|
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 - cascoly
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 170
201
« on: May 13, 2024, 12:42 »
Hello, About a month ago I changed the Data Licensing option to No on Shutterstock. Despite this, some of the photos I upload are still approved for data licensing. What would be the reason ?
are they approved or just qualified?
202
« on: May 11, 2024, 14:30 »
..
Do you have any idea of the work and time required to produce 500 professional quality images (photo, 3d, vector...) of 500 different subjects, for someone who does not use AI?
..
do you have any idea of the time to create 500 pro quality AI images?--most of these discussions have centered on poor quality spamming
203
« on: May 11, 2024, 14:22 »
..
b) If you somehow eliminated that situation (simple solution, don't approve east indian accounts, and disable existing ones post jan 2023 when the media made a co-rodinated annoucement to 'officially' bring public awareness to theft-based ai, even though it's already existed for years, side topic - most high level "media" (i.e., t.v. "news") is XXXX run, and most big "ai" companies (i.e., midjourney, chatGPT, etc) are XXX run -......
your anti-semitic libels are uncalled for (marked in red above), as are your continued slams against all 1+ billion East Indians
204
« on: May 10, 2024, 14:38 »
What WOULD be effective though - is getting companies like midjourney, "research" companies like stable diffusion/etc RETROACTIVELY paying all the contributors for the STOLEN content they used - and then setting up a system where they PAY IN PERPETUITY (i.e., regular monthly income) EVERY TIME an asset is generated using a model that was based off of stolen content. THAT would be effective + fair. It is easy to set up such a system.
Push for THAT.
You're spot-on 
Sent from my moto g82 5G using Tapatalk
it's far from easy since there's no way to tell the address and banking info of the images scraped - not to mention the 'free' sources which have actually stolen images. the questions about scraping haven't been decided yet. but the much bigger question is who is going to actually make such a proposal and who would enforce it? the UN? the ai companies certainly won't voluntarily agree. why bother to propose plans which are dead on arrival?
205
« on: May 10, 2024, 14:24 »
here's what WS says
https://wirestock.io/about-us what we do
Thanks for the link. I must say I am overwhelmed my the amount of detail they provide:
"Here at Wirestock, we eliminate all the manual steps such as keywording and captioning".
That's it. Not a single scrap of information beyond that one sentence. And if that doesn't convince me that they know what they are doing, nothing will. 
they used to have more details, but i couldn't find them. they always did metadat earlier (w variable results) but i havent uploaded since they went to a premium option
206
« on: May 09, 2024, 12:08 »
Hmmm, I guess Uncle Pete is ghosting me or he has no answer to a simple question. Either way, I think that confirms exactly what I thought about Wirestock.
Pete is busy promoting his crapstock portfolio... here's what WS says https://wirestock.io/about-us what we do
207
« on: May 07, 2024, 13:53 »
The AI generation is the dream for incompetent, lazy people who don't even have respect for the word "artist", who were previously only capable of producing photographic craps. Even ignorant kids play to destroy this previous world by using these new technological toys without even having to leave their room, ...
yes, definitely! always attack all the users rather than accepting the world is changing exactly like the disparagement of mobile pix before they mastered the market. resistance is futile
208
« on: May 07, 2024, 13:49 »
I finally decided to start with AI Generated images. I read a few articles, watch a few video and so far the process looks simple
1) Generate image with Midjourney. It look like it's the best generator now
2) Upscale with Topaz Gigapixel AI or Topaz Photo AI. Which one is better?
3) Create description, upload
4) Profit!
What I'm missing?
if the image is sharp & noise free, use gigapixel, if it needs work, use photo AI and then upsize
209
« on: May 04, 2024, 15:01 »
Even at the WSJ they know that AI is destroying what little is left of the stock photography business.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-last-stock-photographers-await-their-fate-under-generative-ai-822d1e6a?mod=hp_minor_pos1
I guess AI is not destroying stockphostography industry. Its just the beginn of mass production for everyone.
As you look at Adobe Stock, never before so much new portfolios have reached first $1000 income at short time.
With AI you don't need an expensive equipment or studio, or take much time to make an expensive shooting with 4 models or more.
With AI everyone in the world can make at least a few $1000s a year without much effort.
But i think the sales won't rise as much and fast than new images.
and your sources for these statements ? how do you know these figures? how many are actually making $1000 without much effort.SS Contributor royalties payable
2022: $38,649,000 2021: $29,004,000
"Working with its growing community of over 2 million contributors, Shutterstock adds hundreds of thousands of images each week"https://investor.shutterstock.com/news-releases/news-release-details/shutterstock-reports-fourth-quarter-and-full-year-2022-financialso average earnings is $15-20 / year or, at most 30-40,000 contributors could earn just $1000. since many make more than that the number is much less. even those best-case numbers mean just 2% make $1000. of course, many receive more than $1000/year these are just numbers for one major agency, but there's no evidence for many making 10x that amount from all their other agencies SS doesn't accept AI, but there hasn't been any indication that AI contributors make more. so the outlook for new contributors is grim
210
« on: May 02, 2024, 15:39 »
...
in another attempt to call out these silly 'worst case' scenarios - i'll bet you $100 that DT is still here a year from now
Make it $10 maybe that's low enough that you can collect in a year? DT isn't going away for a long time.
i'm not so much interested in making a few bucks as in exposing how little confidence they has in their claim. made it $100 so they won't lose money when DT goes under!
Oh I see, you'll cover their loss if DT goes under, kind of like a one year insurance policy for the amount of the protection. I wouldn't pay $5,000 in insurance for a $5,000 car.
...
There's a simple confidence tester and it only costs him Ten Bucks.
(If there's any doubt, I'll back you, for half the $100 loss, no charge, that's my level of confidence) $10 vs $100.
but i'm not offering insurance - i'm calling his bluff about DT going under - if they're right they're protected but if DTs still here, maybe they'll forgo silly chicken-little predictions in the future -- and the bet is open for a few others who think DT will be gone
211
« on: May 02, 2024, 14:02 »
Even at the WSJ they know that AI is destroying what little is left of the stock photography business.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-last-stock-photographers-await-their-fate-under-generative-ai-822d1e6a?mod=hp_minor_pos1
they start by comparing today with the 70s: Top photographers in the 70s, 80s and 90s routinely earned thousands of dollars from ad agencies, record labels and media companies for one photo. Life was gooduntil digital photography changed everything.and the overblown headline doesn't match the moderately optimistic view of the article, they never say AI is destroying stock - but that much of the 'damage' had already occurred and describe some of those adapting to the new reality.
212
« on: May 01, 2024, 15:19 »
I am happy to report I have now crossed the quarter million dollar earnings threshold at Shutterstock.
That's an average of $27.06 per download.
That's an average of $23.80 per video in my portfolio.
The earnings just keep rolling in.
How many images you have in your Port?
hard to accept their questionable claim as a newbie without a portfolio, so w/o a link doesn't matter what numbers they post and remember this is the same guy who last year they were making $348/hr! and besides, i've made $666,000 so far with my NFT w more sales every day
213
« on: April 30, 2024, 12:24 »
...
in another attempt to call out these silly 'worst case' scenarios - i'll bet you $100 that DT is still here a year from now
Make it $10 maybe that's low enough that you can collect in a year? DT isn't going away for a long time.
i'm not so much interested in making a few bucks as in exposing how little confidence they has in their claim. made it $100 so they won't lose money when DT goes under!
214
« on: April 30, 2024, 12:20 »
@blvdone  I save time,and time is money,better to lose 50usd than continue to waste time there!
@cascoly I'm more than sure they will never lower the minimum payout,but tell me if I may ask,how much content do you have there,and how much do you earn in a year?Do you sell a lot of AI there?
i've got about 30K images, only about 150 ai so far. upload i easy, so i continue even though returns are low
215
« on: April 29, 2024, 12:50 »
another reason for staying with DT is they're one of the few agencies that accepts AI images
216
« on: April 29, 2024, 12:49 »
Guess what? I had a huge $2.00 photo sale yesterday and am closer to the $100 payout threshold now. I may be able to cash out before they may go out in the worst case scenario. Fingers crossed!! But it's a tough decision to either immediately cash out once my balance hits $100 or keep going above $100. Because if I cash out at $100, I don't know how long it'll take to get to $100 again. If I keep it going above $100, if Dreamstime suddenly cease the operation, there's no guarantee I'll get my balance back. I'll probably cash out at $100 and delete my port to be safe. I can get like 20 Big Mac for $100. Can't risk that. If the payout minimum was $25, I would definitely keep going.
in another attempt to call out these silly 'worst case' scenarios - i'll bet you $100 that DT is still here a year from now
217
« on: April 29, 2024, 12:43 »
you don't do olympics with olympic rings or anything copyright related
...
same like for content that supports the superbowl time, world football competitions, the oscars etc...there is also something you can do that is free of copyright but works for these events
at one point the Olympic committee sued the Olympic national Park here in Washington (capital Olympia) for trademark violation. my company name CAScadeOLYmpics (2 mtn rages seen from seattle)has been safe so far
218
« on: April 26, 2024, 13:12 »
but yes,AI-real-hybrids,who cares?
I try to do everything I can,with the means at my disposal....
....
we need greater clarity,or despite having these magnificent tools at our disposal,we end up limiting our creativity for fear of consequences.
fine by me -- less competition from those who bemoan AI but don't do anything to change
219
« on: April 25, 2024, 20:45 »
@DiscreetDuck
...let's try to understand for example how to behave or when to label AI content and when not,and what we can do and what not.
Adobe should name "AI generated Images", and exclude any of them from the term "Photo".
Playing on ambiguity, they don't really want to separate the naming of these two types of content. Guess why...
What would Adobe say to photography contributors who don't want to use AI? Either you produce with AI, or your content will be permanently drowned? (by photos that are not)
Is unfair competition still a relevant concept?
photos (digital) are created by capturing light in sensors - 'ai generated' are created by mining those 'photos' buyers don't care - they want something that fits their needs - technicalities don't matter & stock agencies recognizer this, even if luddite 'photographers' continue to fight the last war shift happens - join or wither
220
« on: April 23, 2024, 19:36 »
...
Even with just one AI-generated pixel,do I still have to label the content as AI?
don't underestimate single pixels --after all, the sophons are omniscient proton-sized nanobots
the 3-body problem!:D ok you've definitely already seen fallout!  I just recently saw that the 5th season of StarTrek Discovery is out,later I'll start the free trial via Amazon Prime,since i have already used the free trial in Paramount!
anyway yes,I wondered if something had changed since Mat's last livestream,however it would be interesting if we could have a checkbox for content where we can declare that the subject is real,because it's a shame to have to label content as AI if only an abstract background is added for example,who knows maybe in the future!
Here is the official policy per our learn and support page on generative AI about when to tag as AI and when it is not necessary.
Does the use of Generative Fill and Generative Expand in Photoshop and Generative Recolor in Illustrator require labelling an image as generative AI?
Label your image as generative AI when the use of generative AI tools in Photoshop or Illustrator changed, augmented, or added a new primary subject of an image.
Examples when to label your image as generative AI:
Generating new additions, such as a new person, animal, or object
Adding new subjects might compromise the accuracy of an image
Making significant adjustments or changes to a human subject in an image
Recoloring the primary subject of an image
Examples when you wouldnt be obligated to label an image as generative AI:
Extending background for any reason
Removing IP or other forms of retouching
Removing distracting objects or people
Recoloring the background of an image
so, basically, common sense!
221
« on: April 23, 2024, 15:27 »
...
Even with just one AI-generated pixel,do I still have to label the content as AI?
don't underestimate single pixels --after all, the sophons are omniscient proton-sized nanobots
222
« on: April 23, 2024, 13:39 »
If it was my food magazine I would make an important point that everything we print or write about is real content. It would be a major point for us.
There will be other magazines that don't care and that is their choice.
true, but we already have this problem with 'real' images - several instances recently where photos of older protests are presented as taking place now ( sometimes the photos are not even from the same country) or with deepfakes that use traditional photoshop techniques
223
« on: April 23, 2024, 13:34 »
does this mean AS uses none of its editorial collection in training?
perhaps because AS has a stricter definition of 'editorial' th an some other agencies, it accepts some images as commercial that others would label editorial (eg, some crowd scenes, or images with identifiable people in the background.
224
« on: April 23, 2024, 13:27 »
The days of stock images as a means of subsistence are numbered, we are much closer to the end than we imagined.
even before AI appeared, many us held this was the case - witness the stories in the 'days of yore' thread. the 'end' is behind us
225
« on: April 23, 2024, 13:15 »
...
Photography is different from ALL other arts because it requires a drawing from reality, an imprint of reality.
If it doesn't come from reality it's not photography, it's something else. Call it by another name.
the map is not the territory something that comes 'from' reality, or an 'imprint' of reality cannot be called 'real'
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 170
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
