Yes, you can sell items you have previously listed on Flickr. You do not "need" to delete them from flickr.

Another explanation could be that they are penny pinching, using the open channels on Midjouney's discord. Anyone can copy your prompt or even re-roll it/ make variants etc. Midjourney encourages sharing and collaborating (I guess to push up-selling to pros)

Access to private chat is a major selling point of the pro licence so IMHO, if this is the case, these people have no right to complain.

This is of course also a possibility, but I still think it is the same person. The titels (if they are even the exact prompts), aren't really all that elebaorate ("Beach portrait of Young beautiful woman summer holidays"," happy cheerful male graduate going to school on a sunny september day"), and the topic ideas aren't very original, a lot of simple people portraits, so nothing even worth "stealing".

This happened to me last week. I thought "hurray, they are finally catching up", but then it went back to "normal". Haven't even had any images reviewed at all in days.

Quote from: Her Ugliness on October 03, 2023, 08:29

Quote from: Kenneth_17 on October 03, 2023, 08:00

If Adobe truly stands by their statement, shouldn't they remove all content previously created by Midjourney and other generators and only accept AI content made by Firefly? 

What would be the point since Adobe trained Firefly with images created with Midjourney and other generators.
No matter whether you let Midjourney create images or Adobe Firefly - since Firefly was trained with Midjourney images you end up getting images that are the result of unethical practices either way.

The point would be that in that case they would reinforce their words with actions. They say: "We have ethical AI content."

No. Removing all content previously created by Midjourney would not reinforce their actions. It would only make them look even more hypocritical.
Never having used Midjourney created content to train their Firefly AI would have reinforced their actions. But that ship has sailed.

If Adobe truly stands by their statement, shouldn't they remove all content previously created by Midjourney and other generators and only accept AI content made by Firefly? 

What would be the point since Adobe trained Firefly with images created with Midjourney and other generators.
No matter whether you let Midjourney create images or Adobe Firefly - since Firefly was trained with Midjourney images you end up getting images that are the result of unethical practices either way.

The problem with these discussions is that some of the contributors can't be considered real professional contributors, and then the whole debate is completely pointless. (I really tried to write that last sentence without offending anyone. It cost me a lot of effort.)

I often seem to face that problem. People who only do microstock as a side income often seem to have a very different view on things in opposite to the ones who do it for a living and depend on the income. Whenever an agency offers some way to earn "a few easy bucks", the ones who do it just as a side income seem to think "hurray, a few easy bucks!"and to them it's just some nice extra money on top of their income. But everyone who does microstock for a living has to think further and consider "how will this affect my means of living in 5, 10 or 20 years?". We have to think through very carefully if these few easy bucks will mean a loss of ten thousands of bucks in the long run for us.  That's why sometimes is is very difficult to have a proper discussion when two people start out from two very different conditions.

Sadly the decisions of the ones who do this as a side income affect the ones who do this as a living just as much, so sometimes it matters little what we decide.

instead in my opinion they are already doing it

You really think a one-time payment of a few hundred bucks is, somewhere in the 0.0X$ range per image, is even coming close to making up for my future income I will lose because of AI? I am a full time microstock photographer, based on my earnings so far and on and how many years I have left to work till retirement I would have estimated over half a milliion $ in income from microstock for the rest of my work-life - and that would be assuming my income would stay steady, while in fact my income has been constantly increasing with the size of my portfolio. My earnings will be diminished to close to nothing due to AI in the upcoming years.
And you think by giving me a few hudred bucks Adobe is compensating me fairly for that loss? Are you kidding me?!

"Your image was flagged/reported for incorrect usage of the following keywords: gatti gatto seduto. No admin action has been taken yet and the report is pending"

okay,this is really funny,one of my images was reported by "Exyuretrotv" in Dreamstime,it is a photo of 2 cats sitting on a bench and the contested words are "cats" "cat" and "sitting"

crazy stuff!

However,perhaps it's the fault of the translations,in Dreamstime the translations into Italian have always been terrible!

Sorry,it has nothing to do with the topic but I don't think it's worth starting a discussion about this.

Didn't want to make a new thread for this, but I just got this on dreamstime:
"Your image was flagged/reported for incorrect usage of the following keywords: parakeet quail budgie finch chicken dog."
I do not even know what parakeet or quail or budgie is - It's certainly not part of the keywors of the image and neither is finch, chicken or dog. 

Quote from: userpoland on September 30, 2023, 13:53

Adobe Ai has content and commercial use rights. Midjourney has more data for content creation but I don't think it has commercial use rights. Even for a fee.

So Adobe are uninformed and misled or they are sufficiently informed and after analysis have decided to accept this AI pictures? To me is the second.

Midjourney gives commercial use rights.
Every of their plans gives you General Commercial usage rights, unless you are part of a company with more than $1,000,000 USD a year in gross revenue. Then you need a "pro" or "mega" plan.

Looking at new approvals in the genAI collection this morning (bad habit, I know...), #11 out of 17,943,949 is this clunker.

Businessman's Energetic Leap Across Stairs and Spaces, White Shirt Contrast



HOW does this get approved?

I am not only asking myself "How does this get approved?", but also "How does this get submitted?". It's really impossible to miss, so the person having AI create this image must have noticed the 3 legs, right? And wher are the stairs? And, why does this businessman not look like a businessman at all?  What is happening here?  I do not understand people.

Thanks for the feedback everyone. We are interested in learning more about what you like/don't like about the Missions so please keep your comments coming.

I don't like the very short time frame we got for this - The people who were originally invited got over a month, but we got barely a little bit over a week. The pay isn't good enough to drop everything else that I am doing right now and prioritize these missions. But if I had a full month time, it might have been something I could have done "on the side", do a few photos here and there, especially with the food missions I could have taken photos of my family actually really preparing food through the course of a month. Just have them do what they do anyways and take photos while they are at it.
But now, with what little time is left, I would have to go out of my way, buy food and stage them preparing food to get the photos done in time. And for me that's too much hassle for the small payment.

Another thing keeping me from really taking part in these missions is the "we might get paid or maybe not factor" - and it is a very unknown one to me. By what criteria will Adobe accept photos? What will make them not accept them? Will it just be technical criteria like focus or noise, or are there other factors like "we got more photos than we needed" or "we don't like that the banana is green" that might lead to me not getting paid?
 If I do 10 series � 50 photos each and they accept 9 series, but not the 10th, will I not get paid at all? Will the accepted photos still be used, without paying me?
If I had a better understanding of what would keep Adobe from accepting images and what might lead to me wasting a lot of time and not get a single cent for it this would not feel so much like a gamble to me. If I invest the time, I want the money.

There are many "trival" things contributors have requested for a long time, like "let us select an earning overview for more than 1 year timeframes" or "stop the page from jumping back to the top after you move a keyword when sorting them" or "let us search our own port for keywords from the dashboard" - What good is the option to search for IDs? As if we all knew image IDs and would not have to do the extra step and search for keywords in the serach bar of our own portfolios, copy the image ID and then enter it in the serach bar in our dashboards....but it's never happening.
Adobe's contributor interface has not changed one bit ever since I became a contributor. Not a single requested improvement was ever implemented in years, no matter how trival the request was. 

Not so fun fact: When I searched for the not existing opt-out option I discovered that I can't even delete my account: "An unexpected error has occurred. Please try again later".
Agencies are screwing us over so much, I would not even be surprised if they disabeled the account deletion option deliberately untill they can harvest all our images for their AI training.