I'm not sure whether this has been noted before, but this short film about AI, largely made with AI, is quite interesting:



Here's The Guardian article on it:

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2023/dec/05/wizard-of-ai-artificial-intelligence-alan-warburton-dangers-film

Lots of terms new to me - "Wonder Panic"!

You have to apply for Exclusivity for each separate media - photography, illustration and video. You must have just applied for photography.

Congratulations!

Getty used to do this - it was called Photographer's Choice.

Back then you could make so much from a good, useful image that it may well have been worth it.

https://stock.adobe.com/fr/contributor/211252585/robert-meyner

Those are amazing images. Ironic that the stock business model that everyone was told to follow - shoot people - is going to be the first sector to be consumed by AI.

You always get one of those emails when they�re about to pay you, so you should receive your money shortly.

I thought you could apply and they�d judge you on your submitted work, but I may be wrong.

And this is how it�s going to be rolled out to the masses:

https://techcrunch.com/2022/10/12/microsoft-brings-dall-e-2-to-the-masses-with-designer-and-image-creator/

What's interesting experimenting with this technology is what it's good at and what it's bad at.

I think it'll eventually become really good at lifestyle stuff - beautiful woman sitting in private jet, eating a bowl of salad etc. for instance. So those type of photographers are screwed.

Imagined images and illustrations - those artists are largely screwed.

Generic landscapes - misty forests, dramatic mountain ranges, green farmland. Those photographers are screwed.

What it's really bad at is named locations. It doesn't seem to be able to produce decent realistic images of Big Ben or Mt Everest or the Taj Mahal because those images require a single viewpoint and you can't combine images without it looking very odd.

This sort of thing is the reason agencies are rejecting this kind of content, because someone is going to get sued for a lot of money somewhere:

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/09/artist-finds-private-medical-record-photos-in-popular-ai-training-data-set/

It is very impressive, but it is using pre-existing images at some point in the creation process.

Photographers and illustrators need to be paid for the use of those images, unless they've been donated.

Inevitably, it'll be like Pinterest and other tech start-ups - steal and never say sorry.

iStock / Getty accept cityscapes with multiple logos that aren't too dominant. You'll need at least 5 different ones in a scene I would guess.

You�re not a journalist, you�re a blogger. This referral business neatly illustrates the difference between the two. Journalists are generally held to a much higher standard which your referral links negate.