|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Andrej.S.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 13
126
« on: November 28, 2024, 02:19 »
LAION owns the metadata and release as CC-BY-4.0
"We do not own the copyright of the images or text."
LAION 5B was completed in 2022 before AI had invaded most sites.
LAION 5B and the previous collections are Open Source
Any future training should exclude AI images. I'm not saying it will, but it should. Part of the problem of scraping for AI is more complicated when it comes to text and undisclosed writings that are created by AI. But here, I think we're concerned with images.
"AI has generated 150 years worth of images in less than 12 months, study shows" https://www.designboom.com/technology/ai-has-generated-150-years-worth-of-photographs-in-less-than-12-months-study-shows-08-21-2023/
Just for interest: LAION-5B contains 2.3 billion English samples, 2.2 billion multilingual samples, and 1.2 billion unknown language samples. Depending on bandwidth, it’s feasible to download the entire LAION-5B dataset in 7 days using 10 nodes.
I hope that answers some questions about the size and access. I think from what I've found, the dataset is free, and no one was charged or paid for the content. Non-profit funding was used for the gathering of the data.
I don't know if anyone has taken a closer look at the LAION-5B dataset. I don't remember any high-resolution images in there, just some thumbnails with watermarks. I mean, if someone had painted the pictures, scanned them and then used them as training material, would anyone have complained? For me, Robert is the epitome of hypocrisy. He complains about the LAION-5B dataset, but generates his own AI images with Midjourney & Co. Clown world.
127
« on: November 26, 2024, 07:52 »
No answer yet… 
Response time 2-3 weeks.
But is $15 really a lot of money for a German citizen? 
Well, my monthly income from microstock has successively fallen by around $1,300 (on average – before tax) over the years. If the agencies now start to reduce the remaining amount for whatever reason, there will soon be nothing left.
In addition, the cost of living here in Germany has risen noticeably in recent years. You are well aware of some of the reasons for this.
I have nothing to give away.
In this particular case, however, it's a matter of principle.
Brutal stats. I can imagine by looking at your images in your portfolio that you were quite successfull back then around 2014 to 2018. Now some images are outdated but not the topics. I think if you would renew your portfolio with the same topics (gardening, interior, etc.) you could raise again your earnings.
128
« on: November 26, 2024, 04:01 »
Downloads up, $ up and running steady... ebb and flow as expected. Just less than 20k images... no AI. Total covering a 6 day period. Mon - Sat
Nice stats!
What's your return per download in $? <1 or >1?
I would guess ~ 0.75.
Thanks. I average between 0.87 - 0.94. As with most things, this will swing one way or the other but annually, that's what it is.
Really good! Respect!
129
« on: November 25, 2024, 18:06 »
Downloads up, $ up and running steady... ebb and flow as expected. Just less than 20k images... no AI. Total covering a 6 day period. Mon - Sat
Nice stats! What's your return per download in $? <1 or >1? I would guess ~ 0.75.
130
« on: November 25, 2024, 17:59 »
I would also start generating AI images myself. But there are problems that I don’t like.
1. Adobe often bans the portfolios of these authors.
2. Not all stock agencies accept AI images.
I agree and ...
3.How does one develop their own style with AI so that their art doesn't look like the work of 10 million other AI artists?
4.If I have an idea before anyone else, how can I avoid having it copied since copying with AI is so easy?
I still sell some of my 15 year old photographs well ... while I have many doubts that an AI image can continue to earn money for 15 years.
Well you can't just complain and whine here and not try to adapt because you had success the last 15 years. Just remember Kodak's ignorance. 3. You can train image models with your own content and create LORAs. This means you use a standard image model like flux and create visual fine tuning with your own photographic style. 4. Just don't create generic stuff, which can be easily be copied.
131
« on: November 25, 2024, 17:42 »
You are asking for all of Adobestock to be a controlled edited collection. Which puts additional burdens on the reviewers or would require content be sent to specialized genre reviewers.
This goes against the principle of micros being open platforms where anyone can join and upload as long as the technical quality is fine.
Agencies deal with the duplicates quite easily with the algos. That works much faster than expecting every image reviewer to also be trained as a needed style editor.
In addition, all agencies create beautiful trendy collections for customers that they promote on their websites and newsletters.
I don't think that the duplicate issues, whether with normal camera or ai, is as much of a problem as people think.
Adobe also has a premium collection for high quality and often very artsy content.
Because spammers focus on duplicating, we all have plenty of opportunities to make money because the genuinely truly new content coming is actually very little.
There is so much content that I am now doing with ai, that could have been very, very easily done with a normal camera over the last 20 years. Strangely many of these subjects are not covered at all, often less than 100 files in a theme affecting thousands of people around the world.
And since the ai spammers do no research, to me it feels like they are just uploading pretty flower decorations that do not compete with my files.
Just my 2 cents.
This is ambivalent thinking. You often complain about copycats, but on the other hand, you don't want Adobe to control the flood of images. The problem with the spammers comes from the fact that there is no control and that they orient themselves to the best sellers as the best guess. If, on the other hand, they had some help, along the lines of: Look here, we still have gaps here, we don't have enough content on ESG, sustainable teaching in schools, special health topics, new creative seasonal images, etc., Then all the Indians, Thais and Eastern Europeans would suddenly do something useful and quickly fill in all the gaps. Then there would be far fewer copycats. Why keep the old system running when you can optimize it? Even back then, Shutterstock, for example, rejected content with too little sales potential. And Adobe should reintroduce this review system.
132
« on: November 25, 2024, 05:04 »
It was definitely the right decision for Adobe to focus on AI content and push it.
But I still see an uncontrolled mass of images, of which only a fraction is needed.
The problem is that about 90% of the content is too artistic and therefore not suitable for the usual use as a photo replacement.
I still think Adobe should hire more trend analysts and report on current trends and forecasts based on previous observations in the monthly update. This would also save their review capacities.
In other words, Adobe should control the flood of content. What is already oversaturated and where there is still little content available.
133
« on: November 25, 2024, 04:30 »
AI is ruining the market for both buyer and seller.
In another discussion I read this sentence: "I was able to generate about 6000 high quality images within about 4 weeks, of which I upscale and upload about approx 100 a day."
4 weeks = 6,000 high quality images
I am a photographer who has been doing stock full time for 15 years (microstock gives me about 70% of my total earnings as a photographer), I have earned just under 400k so far with about 5,700 high quality images (I spend on average about 1 hour for each image for retouching on Photoshop).
With AI, a contributor can now create in 4 weeks what I created in 15 years.
For now my earnings are holding up, but everything is becoming more difficult and I have had to increase my annual production up to 100 images per month. I can't do more, otherwise the quality of my images decreases.
I am looking for new niches, images that are difficult to copy with AI, but what future will we original photographers and illustrators have?
We need agencies to protect us and this is not happening by allowing copycats and spammers to invade the image market and suffocate the visibility of us who have original ideas.
In the last few months I have given up on consistently uploading images to Print on Demand sites, there the invasion of AI images is unstoppable and with the old methods of artistic creation (painting, photography, digital art) it is impossible to keep up with AI production.
I have no desire to become an AI creator, because it can bring in money, but I cannot control my artistic creations: the machine does 90% of the work and the artist with his prompt only 10%. It is the AI that decides the output based on the average taste of people ... and this is truly the death of art, because art is error, art is divergence, art is novelty.
I just don't like making art with AI, I don't feel like it's something I did. I think it's a production of the people who created the algorithm, with their tastes, their choices, their way of seeing the world. Not mine.
Unfortunately I do not see a bright future for us original creators.
That's the course of time, the progress of technology. Do you think the analog photographers in Kodak's best days, who like you, grumbled about digital photographers and didn't adapt, survived on the market? As an experienced photographer, you can create unique images with your brilliant ideas and AI. You can use your own photos as templates. Transfer your unique style to the AI images. AI is just a tool. How you use it and make the most of it is up to you.
134
« on: November 20, 2024, 08:15 »
I can imagine a differentiation of the review duration with regard to the quality of the submitted images.
However, I have not observed this in my own experience since I upload only similar high quality AI images.
But what I definetly observed is a differentiation if the contributor is new or longer registered.
The new contributors are faced not only with an upload limit of 50 but have also wait for months.
The old experienced ones have currently to wait just for some days.
I have tested this with my old account, which is registered in 2010 and a new one registered in 2024.
With the old account I get about 200 images reviewed between 2 and 3 days (people, seasonal, lifestyle content, etc.)
I obviously don't use the new one anymore and shifted all content to the old account.
I would also not be very surprised if the review time sink if you generate higher income for Adobe via more sales.
135
« on: November 09, 2024, 13:42 »
If the decline in sales has started since August / September, it is obviously due to the AI competition with the release of the Flux model.
The quality of AI has now reached studio photo quality with very few generation errors (approx 7/8 of 10 generations have correct fingers/hands, perfect composition and lighting).
I was able to generate about 6000 high quality images within about 4 weeks, of which I upscale and upload about approx 100 a day.
The competition is only going to get tougher.
137
« on: September 27, 2024, 05:03 »
Nice that Adobe plans well in advance. I already mentioned a half year ago Adobe should add more AI functions like inpaint / outpaint with real stock photos. In the long term they should integrate some light Adobe Photoshop functions in a web based app. Actually they also should add the function to generate with other open source models since firefly can't match the pace of it's competitors and sucks a lot even at easy motifs. At the end it's the reason why they add the inpaint / outpaint function. The missing piece of information is the amount that you’re going to be paid for using images or video as a starting point for AI modification.
It could be a very low amount. Or not.
Adobe would be dumb if they would lower much the commissions. Classic images still are generating the mass of the revenue. You would only scare away your current top performers.
138
« on: April 10, 2024, 09:21 »
We also learned that there are several single artists in the top 100. That is very valuable information.
I genuinely thought this was impossible, that you needed a huge production team and maybe at least 100k files to get there.
But some people are doing it with less than 10k files.
I don't need them to tell me what sells. I just need to know it is possible.
Yes the information is interesting but not very informative. We still don't know if it's a mix of niches, content quality or just beeing pushed by Adobe because of other aspects. I haven't seen very successfull ports with less than 10k images in the featured best selling contributors, who are selling just usefull content. Most featured ports look very similar and most of the current AI ports are just a series of stolen prompt lists. Jacob Lund and Gorodenkoff are featured almost every week with over 1 million downloads and approx. 40k ports. But they offer as production teams more high end quality than just useful things. So we still don't know what is selling really good, so that we can invest more time on creating this content. I still believe that very efficient and profitable ports consist most of high quality banner graphics. Graphics are almost always outselling people images. I will test it by buying the basic Midjourney Plan and then creating with Photoshop complex banners with the generated basis images. I'm tired of wasting time with regular images. The competition is too high. If you have not an unique port so that Adobe will push you it's really waste of time. PS: My week is extremly low with 3 downloads.
139
« on: April 09, 2024, 14:02 »
by sharing rank changes we get an even better feeling for - is it me - or is it everyone?
and in my case i think it is motivating that it is possible to move up very swiftly if you have in demand content.
there is always the rumor that agencies somehow "lock you" into a rank and that you can never earn more than some imaginary limit.
my very wild swings show this is not true at all.
i must do even better research, find some more niches and targeted content and then i am sure i can reach my financial goals even faster.
Yes, it's entertaining, and the last part BOLD is what's more important.
The imaginary limits and locks are just people who are unhappy or losing sales and make up reasons to justify or rationalize. No proof needed to post on a forum how the agency is favoring someone else. It's always, someone else gets better placement, some favorite person has unfair higher rank and makes more, because of something the agency does. It's not because those people have better images, newer images, more images, the trending images, or like you do, the successful people search for needs of customers.
"by sharing rank changes we get an even better feeling for - is it me - or is it everyone?"
The number of people who participate is so small, the sample is not enough for any valid conclusions. If it's "me or everyone" then your rank will be the same if you sell 100 images and everyone sells 100 images, as if you sell 50 images and everyone sells 50 images. Your rank, can stay the same number, if you and everyone else, sell more or sell less, because it's just a rank, by position.
One week, you're on top, because you have a great week, the next, you feel like you're down, because either you went flat, or someone else had a good high sales week. The rank can be like the tide.
I admit my rank is a joke and irrelevant. If I go up or down 5,500 places that's nowhere near if you go up or down 100 places. I'm at 28,000 right now. Everyone in the world, with the same number of sales, is at 28,000. If you have 100 sales so far this week, everyone with 100 sales, is identical to you, and everyone with 99 sales, which could be any number of people, will be the next rank down. If you are 4,000 and 100 people have 100 sales, the person with 99 and everyone else with 99 will be 3,900 rank.
I think you can see how a small number of sales, even one, can make a big change in the individual rank we can see. But really, it's a cluster. Every single image you sell, makes a move in your rank. Potentially a large move for two or three sales. So what does that really mean? It's almost like, how did the wind blow and hour ago?
I still say, watching a clock doesn't change the time. Watching your rank, while in general is interesting, it won't change your rank?  There's much more value in what you say: find some more niches and targeted content and I'll add, watch trends, the news and the time of year.
Yes, I understand what you mean. Some people try to use the ranking more as an indication of the overall current situation, to say which way the wind is blowing. So when I see a low ranking, all I see is that the wind is not blowing in my direction. But I still don't know which way the wind is blowing, i.e. which content is currently in demand. It would actually be better if Adobe displayed the number of sales per image category. Or at least not in absolute figures, but relative to the previous week/month, etc. So we are still rowing in the fog ...
140
« on: April 09, 2024, 00:38 »
But it's exciting and depressing at the same time what users can create.
I'm happy I'm not working in the design industry, would be extremely upset seeing what nowday's people can create without any digital image processing skills.
If development continues at this rate hardly anyone will use Photoshop in 10 years.
I know someone who is a former, successful, graphic artist and she says, the business was ruined when they came out with Adobe Illustrator and people don't have to be artists anymore, they can do everything on a computer. I wanted to say, join in and learn Adobe Illustrator? She's still got the skills, talent, experience and brain.
If I see her this Summer I'll ask what she thinks of AI? Now people don't need to be much of any kind of artist, they just type in a prompt and have an illustration. Or don't like that? Alter the prompt, styles, lab settings, and make four more new "original" images.
Well, yeah if you go further back than the real artists, wo had real skills with pencil sketching, oil paintings, aquarell papers and colors, etc. had been really screwed up hard when Photoshop and Illustrator were published.
It was the digital nomad time when digital artists created stuff like logos and webdesigns in Illustrator.
You could get nice earnings with logo designing back then, e.g. about 200 to 300 bucks for one single corporate logo in ai / eps format.
Nowdays it is the time of digital theft. By looking at the discord channel I even believe that Midjourney generates masses of movie and series stills. If you use promptings like "cinematic still, cinematic vibe", etc. the images look really like from a movie or tv series.
I don't believe that the AI is in the current state so "clever" to apply image effects. There must be tons of material of movies that Midjourney uses for image generation.
@Back to topic:
My worst week since months sofar. No single sale.
May I ask where you come from or where you live?
Nobody here in Germany can live on 200 to 300 dollars for a corporate logo, let alone feed a family. The cost of living is simply too high for that.
I'm living in Germany. Years ago you could live even as a design freelancer quite well in Germany. You would not sell just a single logo a month, Rather at least 10 and design websites in parallel. If you're skilled this was easily possible. I sold back then some but not as a pro. But there were some really experienced pros 10 years ago, who could live of it. For example 99designs was a famous design plattform for freelancers. Today I can't imagine there are many buyers. Instead the majority will use Midjourney. There are tons of users generating logos, icons and web layouts.
141
« on: April 08, 2024, 16:12 »
But it's exciting and depressing at the same time what users can create.
I'm happy I'm not working in the design industry, would be extremely upset seeing what nowday's people can create without any digital image processing skills.
If development continues at this rate hardly anyone will use Photoshop in 10 years.
I know someone who is a former, successful, graphic artist and she says, the business was ruined when they came out with Adobe Illustrator and people don't have to be artists anymore, they can do everything on a computer. I wanted to say, join in and learn Adobe Illustrator? She's still got the skills, talent, experience and brain.
If I see her this Summer I'll ask what she thinks of AI? Now people don't need to be much of any kind of artist, they just type in a prompt and have an illustration. Or don't like that? Alter the prompt, styles, lab settings, and make four more new "original" images.
Well, yeah if you go further back than the real artists, wo had real skills with pencil sketching, oil paintings, aquarell papers and colors, etc. had been really screwed up hard when Photoshop and Illustrator were published. It was the digital nomad time when digital artists created stuff like logos and webdesigns in Illustrator. You could get nice earnings with logo designing back then, e.g. about 200 to 300 bucks for one single corporate logo in ai / eps format. Nowdays it is the time of digital theft. By looking at the discord channel I even believe that Midjourney generates masses of movie and series stills. If you use promptings like "cinematic still, cinematic vibe", etc. the images look really like from a movie or tv series. I don't believe that the AI is in the current state so "clever" to apply image effects. There must be tons of material of movies that Midjourney uses for image generation. @Back to topic: My worst week since months sofar. No single sale.
142
« on: April 08, 2024, 08:50 »
I'm currently browsing on Midjourney's Discrod Channel to find some interesting prompts, which I would use as basis and modify on my own.
Found several persons using the describe function with some Adobe Stock thumbnails to generate prompts.
Lol, people are just copycats.
Is someone here using this function too?
... as he says that in the same breath and sentence while saying "I'm currently browsing on Midjourney's Discrod Channel to find some interesting prompts"...
Nah, I'm using this more for inspiration since I'm anyway generating with Stable Diffusion so that I can't recreate a very similar content. But it's exciting and depressing at the same time what users can create. I'm happy I'm not working in the design industry, would be extremely upset seeing what nowday's people can create without any digital image processing skills. If development continues at this rate hardly anyone will use Photoshop in 10 years. Tried it with my own files to check how my images are described and what those prompts then create. Thankfully the resulting files were very different. Same genre but not copies.
I also test my image descriptions and titles to see if they create duplicates then modify my titles to be more generic if the results are too close.
I keep browsing their public explore gallery for interesting prompts, then modify them for my own purposes. I never go for copies, I always want the style and vibe for something very different, often a different genre altogether.
But there is a lot to learn about lighting, mood, composition directions. The more specific, the better the results. My descriptions are becoming longer and longer.
eta
now dropped to 5180
that is a low I have not seen in a very long time
Yeah, it's really interesting to browse on the Discord Channel. I love it. Really great to learn and get inspiration.
What kinda brutal is, how many user are now generating banners for youtube, linkedin, social media, etc.
And the most brutal is, how often Midjourney is generating really good stuff, which looks like it is photoshopped.
What I didn't know about Midjourney is, that you can "transfer" image effects of generated images to another.
Some users are creating complex effects, which normally are created with Photoshop's layer blending options.
I believe normal, boring stock photos / images will drop a lot in sales in the future. One have to create unique creative stuff.
And that's why companies like Midjourney, ChatGPT, etc - should be accountable/comepensate the users they stole their materials from, on a perpetual, recurring basis - the same income they expect to get from having stolen it from other people... the "man in the middle" thing (i.e., they got the images from a "research" company, aka "stealing") is total b.s. designed to try and it make it appear they didn't steal stuff, when in fact, they did, and they do. Their business is based off of theft.
Absolutely true. It's depressing how the photo / design industry is going to be ruined for many. Because we live in a fast paced modern world the quality don't matter much anymore. Many users will just generate with stolen material for their purposes like LinkedIn Profiles, YouTube Channels, Amazon shops, etc. They don't care that the models work with stolen material. They just wan't it fast and cheap. Just wait, soon it will be the music industry's turn.
143
« on: April 08, 2024, 02:30 »
Tried it with my own files to check how my images are described and what those prompts then create. Thankfully the resulting files were very different. Same genre but not copies.
I also test my image descriptions and titles to see if they create duplicates then modify my titles to be more generic if the results are too close.
I keep browsing their public explore gallery for interesting prompts, then modify them for my own purposes. I never go for copies, I always want the style and vibe for something very different, often a different genre altogether.
But there is a lot to learn about lighting, mood, composition directions. The more specific, the better the results. My descriptions are becoming longer and longer.
eta
now dropped to 5180
that is a low I have not seen in a very long time
Yeah, it's really interesting to browse on the Discord Channel. I love it. Really great to learn and get inspiration. What kinda brutal is, how many user are now generating banners for youtube, linkedin, social media, etc. And the most brutal is, how often Midjourney is generating really good stuff, which looks like it is photoshopped. What I didn't know about Midjourney is, that you can "transfer" image effects of generated images to another. Some users are creating complex effects, which normally are created with Photoshop's layer blending options. I believe normal, boring stock photos / images will drop a lot in sales in the future. One have to create unique creative stuff.
144
« on: April 07, 2024, 17:30 »
I'm currently browsing on Midjourney's Discrod Channel to find some interesting prompts, which I would use as basis and modify on my own.
Found several persons using the describe function with some Adobe Stock thumbnails to generate prompts.
Lol, people are just copycats.
Is someone here using this function too?
145
« on: April 05, 2024, 18:15 »
So, back down in the real world.
pos 3450, 4300 files
hi! If these are your numbers then how did you manage to make into Recent top sellers for this week in the Illustrations section?  I don't get it
On Adobe always the last week is shown and not the current one. Cobalt's last week was pretty good.
But yeah I wonder still also a little bit. Her position ranking was under 1000 if I'm not wrong.
So either almost everyone with a better ranking was a photo seller or Adobe does not show the real cash cows with rankings < 100.
Well going with Adobe's rules...
For each asset type we generate a list of 200 contributors who made the most sales in the previous week, only considering their uploads from the past six months. Then, we order the list based on each contributor’s uploads/sales ratio, and the top 10 contributors on this list are featured as “Recent top sellers”. ... I don't think it's possible to get into weekly top sellers being anywhere between position 1k-2k. something very strange here
Yeah, it is a mystery which criterion Adobe uses for featuring of best selling contributors. Probably they consider the portfolio size in relation to the sales. Would somehow make sense.
146
« on: April 05, 2024, 14:13 »
So, back down in the real world.
pos 3450, 4300 files
hi! If these are your numbers then how did you manage to make into Recent top sellers for this week in the Illustrations section? I don't get it
On Adobe always the last week is shown and not the current one. Cobalt's last week was pretty good. But yeah I wonder still also a little bit. Her position ranking was under 1000 if I'm not wrong. So either almost everyone with a better ranking was a photo seller or Adobe does not show the real cash cows with rankings < 100.
147
« on: April 05, 2024, 08:22 »
I am still in the early stages of learning about midjourney. While you cannot get a series with a specific model you can get a theme of files with similar vibe, colors, lighting.
Midjourney people files still need a lot processing, I get a lot of great looking files, then on close up discover all kinds of issues with broken teeth, weird fingers growing out of a neck, strange details on clothes. The experssions are better than on stable, but far from perfect.
But the biggest challenge is to get faces that not everybody has. It feels like Mj just has 10 faces to choose from for a given age and ethnic type.
I am also trying to do more with Adobe and next week I have my first real shooting with a camera again.
But like I said before, the main focus for this year will be ai illustrations and to learn what I can offer that people will then like to buy. Every illustration sale, is a sale I would not have had otherwise.
They are selling very, very slowly, even the holiday files sell slow. But I believe it will pay off eventually, once the initial files have laid their roots across the algos, which will probably take 3 years.
Regarding "number of faces", this is one thing I don't get. I have also seen on Firefly where faces get almost repeated. With all the vast quantity of images these tools are trained on, how is it that they get stuck with a limited number of "faces"? Is it some kind of "flaw in the logic" of how they work? Is it a bug? If you take human artist, say painter, they don't repeat faces in their work, yet AI seems to do that. Maybe it's some kind of short cut in the algorithms which leeds to this? Just curious.
No it is not really a bug. Or somehow you could tell it but it is technical stuff. Because of the diffusion process you get a smoothing as mean result out from million of images. You should try to use very detailed prompts with character describing (e.g. age, ethnicity, hair color, eyes color, etc.) instead of a generic prompt like "a portrait of a beautiful woman". But it won't fix all problems. But Midjourney has some problems with narrow lips for example. You will get always full collagen filled lips on females.
148
« on: April 05, 2024, 08:13 »
Top 100 weekly, top 100 lifetime, less than 10k.
wow this is great! How long have you been an Adobe Stock contributor,if I may ask?
I started submitting in 2016.
Thank you,therefore for less than 10 years and already among the top 100 with less than 10k contents,it's incredible!
It's also very hard to believe,but ok anything can be!
I believe that. I have seen some small on banner graphics specialized portfolios, which seem to consist of almost all bestsellers. Back in 2014/2015 before Adobe Stock for example Anja Kaiser was extemely pushed with her vector graphics by Fotolia. She has a sell ratio of almost 99% of her portfolio I believe. And some illustrations were featured for almost years. https://stock.adobe.com/de/contributor/200564940/anja-kaiserBut today she seems not to be pushed anymore by Adobe Stock. So that I don't believe only keywords and image rankings matter. Another portfolios, who probably still are doing very well: https://stock.adobe.com/de/contributor/200905841/floydinehttps://stock.adobe.com/de/contributor/202483008/romolo-tavaniActually one should stop spamming by generating thousands of AI images but start to create some good basis material with AI and then use Photoshop further to add more details, lighting, effects, etc. This is probably a better time investment.
149
« on: April 05, 2024, 04:03 »
I have read several times here about "bestsellers". Now I'm curious as to what a "bestseller" at AS actually is.
500 downloads? 1,000 downloads? 2,500 downloads? 5,000 downloads? Or even more?
I have one file with over 10k lifetime sales.
But I would consider a file that sells at least 2-3 times a week to be a reliable bestseller, or around 100 sales a year.
The ideal bestsellers is something that gets sales nearly every day.
I do have seasonal bestsellers that can sell 5-10 a day in the season, but then die off quickly when the event is over. And that is usually just for 1-2 weeks very close to the holiday event.
But the most important - can the bestseller lead to more sales of the series? Then the file becomes really valuable.
It is the download of a complete series or at least 3 files at the same time that makes a real bestseller for me.
A lead file that can entice customers to look what else I have on the subject.
10k sales with one image is dam* good. But on the other hand one is quite fragile if the bestseller drys out. Ideally the portfolio should be (like a financial portfolio) as well balanced as possible. And as you said even more ideally the buyers would buy more images from a series when they see the leading bestseller. Currently you can't produce accurate image series with AI. But probably with Midjourney v7/v8 or Stable Diffusion XL 4 it will be possible.
150
« on: April 04, 2024, 06:41 »
On my way back down
pos 2240
you go down and I go up  but I'm always far from you rank,even though I have more content than you,I've been on Adobe Stock for much less time than you.
I don't believe it is the time factor, which is relevant to be pushed up by Adobe.
I think it is rather a well balanced mix of real photos and AI images that is promoted by Adobe.
A good example is the following portfolio (although he steals a lot of ideas from other contributors)
https://stock.adobe.com/de/contributor/201195540/igor-link
but regardless of whether your portfolio is promoted or not,over time sales increase,so time remains the most important factor,as it should be.
a portfolio of 5000 contents active since 2010 earns more than a portfolio of 20,000 contents active since 2020,assuming that neither portfolio is promoted by Adobe.
I would say this is more an image ranking subject. There are long-established contributors who are still living off their old bestsellers, which have climbed a good ranking over the years because there was less competition back then. If one had crap back then 15 years ago it won't help you with new AI stuff. Several accounts are allowed and I'm currently testing with a new one for other various content. But there is a review limit of 50 images at the beginning.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 13
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
