Quote from: fotoroad on February 28, 2025, 14:03

Quote from: ouatedeP on February 27, 2025, 22:55

Quote from: fotoroad on February 26, 2025, 21:37
Looking for inspiration? Here is My 10 Best Seller with Alamy https://youtu.be/mBpQlB2qt-c?si=FKY4vwvVK5ZZpv1m
Best
Miro

are those net price?

No it was what I get

i'm confused, how is "what you get" different than net?

Quote from: fotoroad on February 26, 2025, 21:37
Looking for inspiration? Here is My 10 Best Seller with Alamy https://youtu.be/mBpQlB2qt-c?si=FKY4vwvVK5ZZpv1m
Best
Miro

are those net price?

Quote from: JustAnImage on August 02, 2023, 18:36
Yes, that's really a laugh - they've put themselves out of the running with that.

One thing I would also like to point out:
I have been trying for several months to get an answer from support as to when the dataset earnings from Shutterstock and Pond5 will be paid out to the contributors, because this has not happened yet.
Since I asked this question in support, I have not received an answer to my queries (8 queries have gone unanswered by now).

I've just been running my account there for a few months now and taking the few $ that come in.
I certainly won't be uploading anything there any more...

yeah, they never answered my question on how they allocate DACS payment, or similar, they get from Alamy.

Quote from: gnirtS on June 07, 2023, 16:26
""Given our strong free cash flow generation and healthy balance sheet, Shutterstock is uniquely positioned as a technology company to be able to invest for organic and inorganic growth while also consistently returning value to shareholders"

Text book example of how to use lots of words whilst saying absolutely nothing.

clearly says "we value our shareholders more than our employees and contributors so they will be the one profiting from our excess cashflow"

hopefully all AI which means "creator" doesn't own copyright and usage like this is fair game

Quote from: Yakystockero on May 13, 2023, 20:44

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on May 13, 2023, 15:09

The programmers have appropriated copyright work to make their product, and as proved in the paper I referenced that work is still accessible using the right prompts (though this is not all that relevant as the issue is the appropriation of the work for commercial purposes without the copyright owner's consent).

Although legally there may be loose details that programmers have infringed upon, the point of AI image creation, as a concept, is exactly the same one that we have all learned to read, write, draw or photograph. I have read dozens of books by cartier bresson, Avedon, Erwit, Leibovitz... and seeing their photos is how I have learned to photograph, and I have created my own photographs with theirs in my mind.
That's the same thing they do, and it can't be avoided, because the photos are published, open to anyone's eye.

Years ago you had to pay to enter the museums, now it's not even necessary.

tell that to the musicians who got sued after listening to others work and using it it as "inspiration". 

fascinating how many stock photographer seem to have an international law degree.

Quote from: alijaber on May 05, 2023, 21:03
They are must be making huge money from the data deals from SS and P5 

did they address how they are giving contributors their due for these, or DACS payment from Alamy and the likes, which are not reported to specific images

Opt Out window now extended because Alamy is again changing their contract at expense of Contributors (more rights to ding Contributors for their inconsistant definition of exclusive/non-exclusive and unilateral rights to target Contributors clients for infringement with no warnings to the Contributors )

Quote from: Firn on May 09, 2023, 10:06

Quote from: Uncle Pete on May 08, 2023, 19:21
Interesting video and he has a some very solid predictions.

I thought this was too finny. I couldn't forget how AI created these and it just shows how training can get conditioned to think of some word or product by repeating images, that the AI is skewed. Ketchup under a minute.


https://youtu.be/LFmpVy6eGXs

This is indeed very interesting. And it's not the only case where you can notice that AI has been trained to "think" in stereotypes.

Anyone noticed that, when you have midjourney (and probbaly every other AI image generator) create a human, unless you specify, the human is always caucasian? Isn't that sad? For the AI the "default" human is caucasian.  And that doesn't even represent the real state of the world, because there are more Asian and Indian people in the world than caucasian white people.

I've come across a lot of other strange stereotypical trainings with AI. I let midjourney generate dogs with all kinds of foods, not specifying the dog breed. When I wanted to have dogs with Sushi, it always gave me dogs resembling Shiba Inus, so a Japanese breed. I let it generate women with clorful hair and midjourney keeps giving me women with tattoos and so on...

same for the Text based AI.  If you ask ChatGPT questions about sports competitions they tend to ignore women.  For example "Who won most gold medals in Olympics Ice hockey" it will answer Vladislav Tretiak with 3, totally ignoring Hayley Wickenheiser with 4. (plenty of other examples)

Quote from: stoker2014 on May 07, 2023, 14:42

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on May 06, 2023, 21:37

Quote from: stoker2014 on May 06, 2023, 16:26

Quote from: NewStocker on May 06, 2023, 11:19
AI Generated Imagery, Is It OK To Sell It?

You can't sell them. This is copyright infringement. You can not take someone else's work and redo it without the permission of the author. And even more so you can not sell this work later as your own.

Tell us you don't understand AI imagery without telling us.

Why should I say something? Better than all my words - lawsuits that have already sued websites selling AI-generated content.
I don't know what kind of responsibility specifically stock agencies will bear, but the "authors" who sell such things may well be made extreme, banned and held accountable.

tell me you don't understand the legal system without telling me you don't understand the legal system.  lawsuits in one jurisdiction doesn't make it a crime. 
in fact the only Stock Agency that has stated wrong in contributor uploading AI images, Alamy, used the contractual obligation of of contributor of owning all rights to the image as the reason, nothing to do with legality of AI images.

Quote from: stoker2014 on May 06, 2023, 16:26

Quote from: NewStocker on May 06, 2023, 11:19
AI Generated Imagery, Is It OK To Sell It?

You can't sell them. This is copyright infringement. You can not take someone else's work and redo it without the permission of the author. And even more so you can not sell this work later as your own.

of course you can,  same as i can sell stolen goods.  you still have to prove that i did it.

Quote from: aggie on April 29, 2023, 19:15

Quote from: ouatedeP on April 29, 2023, 12:18
Anyone getting any credits from Wirestock this month?  I have a small no new image account with them and no sales at all this month for the first time since i joined...  Have they moved to a month end reporting for all the agencies like they do for DP and P5?

I think adobe sales are updated daily (I got some on 20th April), and shutterstock used to be reported weekly, but I can see only some sales reported on 5th April, so I'm not sure about other weeks. I didn't have sales from other agencies this month, so probably waiting few more days will give us more answers...

looks like shutterstock has now moved to monthly reporting also, with no communication.  Glad i stop using them for anything else then throw aways. 

Anyone getting any credits from Wirestock this month?  I have a small no new image account with them and no sales at all this month for the first time since i joined...  Have they moved to a month end reporting for all the agencies like they do for DP and P5?

Quote from: Mimi the Cat on April 18, 2023, 17:28
Personally the judges must have been pretty dense not to notice the oddness of this "picture" I spotted AI before I even read the article.

they did. But he lied about his part of the work, from article above

"Update on 4/18/23: World Photography Organisation tells Motherboard that while it was aware that AI was used to create the image, Boris had "deliberately" misled them by telling them it was "co-created" with AI. Here's a statement provided by a spokesperson:

"The Creative category of the Open competition welcomes various experimental approaches to image making from cyanotypes and rayographs to cutting-edge digital practices. As such, following our correspondence with Boris and the warranties he provided, we felt that his entry fulfilled the criteria for this category, and we were supportive of his participation. [...]

We recognise the importance of this subject and its impact on image-making today. We look forward to further exploring this topic via our various channels and programmes and welcome the conversation around it. While elements of AI practices are relevant in artistic contexts of image-making, the Awards always have been and will continue to be a platform for championing the excellence and skill of photographers and artists working in the medium.""

Quote from: Lowls on April 15, 2023, 10:41

Quote from: stoker2014 on April 15, 2023, 09:57
So what are the conclusions? Stock agencies are not allowed to sell content to buyers on their own behalf?

No that's already happening I believe. I'm not a buyer so I don't know. But the conclusion is that if the A.I. generated product isn't copywritten and I believe it isnt, why do people need to pay for it. They could just take it. An A.I. can't bring a case against them. It is the creator. It's work according to the conclusion last year wasn't copywritten. So who can claim copywrite theft? Unless laws have changed since then it appears the work can just be taken.

it will be interesting, not sure we can conclude it can be taken.  Going to take property illegally, copyrighted or not, is still theft, either downloading without paying (breach of terms) or removing watermarks (intention to defraud).  I think the bigger issue is for buyers, if they use AI generated material they can copyright it, so this would be a big issue if they use it in trademark and copyright stuff

Quote from: thx9000 on April 13, 2023, 17:43
Well, I just got another sub 10$ distributor sale and I've been opted out for more than a year. Every time I report these Alamy just replies with a canned excuse and then just keeps doing it. This is on top of last year's huge decrease in earnings - from 3k+ to barely over 1k. This agency is becoming a joke

it's been a joke ever since PA bought them.  See their forum where they suddenly e-mail some contributors they won't accept AI images, block all discussions, and make no general announcements

Quote from: Her Ugliness on March 31, 2023, 08:28

Quote from: amabu on March 31, 2023, 07:04

These agencies made no announcements but accepted my AI images:

·   Designbundles https://designbundles.net/store-register?sref=NQFdTb
·   Freepik https://contributor.freepik.com?utm_campaign=stockeraxel&utm_medium=referral-content&utm_source=referral
·   Mostphotos www.mostphotos.com/en-us/signup?ref=40788
·   Canstock www.canstockphoto.com/?r=87020

Alamy also accepts them.

Alamy does not check image content in general, except if they get a specific request to take down subject.  They will distribute anything that meets technical size requirements since in the end they will download any legal impact on the contributor as er the agreement.

Quote from: MxR on March 21, 2023, 11:37

Quote from: gameover on March 21, 2023, 08:49

Quote from: MxR on March 21, 2023, 08:01
wow... butr AI sales are not to high...

edit: ugly right hand!!

Do you know that there happens to be a plastic surgery tool named Photoshop?

Generating a decent image and AI photo retouching can take more time than taking photos... and you have to pay for AI licenses

but on the other side you have to pay for the model.

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on March 20, 2023, 17:39
So here with us (Germany) there were no problems.

Could also the last few days under the link https://www.alamy.de/myalamy-aim.aspx in my dashboard and also continue to forum.

can you post in forum?  Nothing new showing in last 24 hours and it's usually more active

Quote from: DaveNelson on March 20, 2023, 14:44
Everything seems to be working now except for the forum.

back to normal, 3 puny sales reported today, including 2 with 76% commission.

Quote from: Her Ugliness on March 16, 2023, 11:57

Quote from: stoker2014 on March 16, 2023, 11:27
There are sales, I think it's because I put my video in a free library. Advertising works.

Yes. There are sales. I did not put any videos in any free library.

Conclusion?

Not Advertising works

Quote from: SVH on March 07, 2023, 22:51

Quote from: Jaggy on March 07, 2023, 22:42

Quote from: SVH on March 07, 2023, 22:09

Quote from: Jaggy on March 07, 2023, 21:56
Okay, so help me out here.

Suppose someone on Twitter ... Elon Musk or someone else .... posts my photo. How does anyone know who I am or where my portfolio is?


Do they credit me? Do they post a link to my port?

Customers that would like to use your art and know that they have to respect copyright will find your art and pay for it. Sure some blogger will fetch it from Elon Musk's tweet but who cares? I think both artists mentioned (I was reacting to the latter case) will have seen their income increase multifold by this commotion. But that is a guess because I don't know them personally offcourse.

Sounds hit and miss to me. Mostly miss. I think I'll pass.

Sure thing. So president Biden places my photo and not yours on a tweet without credits. Let's see who's income gets boosted. I am pretty sure it will be me and not you. But you go ahead with your own reasoning.

oh course it will be you, as you are the one entitled to claim infringement and bill/sue said person for it,  Why should i gain from someone stealing your image?

Quote from: SVH on March 07, 2023, 21:47

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on March 07, 2023, 21:34

Quote from: SVH on March 07, 2023, 20:58
Elon Musk may tweet my photo's without any credit any day. It will bring a lot of attention to your portfolio for free. But just him and any other person with millions of followers. Don't really see the downside here, only the upside.

I am normally a friendly person. The two of us have already had one or two arguments here.
But this is now the biggest nonsense that I have read here from you.
How should a portfolio be pushed into any wise if Musk uses your images?
Published images can be downloaded directly from twitter in acceptable quality.

Agree with Wilm, Musk is dangerous and makes his own laws and rules in his own weird world without reference to reality.

Also you Ralf are getting way to political correct here. Again completely unnecessary. I think it's a German problem and you can't help yourselves I guess.
Obviously you can not agree with what I am saying but I did explicitly mention that it is my opinion on the matter. I did not insult anyone here but actually you are now. As I remember we are still in a world where everyone can make up his own opinion and express it. I guess you want to change that? Maybe you should take it up with Leaf then and set new rules for what you think is right that people may or may not write here. I am not worshipping Musk here. I am only noting that if someone with such a big audience shows your art it can be very lucrative and that me, myself and I, would not be unhappy about it if it would happen to me. Get it?

thinking stealing is bad is Political?

Quote from: SVH on March 07, 2023, 21:27

Quote from: Wilm on March 07, 2023, 21:16

Quote from: SVH on March 07, 2023, 20:58
Elon Musk may tweet my photo's without any credit any day. It will bring a lot of attention to your portfolio for free. But just him and any other person with millions of followers. Don't really see the downside here, only the upside.

I do not like to read your words. In the past, it did not help any farmer if his potatoes were praised by the lord of the manor, as long as the lord of the manor earned money from them and not the farmer.
With this attitude and thinking Elon Musk increases his wealth on the back of other people. This is absolutely unacceptable!

It is also not about promoting a portfolio on Twitter. It's about the illegal use of images. Without paying.

I cannot understand how one can approve of a person with such global market power leveraging copyrights. That is illegal!

I also don't know until today why everyone picks on Bill Gates and worships Elon Musk so much. This man is dangerous from my point of view.

You are getting a bit to emotional here and political as well. Totally unnecessary. The only point I'm making here is that if anyone with such a great audience place your art work it's worth thousands of dollars of promotion. Sure he doesn't pay for using your art but lot's of people will because he promoted your work and you will get a lot of attention of paying customers. And yes you can nag about things not being right but I personally would welcome something like this. And I will bet the artist in question will not be so unhappy as well. Even though she complains about not getting paid by Musk himself or being credited. C'mon think twice
But then still you can have another opinion. It's a free world still where we live, isn't it?

so you are fine if someone steels from you.  by the way Musk is not the one who stole, he is the one who is encouraging it

Quote from: Microstockphoto on March 03, 2023, 08:28

QuoteTrue he posted over 50,000 good tips and advice replies on the SS help forum

feck he did, id say 90% was useless drivel.,

generous