Quote from: stoker2014 on November 14, 2022, 10:11

Quote from: Artist on November 14, 2022, 09:45

Quote from: stoker2014 on November 14, 2022, 09:15

Quote from: ADH on November 13, 2022, 21:32
AI is also bad news for agencies, eventually stock image users will be able to download cheap versions of AI software and get the images they want without paying subscriptions. In the medium term, AI will not only kill the contributors but also the agencies

It will not kill and will not even create competition. I dealt with one program that converts HD to 4k and removes any noise from the video, but it needs a very powerful PC to work, and even on a powerful PC it takes a lot of time. As a result, the cost of a PC and electricity will block the profit.

One can easily rent a cloud GPU at very cheap price.

ok, when you rent it and create something there, tell me.

He doesn't need to rent one and create something with it, as the majority of these AI image generators are all cloud based... so it doesn't matter what setup the end user has. If you'd looked into it and done even the slightest bit of research, rather than basing your opinion on incorrect information that you just made up (like you usually do), then you'd know that.

Quote from: Her Ugliness on November 12, 2022, 11:31

Tell me, which one is a human made photo and which one was created by an AI?

One on the right is AI. That's my guess? How did I do?

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 15, 2022, 23:57

Quote from: Her Ugliness on November 12, 2022, 11:31

Tell me, which one is a human made photo and which one was created by an AI?

One on the right is AI. That's my guess? How did I do?

Left one is the AI generated image by DALL E. 😥

Quote from: Her Ugliness on November 16, 2022, 06:45

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 15, 2022, 23:57

One on the right is AI. That's my guess? How did I do?

Left one is the AI generated image by DALL E. 😥

Nice job. The right one is soft and pixelated, that's why I made that choice.  The AI version has some more even lighting. Of course the test is someone biased as you got to pick the bad real photo, but point made.

That's so exciting! They don't need photographers anymore.

Quote from: Braznyc on November 16, 2022, 18:24
That's so exciting! They don't need photographers anymore.

And buyers do not need stock agencies anymore

Published today in a pro-Dalle-E online news article
Quote

Bad news for stock photo businesses
If you're a stock photo business, DALL-E 2 might be your worst enemy. Stock photos already have a reputation as cheesy and inauthentic, but have been a necessary evil for content creators. That changes the moment DALL-E 2 becomes available for commercial use.

What justification would there be to pay for a stock photo license in a world where DALL-E 2 can create any image you want?

Quote from: ADH on November 18, 2022, 16:29
Published today in a pro-Dalle-E online news article
Quote

Bad news for stock photo businesses
If you're a stock photo business, DALL-E 2 might be your worst enemy. Stock photos already have a reputation as cheesy and inauthentic, but have been a necessary evil for content creators. That changes the moment DALL-E 2 becomes available for commercial use.

What justification would there be to pay for a stock photo license in a world where DALL-E 2 can create any image you want?

DALL-E is available now for commercial use. All those illustrations and creations, are allowed to be licensed. What's going to be interesting in the future is, right for images that use portions of people or protected property, designs or specifics. Open AI "Users get full usage rights to commercialise the images they create with DALL-E, including the right to reprint, sell and merchandise,"

What is Fair use? I hope that sometime in the near future the courts will decide.

"There are real concerns with respect to the copyright of outputs from these models and unaddressed rights issues with respect to the imagery, the image metadata and those individuals contained within the imagery," Getty Images CEO Craig Peters   https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/21/23364696/getty-images-ai-ban-generated-artwork-illustration-copyright#:~:text=The%20creators%20of%20AI%20image%20generators%20say%20the,sites%2C%20and%20stock%20photo%20sites%20like%20Getty%20Images.

Read this article which is looking at both sides. "I see people on both sides of this extremely confident in their positions, but the reality is nobody knows,"   https://www.theverge.com/23444685/generative-ai-copyright-infringement-legal-fair-use-training-data

What's interesting is that, lets say I create an image, using AI from one of the online services. If I don't have enough creative input and, the image is not created by a human's work, then it's not going to be protected. In the article they use Cat by Van Gogh as an example of what couldn't be protected. In the US, there is no copyright protection for works generated solely by a machine. However, it seems that copyright may be possible in cases where the creator can prove there was substantial human input.

What is substantial human input? What is a derivative, of substantial new design to change the image "enough" to make it a new work. Very subjective questions.

This is why I posted the Warhol case which is in progress now, that's examining what is fair use. They are both related.

None of this has to do with what's right or fair for artists, creatives or our interests, it's all about the legal side and could someone get sued for using something that AI created by scraping the web or using copyrighted images to train the AI?

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 18, 2022, 16:56

Quote from: ADH on November 18, 2022, 16:29
Published today in a pro-Dalle-E online news article
Quote

Bad news for stock photo businesses
If you're a stock photo business, DALL-E 2 might be your worst enemy. Stock photos already have a reputation as cheesy and inauthentic, but have been a necessary evil for content creators. That changes the moment DALL-E 2 becomes available for commercial use.

What justification would there be to pay for a stock photo license in a world where DALL-E 2 can create any image you want?

DALL-E is available now for commercial use. All those illustrations and creations, are allowed to be licensed. What's going to be interesting in the future is, right for images that use portions of people or protected property, designs or specifics. Open AI "Users get full usage rights to commercialise the images they create with DALL-E, including the right to reprint, sell and merchandise,"

What is Fair use? I hope that sometime in the near future the courts will decide.

"There are real concerns with respect to the copyright of outputs from these models and unaddressed rights issues with respect to the imagery, the image metadata and those individuals contained within the imagery," Getty Images CEO Craig Peters   https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/21/23364696/getty-images-ai-ban-generated-artwork-illustration-copyright#:~:text=The%20creators%20of%20AI%20image%20generators%20say%20the,sites%2C%20and%20stock%20photo%20sites%20like%20Getty%20Images.

Read this article which is looking at both sides. "I see people on both sides of this extremely confident in their positions, but the reality is nobody knows,"   https://www.theverge.com/23444685/generative-ai-copyright-infringement-legal-fair-use-training-data

What's interesting is that, lets say I create an image, using AI from one of the online services. If I don't have enough creative input and, the image is not created by a human's work, then it's not going to be protected. In the article they use Cat by Van Gogh as an example of what couldn't be protected. In the US, there is no copyright protection for works generated solely by a machine. However, it seems that copyright may be possible in cases where the creator can prove there was substantial human input.

What is substantial human input? What is a derivative, of substantial new design to change the image "enough" to make it a new work. Very subjective questions.

This is why I posted the Warhol case which is in progress now, that's examining what is fair use. They are both related.

None of this has to do with what's right or fair for artists, creatives or our interests, it's all about the legal side and could someone get sued for using something that AI created by scraping the web or using copyrighted images to train the AI?

With many players coming into AI, the companies are now shifting their licenses to commercial.
This is dangerous and I don't see good future of image industry.

AI Learning means data is held, just as data is held in the human brain in terms of memory and learning as to what things look like.

The problem for AI data is that there are now laws that require data to only be held for a reasonable length of time, not indefinitely. I think this is why SS talks about being able to opt-out of future dataset refreshes that the AI uses. These datasets are created from stored imagery (ours).

Ultimately, if they let this continue, the software could put many artists and photographers out of business and in turn, drastically reduce the size of datasets available for the AI to... *cough* learn from. It feels like a short term gain process for the AI, which from my dealings with AI is not as fancy as what they like it to sound. It's basically a very large dataset with clever conditional programming. We used to use SaaS and other software to do "Machine Learning" within the financial industry!

Quote from: Artist on November 19, 2022, 04:17

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 18, 2022, 16:56

Quote from: ADH on November 18, 2022, 16:29
Published today in a pro-Dalle-E online news article
Quote

Bad news for stock photo businesses
If you're a stock photo business, DALL-E 2 might be your worst enemy. Stock photos already have a reputation as cheesy and inauthentic, but have been a necessary evil for content creators. That changes the moment DALL-E 2 becomes available for commercial use.

What justification would there be to pay for a stock photo license in a world where DALL-E 2 can create any image you want?

DALL-E is available now for commercial use. All those illustrations and creations, are allowed to be licensed. What's going to be interesting in the future is, right for images that use portions of people or protected property, designs or specifics. Open AI "Users get full usage rights to commercialise the images they create with DALL-E, including the right to reprint, sell and merchandise,"

What is Fair use? I hope that sometime in the near future the courts will decide.

"There are real concerns with respect to the copyright of outputs from these models and unaddressed rights issues with respect to the imagery, the image metadata and those individuals contained within the imagery," Getty Images CEO Craig Peters   https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/21/23364696/getty-images-ai-ban-generated-artwork-illustration-copyright#:~:text=The%20creators%20of%20AI%20image%20generators%20say%20the,sites%2C%20and%20stock%20photo%20sites%20like%20Getty%20Images.

Read this article which is looking at both sides. "I see people on both sides of this extremely confident in their positions, but the reality is nobody knows,"   https://www.theverge.com/23444685/generative-ai-copyright-infringement-legal-fair-use-training-data

What's interesting is that, lets say I create an image, using AI from one of the online services. If I don't have enough creative input and, the image is not created by a human's work, then it's not going to be protected. In the article they use Cat by Van Gogh as an example of what couldn't be protected. In the US, there is no copyright protection for works generated solely by a machine. However, it seems that copyright may be possible in cases where the creator can prove there was substantial human input.

What is substantial human input? What is a derivative, of substantial new design to change the image "enough" to make it a new work. Very subjective questions.

This is why I posted the Warhol case which is in progress now, that's examining what is fair use. They are both related.

None of this has to do with what's right or fair for artists, creatives or our interests, it's all about the legal side and could someone get sued for using something that AI created by scraping the web or using copyrighted images to train the AI?

With many players coming into AI, the companies are now shifting their licenses to commercial.
This is dangerous and I don't see good future of image industry.

Well said in many less words.

Lets say I used to make $100 a month on a specific agency and now I make $10 a month there. And another the same, only it's now $5 a month. I averaged $80 RPD for some years on another, now I get $8.71 RPD with more images?

If you hang someone, and then shoot the corpse, does that make them more dead? Killing an already dead industry won't be making it any worse by AI entering the market. You can't stop progress or technology just because it doesn't fit our own goals or plans for the future.



"...grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference."

However if you are a supreme court justice, one of the nine people who could make a difference, and reading this, you could help protect the artists rights and interests. The rest of us 332 Million other people have almost no power to make a change. That's just in the USA.

AI images are just ugly

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 19, 2022, 19:26
Lets say I used to make $100 a month on a specific agency and now I make $10 a month there. And another the same, only it's now $5 a month. I averaged $80 RPD for some years on another, now I get $8.71 RPD with more images?

If you hang someone, and then shoot the corpse, does that make them more dead? Killing an already dead industry won't be making it any worse by AI entering the market. You can't stop progress or technology just because it doesn't fit our own goals or plans for the future.

And let's say I used to make $100 a month there and now I make $1000? What then?
Microstock is not dead for everyone. Some people are still making decent money there, some even rely on it for their living.

No, we can't stop progressing trechnology that might destroy our livelihood. But it doesn't mean we have to like it or even cheer it on or keep silent about our disapproval.

Quote from: Julied83 on November 21, 2022, 11:09
AI images are just ugly

use a good prompt and the ugly will become beautiful.

Quote from: Her Ugliness on November 21, 2022, 12:53

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 19, 2022, 19:26
Lets say I used to make $100 a month on a specific agency and now I make $10 a month there. And another the same, only it's now $5 a month. I averaged $80 RPD for some years on another, now I get $8.71 RPD with more images?

If you hang someone, and then shoot the corpse, does that make them more dead? Killing an already dead industry won't be making it any worse by AI entering the market. You can't stop progress or technology just because it doesn't fit our own goals or plans for the future.

And let's say I used to make $100 a month there and now I make $1000? What then?
Microstock is not dead for everyone. Some people are still making decent money there, some even rely on it for their living.

No, we can't stop progressing trechnology that might destroy our livelihood. But it doesn't mean we have to like it or even cheer it on or keep silent about our disapproval.

I know you're lookin' for a ruby in a mountain of rocks
But there ain't no Coupe de Ville
Hidin' at the bottom of a Cracker Jack box

Lets say your disapproval is useless and changes nothing. Then what?

Quote from: Diana Herrmann on November 21, 2022, 15:03


I know you're lookin' for a ruby in a mountain of rocks
But there ain't no Coupe de Ville
Hidin' at the bottom of a Cracker Jack box

Lets say your disapproval is useless and changes nothing. Then what?

Don't understand the ruby and ville and jack stuff. Guess my English isn't good enough, I don't know what half of that is.

So, you are saying we are not supposed to talk about anything we don't like we can't change anything about? The Russian war? Explosing gas prices? Inflation? Soccer world cup in Katar? 


Communication is a way to express our thoughts and feelings. It's a basic human need that helps us connect and interact with others. It's helps us form our identity and perceive the world as we want others to see it. It helps us express our emotions and emotional expression is a key to our mental health. It helps relieve stress.
Through communication, we evolve as individuals in society. Through it we become informed and make well thought out decisions. It helps us develop our own ideas and express ourselves. It creates the foundation for understanding between people and helps us develop respect and empathy.

There are a million reasons why we talk about things, even though talking about them doesn't change anything about these things.

If you do not feel the need, then that's okay. But don't question other's peoples' motives for wanting to express their thoughts and feelings, regardless of whether it'S something positive or negative or something they can change or not.

Quote from: Julied83 on November 21, 2022, 11:09
AI images are just ugly

Hmm this is what my friend told me around 20 years ago about digital images.She works in photo lab... photo lab almost do not exist this days

Computers have been putting people out of business for a long. Machines have been putting people out of business for a long time. How many painters were put out of business by the camera?

The microstock business was created by digital cameras and computers. It put the old stock photo guys out of business.

How will all this play out? Will people still pay for the best images, and give SS a way to stay in business? Or will all images be free from now on?

What I most want to know is: How long before AI can make vectors?

Quote from: michaeldb on November 22, 2022, 00:41...
The microstock business was created by digital cameras and computers. It put the old stock photo guys out of business.

no - many of us old stock guys (since 1976) made the transition.  evolution in action

Quote
How will all this play out? Will people still pay for the best images...

why assume digital cameras will always produce 'better' than AI? 

Quote from: cascoly on November 22, 2022, 18:04

Quote from: michaeldb on November 22, 2022, 00:41...
The microstock business was created by digital cameras and computers. It put the old stock photo guys out of business.

no - many of us old stock guys (since 1976) made the transition.  evolution in action

Quote
How will all this play out? Will people still pay for the best images...

why assume digital cameras will always produce 'better' than AI?

Because I'm behind that camera and I'm real, not artificial? 

AI created images do have a place. I still see them doing some impossible things that real photos won't. Look at what CGI has done for movies. They also have AI screen writers to help with the script. This isn't an attack on photography and stock, the whole world is being advanced by AI assistance. Sure, that also means some people will not be needed, as computers fill in gaps and positions.

Robotics have taken over in manufacturing. Those real life workers have been replaced.

Biden said "Anybody who can go down 3,000 feet in a mine can sure as hell learn to program as well... Anybody who can throw coal into a furnace can learn how to program, for God's sake!"     So anyone who can push a button or edit a photo can learn some new tricks too? The Prez says so.

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 23, 2022, 17:46

Quote from: cascoly on November 22, 2022, 18:04

Quote from: michaeldb on November 22, 2022, 00:41...
The microstock business was created by digital cameras and computers. It put the old stock photo guys out of business.

no - many of us old stock guys (since 1976) made the transition.  evolution in action

Quote
How will all this play out? Will people still pay for the best images...

why assume digital cameras will always produce 'better' than AI?

Because I'm behind that camera and I'm real, not artificial? 

AI created images do have a place. I still see them doing some impossible things that real photos won't. Look at what CGI has done for movies. They also have AI screen writers to help with the script. This isn't an attack on photography and stock, the whole world is being advanced by AI assistance. Sure, that also means some people will not be needed, as computers fill in gaps and positions.

Robotics have taken over in manufacturing. Those real life workers have been replaced.

Biden said "Anybody who can go down 3,000 feet in a mine can sure as hell learn to program as well... Anybody who can throw coal into a furnace can learn how to program, for God's sake!"     So anyone who can push a button or edit a photo can learn some new tricks too? The Prez says so.

That's why presidents have the ultimate wisdom and we have not

Quote from: SVH on November 23, 2022, 17:54

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 23, 2022, 17:46

Biden said "Anybody who can go down 3,000 feet in a mine can sure as hell learn to program as well... Anybody who can throw coal into a furnace can learn how to program, for God's sake!"     So anyone who can push a button or edit a photo can learn some new tricks too? The Prez says so.

That's why presidents have the ultimate wisdom and we have not

Yes, the current one and the last one.

Just amazing, as that's who's the figurehead that runs the country? Actually for anyone who has been in a club or on a board, the President presides and can't even make a motion. (Presidents don't write laws) He rules and is supposed to maintain control. "The chief administrative duty of the president is to represent the organization. The president signs all legal documents; supervises the employees and the activities of the organization; represents, or speaks for, the organization; and presides at meetings." That and commander in chief of the military.

So it all started now.

https://pixelvibe.com/

Quote from: Artist on November 24, 2022, 01:09
So it all started now.

https://pixelvibe.com/

Hey there 👋
Welcome to PixelVibe 🙌
We're building the world's best collection of AI stock photos and videos.
If you have any questions, just reply to this message.
Max

Yeah, please drop dead PixelVibe. I can't see any benefit of buying a license for an AI image over a real one, and I mean the ones they have?