Quote from: Her Ugliness on August 28, 2023, 07:31

Quote from: stoker2014 on August 28, 2023, 06:40

And where is MatHayward, why doesn't he write anything here?

Page 2:

Quote from: MatHayward on August 25, 2023, 10:24

Hi All,

If your account has been recently blocked, please write to contributor support via [email protected] for information on your account. The team is currently backed up, but will respond asap.

I can't speak to your account(s) directly, but I did recently post some important reminders about submission policies such as the strict prohibition of using the name of existing artists in generative AI prompts and metadata. Violating generative AI guidelines can lead to possible account suspension or termination.

Please be sure to review them here: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/generative-ai-content.html

Thank you,

Mat Hayward

"Never submit content that infringes the rights of third parties, including mimicking or replicating their content. "

How can an author know if someone's AI content has been copied or not?

No user of AI can ensure that AI has copied works of other contributors. This is exactly the problem!

Now when you upload an image to Adobe, it says the following:

"Do not submit generative AI content where other artists or artists have been referenced in the submission."

It doesn't say, "Don't submit generative content based on the work of other artists."

Which specifically means: it doesn't matter if the AI copies the work of other artists. But it does matter that the other artists don't readily notice just because their name was used in the copying. Personally, I find this highly questionable.

To me, this notice is dangerous for Adobe from a legal point of view. People will submit works copied by other artists with full knowledge, but delete the hints for it from the IPTC data. Yet copyright law continues to be circumvented.

27 days.

From the website for contributors:

https://helpx.adobe.com/de/stock/contributor/help/known-image-restrictions.html#design-ip

"Apple logos and product designs are protected. Vector drawings and illustrations are also prohibited."

The AS database is chock full of clearly recognizable Apple product designs. Be it the iMac, the keyboard, the MacBook, the mouse....

For example, if you type in "responsive design", it looks like this:

https://stock.adobe.com/search?k=responsive+design&search_type=autosuggest

I see this crystal clear countless clearly recognizable Apple products. Even if the logo is touched up.

I guess Adobe doesn't make that its problem when there is litigation, but instead passes it off on the contributors.

For example, how is a contributor supposed to ensure that people their AI software creates don't match real-life people? That's not possible! Nobody knows that! Probably not even the producers of the AI software! And AS knows that, too!

Content Submissions

Please note: Intentionally submitting content to which you do not own copyright or submitting content that infringes on the copyright of another artist will lead to immediate account termination.

Submitting content that infringes on the rights of any person. Including directly copying or excessive inspiration from work to which you do not own the copyright.

This exactly is what AI does!

Quote from: Wilm on July 04, 2023, 05:58

At least, that's how I see it with calculating the hourly rate. And stand by my statement that a calculation of 5 minutes per file is unrealistic from my point of view.

Yes, it might be unrealistic from your point of view because you do things differently than me. Obviously, you are welcome to do things anyway you want to, but that doesn't mean I can't do what I say I can do.  I can't free-climb Half Dome in three hours or run a 100 meter dash under 10 seconds, but that doesn't mean other people can't do it.

Yes, I really can process 12 clip per hour (edit, grade, export, generate metadata, and upload) without batting an eye.   Actually it is closer to three minutes, but I like to be conservative and say 5 minutes.   How can I do it? Because I have a workflow and system in place that allows me to do it.  And through my online master class and in-person workshops, I have taught hundreds of other people to use the exact same  methods to speed up their workflow too.     Here's a secret:   The less time I spend creating my content, the more money I earn per hour of my time.  It is that simple.  If someone can cut their time to create content in half, they have instantly doubled their hourly income.  It is as simple as that.

Some contributors are like a cobbler working in their little home workshop to create a perfect pair of shoes by hand.  While other people, like myself have more of an assembly line approach where speed and efficiency are king.  You might be building a house with a pocket full of nails and a hammer, while I'm using a high-powered nail gun to get the same job done faster.  You might be an author banging away on a manual typewriter, while I'm cruising along with a word processor to get the same work done in a fraction of the time. 

Why is it that people can't understand that workflow, and the tools we use, actually matter to the bottom line? And that someone else may have a better way of getting the job done.

May I ask what software you use to edit, grade, export, and upload?

May I ask how you generate and manage your vast library metadata, and how you use are able to use older metadate to automate the creation of metadata for new clips?

May I ask how you shoot your footage and what tools you use onboard your camera, and during ingest, that will make you more efficient in post?

Doug,
we've been through this too. At the time, you insisted that there was no money to be made with pictures, only with videos. From that discussion, you must remember that I don't offer videos. So I can't answer the last part of your question.

My average earnings per image are about $125, but that can't be compared to you because I've been around a lot longer than you.

As for the hourly rate, I come up with different numbers because I calculate it differently than you do. We've been through this too, but the amount of time per image varies a lot for me. My lucky shot made me an hourly wage of about $8,000. But I also have many images that have had tens of hours go into them that have not made me a dollar.

However I calculate it, I've never managed 5 minutes per picture.

The least amount of time, on average, is in the photos. Depending on the subject, just pressing the shutter where I was. Or setting up a tripod, making sure the lighting is right, shooting for maybe 30 minutes, post-processing, tagging, uploading, saving data...that was a bit more time.

The vectors took more time on average because I often made sketches beforehand.

And most of the time went into 3D renderings.

My calculated hourly wage is in any case significantly lower than yours. Considerably lower! Because the images didn�t fall from the sky - I had to create them. This time of creating them was fun. But this time still is part of my calculation. And that is the main difference to your calculation.

I upload jpg files including IPTC data. When uploading to AS it still takes some extra time to take care of the most important keywords (which usually costs some more minutes).

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 02, 2023, 13:05

Quote from: blvdone on July 02, 2023, 07:36

That dude used to attack me when I criticized Shutterstock on Shutterstock's contributor forum.  Now he's suffering the same fate as everybody else huh.

Yes. The dude is an arrogant know-it-all type, who was caught with his pants down on multiple occasions.
He was there to sell his "course" to those gulible enough to pay for something that is widely available for free.

He was making ridiculous claim of making $300/hr or something on stock videos, but he didn't calculate his expenses for equipments, travel and his labor hours shooting footages because "he enjoys shooting".  Total BS.  Many end up making less than minimum wage these days in reality.

I remember this "calculation" too.

My highest video sale so far...

Wow! Nice! Congrats to you! 

Last night I was shown $9.81 in unpaid revenue for May - in my dashboard it was $69.40.

Currently, the unpaid revenue shows $79.03, and the dashboard shows $71.10.

No idea what's going on there.

Downloads below average. RPD = $0,99 = above average.

I offer 181.156.122 right now. Might be a bug - I don�t know.

What's going on there? 5 minutes later + nearly 2 million files???

I also have some $0.33 and theoretically shouldn't have any income under $0.38 - but there's no way that's because of the tax form, because that's up to date. All this is now no longer transparent and traceable at all agencies.