AI generated images and video are valueless in the eyes of buyers, even if it meets their content requirements.

This type of product may well become ubiquitous, but it will never be valued by agencies in the way photography and filming is, so the price of it will drop to almost nothing. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if agencies didn't start charging prompt writers to host and sell their product because the storage and distribution costs will get so huge. They'll probably say it's an environmental necessity to offset the energy used in their creation.

Quote from: Zero Talent on December 02, 2025, 23:39
Buyers on IS/Getty are greeted with the note below.
Love it!

Except that as contributors are allowed to use generative AI on 10% of their image, in certain circumstances, it's not actually AI-free, it's AI-lite.

BTW, I wish Adobe would offer a cheaper, non-AI version of PS (but still keeping other features updated), to make sure we don't use gen-AI by accident. It looks like they're putting most of their development time/money into AI.

"And ai work is just as creative or uncreative as button pushing. "

Lighting (natural or studio), composition, subject, props, story, location, timing, shutter speed, lens choice, focus, lens filters, story boards, aperture colour grading.

I don't know I've tinkered with AI just to see what all the fuss is about, it felt more like a slot machine than any creative process. 

Quote from: Zero Talent on November 30, 2025, 14:46
Regarding Getty, they are the only agency I know doing something to protect creators against the AI onslaught. Besides, they are now a clear number #2 for me.

+1 here, Getty have emerged as my #2 as well.

Also might add that I don't upload image to either of these agencies anymore and get the vast majority of editorial up on Adobe. Personally, wouldn't concern me too much if SS disappeared.

Quote from: ShadySue on December 03, 2025, 18:49

Quote from: Zero Talent on December 02, 2025, 23:39
Buyers on IS/Getty are greeted with the note below.
Love it!

Except that as contributors are allowed to use generative AI on 10% of their image, in certain circumstances, it's not actually AI-free, it's AI-lite.

BTW, I wish Adobe would offer a cheaper, non-AI version of PS (but still keeping other features updated), to make sure we don't use gen-AI by accident. It looks like they're putting most of their development time/money into AI.

There is a bit of difference.
I can replace the sky (with another sky of my own) or clone out an advert manually, as well as I can do it with the AI based tool in PS. In this case, AI is just a bit faster way to do what I would do anyway (and often it even fails to do a better job), and it's not that much different from the pre-AI content aware fill, for example.

But I strongly doubt that those who generate those obviously fake AI images, could ever do them themselves. These are fundamentally copies of other people's work. Being a "prompt engineer" is rather an oxymoron, not a job.

Quote from: angelacat on December 04, 2025, 09:11
"And ai work is just as creative or uncreative as button pushing. "

Lighting (natural or studio), composition, subject, props, story, location, timing, shutter speed, lens choice, focus, lens filters, story boards, aperture colour grading.

I don't know I've tinkered with AI just to see what all the fuss is about, it felt more like a slot machine than any creative process.

Well said.

Quote from: SimonSays on December 04, 2025, 19:53

Quote from: angelacat on December 04, 2025, 09:11
"And ai work is just as creative or uncreative as button pushing. "

Lighting (natural or studio), composition, subject, props, story, location, timing, shutter speed, lens choice, focus, lens filters, story boards, aperture colour grading.

I don't know I've tinkered with AI just to see what all the fuss is about, it felt more like a slot machine than any creative process.

Well said.

And finally, we can always hope that they also push button while playing Russian roulette. (second degree here, of course)...

Quote from: angelacat on December 04, 2025, 09:11
"And ai work is just as creative or uncreative as button pushing. "

Lighting (natural or studio), composition, subject, props, story, location, timing, shutter speed, lens choice, focus, lens filters, story boards, aperture colour grading.

I don't know I've tinkered with AI just to see what all the fuss is about, it felt more like a slot machine than any creative process.

I did mostly ai for two years, I find it extremely difficult to get what I want. I did learn a lot and if a customer searches ai only, I now have content and can be found. With or without ai, I will not be excluded.

But if I do a set up for photography, especially in the studio, it is extremely easy to get good content. You always get exactly what you want. Once I have a system set up you can take hundreds of images, then change layout and lighting a bit, use a different background and props and off you go.

Even easier with people, also because you can combine it with doing video at the same location.

Ai is full of mistakes, results are very inconsistent.

What I found most interesting is to use one of my own photos to create variations and also tried to animate them with ai.

This way you have a quakity image to start with, let us say holiday candles by the window. Then you tell ai now do a version with golden candles instead of red, on white wood table and it snowing outside.

Or something similar but there is colorful blinking christmas tree outdoors for an animation.

Working only with prompts has not been that good for me, but I am probably just bad at prompting.

I still need to do many variations to get one good file, then upscale, then process.

But going forward I see that combination of evolving my own photos as the best way to use ai.

Or transform my own illustrations into watercolor or oil lainting.

Ai is a very interesting tool and I find it just as complex as Photoshop.

I also use ai as a mood board to test various still life combinations. At the moment I am testing various easter card designs. The ones I like best will then be done as photos so the content can go everywhere.

This combination is even more efficient than transforming my own photos.

I haven't tried it yet, but apparently you can give ai various isolated objects and then ask it to create still lifes for you. That would maybe be the ideal way to preview new greeting cards or food images. test lighting, angles, layering, all without actually setting it up physically. then take the winner combinations and shoot that.

All the agencies are heavily promoting ai tools on their front pages. And customers love to use ai.

For creators money from ai training and using these tools will always be tiny.

So by using ai myself I can also better understand what kind of camera photos and videos are useful as base files for the customers.

Getty said many times, they love ai, they just want the generator companies to properly license training files, not scrape them from the internet.

Ai is not going away and if you believe our customers are stupid uncreative idiots for using ai in their work, you really deserve lower income.

Button pushing does not make you creative. 90% of the images on agencies are just duplicates of duplicates of duplicates.

If you were such an amazing talented artist bringing something really new visually you would have steadily rising sales.

Because uploaders who do something really creative and new are extremely rare.

Understand the customer - make money.

Whine and complain that nobody appreciates your brilliance...then enjoy loss of sales.

And then just move on. Blame it on ai that button pushing is no longer working for you.

I think it is sad that msg is becoming the backwards looking complainer site. The up and coming fresh creators are not here.

Hugo is one of the latest creators now doing stock fulltime.

He has been active for many years, he has illustrations, videos photos, uses ai in his metadata workflow.

By focussing on what customers actually need he was able to now do stock fulltime.

Of course you will keep hearing people here whining...but I do not want to do video or use a drone. I am a PHOTOGRAPHER.

Maybe you are, but if you are making zero effort to understand customers, where do you expect the money to come from?

Just doing the same you have been doing for 20 years?

How is that a clever way to run your business?

In the adobe discord is also someone only uploading photos, no ai, no video and makes 300 sales a week with 267 files. Down from 450.

The guy knows something about customers and agency algorithms.

Only those that really want the money will make money.

Understanding customers is the only thing that works.

https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2025/12/02/exclusive-interview-how-drone-footage-transformed-hugo-kurk-into-a-top-earning-microstock-creator/

Quote from: cobalt on December 06, 2025, 10:31

Of course you will keep hearing people here whining...but I do not want to do video or use a drone. I am a PHOTOGRAPHER.

From my experience in other industries, the loudest complainers usually produce the least, while the quiet, hardworking ones end up the most successful. Amazing how the same pattern shows up in this forum.

Quote from: angelacat on December 04, 2025, 09:11
"And ai work is just as creative or uncreative as button pushing. "

Lighting (natural or studio), composition, subject, props, story, location, timing, shutter speed, lens choice, focus, lens filters, story boards, aperture colour grading.

LOL - you're describing the makings of a good prompt!

Quote from: angelacat on December 04, 2025, 09:11

I don't know I've tinkered with AI just to see what all the fuss is about, it felt more like a slot machine than any creative process.

'tinkering' says it all - if you didnt create anything worthwhile it's obviously AI's problem

I still am thrilled that Getty is taking this approach. Do I use AI? Yes it has a place for broll that does not exists for subjects I shoot for different Youtube Channels. Sadly because of the amount of media out there, people hardly notice or appreciate good quality. As producers, our job is to create useful and top quality that is all the customer wants; they don't care if AI did it or your new Canon or iPhone. It is not about the artist it is about the content.

"Ai is not going away and if you believe our customers are stupid uncreative idiots for using ai in their work, you really deserve lower income."

OK so you think people should be punished  with less sales for not using AI.  Personally I prefer to use only my own work and not risk passing on copyrighted work to the customer but I should be punished for that - interesting take.

Never once have I said customers are stupid uncreative idiots, please stop putting your words into my mouth.  I'm very grateful for their business. 

"'tinkering' says it all - if you didnt create anything worthwhile it's obviously AI's problem" no as I said I used it to see what all the fuss was about - not to profit from. I don't blame photoshop for my bad photos.

"LOL - you're describing the makings of a good prompt!"  the point is people invested time, money and effort, bought lenses, lighting cameras and traveled to locations just for their work to be scraped so other people who haven't invested the time and money to use their work to profit from.  If it were not so why are there so many creators suing AI companies for stolen copyrighted work. 

This is a critical development. Getty's threat about potential restructuring or reduction of UK operations sounds like a classic regulatory pressure tactic, rather than a purely financial warning.

The real question for investors is this:

Is the CMA (Competition and Markets Authority) more concerned with the consumer pricing power of the combined entity, or the competitive landscape for individual photographers/creators?

If the deal is blocked, which competitor (like Adobe Stock or smaller players) benefits the most from the resulting uncertainty and asset splintering?

Blocking the deal might solve one regulatory issue but could potentially destabilize Getty's European footprint, ironically strengthening other non-UK global competitors. Curious to see the CMA's final justification.