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.
Quote from: cascoly on August 31, 2024, 21:44🤣 🤣 🤣
advice everyone should digest if they want enjoy seafood.
Quote from: Injustice for all on August 31, 2024, 10:49Hi,
Thank you Luisa,it's always a pleasure to read those who for reporting the facts honestly.
il pecorino al tartufo vende perchè è buono!
It's true that content that you don't expect often sells more,if you see what my third best-seller on Adobe is,you wouldn't believe it!
I agree with eliminating agencies that don't perform good,as Dreamstime,which have always behaved well,but unfortunately they sell little,the only thing that DT should change is the minimum payout,because 100usd is too much,they know it but they don't do anything about it.
I still have the port on Shutterstock but I no longer upload,because it has become a waste of time like small agencies.
I became exclusive with Adobe,without an exclusivity program,after I broke up with Istock.
Sooner or later I will publish the emails received from Istock here,so perhaps many will realize what Getty/Istock actually is.
In my opinion,working with too many agencies today only results in a waste of time,because whether you want it or not,in the end they absorb your time and are just a distraction.
In my opinion,the future of microstock is with Adobe!
Quote from: zeljkok on August 31, 2024, 05:41Hi zeljkok,
That is very good and concise write-up Luisa; enjoyed reading it.
Some great art there too; "Fearsome Strange Underworlds" really speaks to me
Quote from: zeljkok on February 15, 2024, 21:13
$$$$ sale, 2 years ago
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-iron-mountain-trailhead-poway-san-diego-county-california-140734827.html?imageid=7102A0A7-107E-49CE-925D-A1A4FABE660A
congrats 
well done!
Quote from: cascoly on January 19, 2024, 18:40yes, I did, but it is quite challenging
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/01/19/technology/artificial-intelligence-image-generators-faces-quiz.html
can you at least make 50%? (i got only 2 of 10 correct)
Quote from: cobalt on January 07, 2024, 09:55
I am getting a lot less 99 cents sales and a lot more sales around 1.04 - 1.28.
You are suggesting these may be a replacement for the 3.30 sales?
I don't know, at least with me the sales volume fits the 99 cents pattern.
So, I will try to be positive and assume Adobe is getting more money in some way.
Quote from: cobalt on January 02, 2024, 08:42
2023/2022
I focused on Adobe, where I only had 1300 files and did not upload for 10 years.
I added around 2300 files and my income increased over 900% year on year. Reached a weekly rank of 253 for a brief moment, now back down to 1040.
Basically from next to nothing to months with several hundred and one month over 1800 dollars with 2-3k files.
This year I want to make a big push for video. And also try to ,,activate" istock with normal photos and videos.
Will still submit every day to Adobe and try to round out my port with themes that I have simply never offered.
Especially illustrations, every illustration sale is a sale I never would have had.
I really hope I can activate istock. My old port is still my largest port.
eta: now 1670...hm, need more stuff for spring
Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 28, 2023, 18:31just the free oneQuote from: gameover on November 27, 2023, 18:04
I was pretty curious to test at Runway https://runwayml.com/ a new creative tool to AI-generate a video directly from a prompt, an image + prompt, or simply with brush strokes over an image to specify motion.
The two last posts on my blog https://luisafumi-digitalart.com/blog are dedicated to my attempts.
I enjoyed the ride and I think the last result is not bad at all.
What version are you using? I see free and three more.
Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 27, 2023, 17:18
Machine Learning, AI that creates images does not use the original images, it's not making a composite or taking bits and pieces of our images to make new images. The machine is trained to create new images, from what it has learned. At least that's the way AI like Dall-E and Midjourney work.
The original images are never accessed again when someone asks for a new composition. So the whole, "I should get paid, every time my image is used again." is not logical, as all images of that type, style or whatever else, were used only once, but no images are specifically ever used again. AI is making a new image.
I see the decision to use or not as anyone's individual choice. I have fun making some cartoons or basic illustrations. And that's just as needed, now and then. Personally I'm not going to depend on AI for anything, and I like taking real photos. Hopefully people who pay for using images that I create will feel the same.
Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 02, 2023, 16:26Quote from: gameover on November 01, 2023, 18:03Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 01, 2023, 16:34Hi Uncle Pete!
"the sales rate is almost negligible" says it all. Plus, $300 a year for hosting?
the point is, through the agencies I sell pretty well; thus my "almost negligible" (compared to that) is enough to pay for the hosting and leaves me something for a cup of coffee too ;-)
Not to mention that my huuuge options come in very handy to develop and test my customers' websites before delivering them, and to host there a few E-mail accounts for friends and relatives.
Thus all in all, though paradoxically, it's still convenient - or at least no waste :-)
And in case anyone else or you think I'm being at all critical, I admire your effort and the work that went into the site, making it function as it should, and wish you continued success.
Quote from: wordplanet on November 02, 2023, 08:42
I never tried licensing microstock on my own but I licensed full priced stock back in the day to magazines & web designers who'd find me via searches. These days, however, I usually only license photos to clients with whom I already have a relationship, such as local magazines & various calendar companies I work with.
Even when I licensed stock regularly to non-clients, while they sometimes found my work via Google, they mostly found it because Photoshelter (my site host since 2008) hosted the URLs of thousands of photographers and search was built into both individual websites and also art directors could go to Photoshelter directly and search all keyworded images that all the photographers' sites they hosted had available to license. So I had that working for me ... the effort to market on my own would have been daunting.
It's a shame that it's no longer viable because Photoshelter has easy stock & print pricing & ecommerce built in, and even lets you do image packages. It's still worthwhile since it also provides unlimited storage of RAW, PSD, etc, excellent organization & search, client sharing tools, private galleries, and numerous templates so even this 65-year-old grandma can build & change my site with ease.
I never had the volume I'd need to make licensing microstock worthwhile but IMHO, even when the market was strong, it only ever made sense to license full priced stock because I could provide unique RM images that weren't on other sites. Today, the microstock model has mostly supplanted RM. My only licenses these days are to clients with whom I already have a relationship, done via private (hidden) galleries set up each of them, a far cry from random Google searches.
Hard to believe how much has changed in 15 years.
Thanks for sharing your experience.
P.S. I love that you are making antique looking images like the books and some Halloween images with the latest AI tech. Beautiful stuff! Great idea licensing as image packs too.
Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 01, 2023, 16:34Hi Uncle Pete!
"the sales rate is almost negligible" says it all. Plus, $300 a year for hosting?
Quote from: synthetick on October 24, 2023, 07:33Splendid! the best response instead of whining ...
Nightshade is a tool that performs a data poisoning attack against generative AI image models:
https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/10/23/1082189/data-poisoning-artists-fight-generative-ai/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=site_visitor.unpaid.engagement&utm_medium=tr_social
Quote from: cobalt on September 01, 2023, 17:34Thank you! You gave me inspiration, you were my Muse
@gameover
this is the smart way to do localized ai images. Use a real image as a background and just ai content at the front.
Great work!
Quote from: cobalt on September 01, 2023, 06:22
. . .
In many images the brandenburg gate is wrong, or the quadriga on top etc...
eta
and then there is this image in the search which has nothing to do with berlin, but has berlin in the keywords
https://stock.adobe.com/de/images/bride-and-groom-standing-in-front-of-a-heart-shaped-cake-generative-ai/570122192?prev_url=detail
Quote from: JustAnImage on August 27, 2023, 00:58I'm following this thread and I'm very very sorry to hear these extremely unpleasant situations.Quote from: Konstantin Sutyagin on August 26, 2023, 23:01tut mir leid zu hören, dass es dich ebenso getroffen hat!
I found myself in the same boat. Have been a Fololia/Adobe contributor for 16 years. I had a few AI images accepted, but my portfolio consists mostly of "handmade" photos and videos. Thursday my port was blocked. It's frustrating that there was no warning, no communication, no reply for three days.
Nun sitzen wir hier im Forum zu dritt in diesem leider mit sehr wenig Information gefüllten Boot.
Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on August 27, 2023, 00:44Jo Ann, thank you for the well thought and meaningful post. Quite brave of you :-)Quote from: Konstantin Sutyagin on August 26, 2023, 23:01
I found myself in the same boat. Have been a Fololia/Adobe contributor for 16 years. I had a few AI images accepted, but my portfolio consists mostly of "handmade" photos and videos. Thursday my port was blocked. It's frustrating that there was no warning, no communication, no reply for three days.
So sorry to hear this.
Adobe is wrong in the way they are handling established contributors who made a mistake with AI - and doubly wrong because their review process for AI images is so useless it doesn't catch any of the errors.
This isn't an intractable problem. It requires a bit of attention, possibly some extra staff assigned to the task and possibly some code. When a problem AI image is identified in an account more than one year old:
-Disable AI images temporarily while you investigate
-Email the contributor with the image numbers identified as problems and mark them in the contributor interface. Have a few categories of errors and specify what the errors are with each image number
-Block uploading but leave the account open for the contributor to delete items if that's their choice. Payouts should be available if the balance is sufficient.
-Respond to contributors with disabled images within a week - if their accounts are open, the urgency will be less.
-If the investigation takes longer than a week, allow uploading of non-AI images until issues are resolved.
Established contributors have proved themselves with Adobe Stock. Treating them with respect, even if a mistake has been made (not only by them, but also by the reviewers), is the absolute least they deserve.