist's interpretation of the physical world

Photography is different from ALL other arts because it requires a drawing from reality, an imprint of reality.

If it doesn't come from reality it's not photography, it's something else. Call it by another name.

« Reply #20 on: April 23, 2024, 04:54 »
+1
@Cascoly true,i think we say"real" just to differentiate non-AI content,we can define a tomato as "real" if photographed because it exists or existed in our physical reality,and a tomato not "real" if created with AI because it has never existed in our physical reality,but certainly creating AI content is a form of art,I agree.

@Bauman AI contents are illustrations,in the end it is just a rendering of pixels,but it is certainly a form of art like 3D or painting,even if painting requires more skill and experience,there's no denying that creating AI content is an art form.

then creating AI content,especially that sells,is not easy as it seems,of course,everyone knows how to write "Easter bunny" and generate it,but good luck selling it! :D

there is a lot more work behind AI content than it seems,from complex prompts,to improvements,use of additional tools such as generative fill,originality,creativity,being an AI artist in the microstock world,it is much more complex than it seems,and will become more and more complex over time.



« Reply #21 on: April 23, 2024, 05:06 »
+1

@Bauman AI contents are illustrations,in the end it is just a rendering of pixels,but it is certainly a form of art like 3D or painting,even if painting requires more skill and experience,there's no denying that creating AI content is an art form.

The problem is that many people use AI as if it were a photograph and not an illustration.

And this is not good for us photographers (because we lose sales) and for those who look at these images, because almost always, when they are published, it is not specified that they are AI and therefore they are confused or even deceived by fake photographs.

I take landscape images from real, but the web is full of fake landscapes that are believed to be real. Maybe you book a trip to a location that isn't the one you see in the photos.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2024, 05:08 by Bauman »

« Reply #22 on: April 23, 2024, 08:09 »
+1

@Bauman AI contents are illustrations,in the end it is just a rendering of pixels,but it is certainly a form of art like 3D or painting,even if painting requires more skill and experience,there's no denying that creating AI content is an art form.

The problem is that many people use AI as if it were a photograph and not an illustration.

And this is not good for us photographers (because we lose sales) and for those who look at these images, because almost always, when they are published, it is not specified that they are AI and therefore they are confused or even deceived by fake photographs.

I take landscape images from real, but the web is full of fake landscapes that are believed to be real. Maybe you book a trip to a location that isn't the one you see in the photos.

I agree,the problem is not the technology but how it is used,I am sure that over time this thing will degenerate into something that needs to be controlled.

for now we are still at the beginning of this new reality within everyone's reach,but stricter rules will have to be applied on the use of AI content by the end user,otherwise it will be chaos.

Going back to microstock,I find it quite strange that even today I also sell very simple illustrations,this shows that there is a large percentage of customers who are not at all interested in wasting time with AI,and just want ready-made content.

I think that AIs change the microstock game a bit,opened new doors,but I firmly believe that do not represent the end of the microstock.

then as regards the race to the bottom,in my opinion we have a large responsibility in this,but I don't want to dwell on this again.


wds

« Reply #23 on: April 23, 2024, 08:27 »
+3
Where does image retouching fit into this? Should only completely unretouched images be allowed as "natural creations"?

« Reply #24 on: April 23, 2024, 13:12 »
0

@Bauman AI contents are illustrations,in the end it is just a rendering of pixels,but it is certainly a form of art like 3D or painting,even if painting requires more skill and experience,there's no denying that creating AI content is an art form.

The problem is that many people use AI as if it were a photograph and not an illustration.

And this is not good for us photographers (because we lose sales) and for those who look at these images, because almost always, when they are published, it is not specified that they are AI and therefore they are confused or even deceived by fake photographs.
And this is not good for us film photographers (because we lose sales) and for those who look at these images, because almost always, when they are published, it is not specified that they are digital and therefore they are confused or even deceived by fake film images


Quote
I take landscape images from real, but the web is full of fake landscapes that are believed to be real. Maybe you book a trip to a location that isn't the one you see in the photos.
first, you assume all those using 'fake' landscapes believe them to be real - if i'm writing about castles in general, i may just want a generic castle

you describe a different problem - artists are responsible for proper description of their images - eg stock images of an ocean with tags 'atlantic' AND 'pacific'.  and even more so, those selling the booking are responsible for accuracy - all images can be mis-used  (eg, insects or plants with incorrect latin names)
« Last Edit: April 23, 2024, 13:22 by cascoly »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
31 Replies
10361 Views
Last post December 16, 2010, 13:01
by cthoman
4 Replies
5118 Views
Last post April 18, 2013, 02:14
by jareso
2 Replies
3450 Views
Last post May 08, 2013, 10:14
by Microbius
2 Replies
2080 Views
Last post July 01, 2013, 20:32
by grsphoto
31 Replies
9508 Views
Last post August 04, 2013, 06:25
by cathyslife

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors