Declined files that I reprocessed by upsizing with stable and uploaded in smaller size have now been accepted.
@ andrej
The reason. agencies will need content produced by regular contributors with ai is the same they want it for photos - they need an amazing diversity of content and subjects from the entire planet.
You cannot do research on EVERYTHING and just work with paid artists who do work for hire jobs.
It is much easier to have masses of uploaders, pick and choose what you need for different customer groups.
If the "free image" sites did not replace us, neither will ai.
I do think agencies will work with specialized ai producers more closely for elite collections. In the same way they do it with photos now.
There are collections at all kind of price points and licensing. types.
Also...for ai training agencies will keep needing huge amounts of freshly uploaded content, maybe even more than before.
You make valid arguments that I would like to respond to.
[1. Photo providers with free images haven't ruined the microstock market yet]
In my opinion, the reason for this is because many users would have used these free, some very professional photos from for example unsplash, but they heard and found out that there are many black sheep, who try to rip-off users through expensive warning letters from lawyers with whom they cooperate.
So they rather invest 2 to 5$ for an image on providers like Adobe to avoid copyright infringements and have quiet nights without insomnia.
[2. Agencies will need content produced by regular contributors]
Absolutly right. But they neither need millions of new images, which are copycats of historic generic bestsellers or content, which obvious won't find any or very few customers. With AI it is extremly easy to generate mass of such copys.
I don't believe they will need every content and subjects on the earth.
They will even more need creative concepts of current trends like diversity, sustainability, environmental awareness, home office work, ethical consumption or new coming global trends. I can't imagine they still need the million and one easter background or close up of a cocktail on a beach bar.
And that is exactly the bridge to:
[3. Agencies will work with specialized ai producers more closely for elite collections]
That's actually roughly what I meant.
First they will try to work more together with skilled photographers, who can produce elite content, which can't be generated by AI.
And second for sure with a small fraction of very skilled AI contributors, who can create very original content with professional image und retouche editing.
[4. It is much easier to have masses of uploaders, pick and choose what you need for different customer groups]
In earlier times, before the mass flood of images, absolutely yes.
But nowadays it's becoming increasingly difficult to pick out exceptional good images from the masses.
That's why it would only make sense to concentrate on contributors (point 3) who provide on usual very demanded content.
[5. Agencies will keep needing huge amounts of freshly uploaded content for ai training]
This is an interesting and valid argument. Probably they will accept in future only content, which can increase the quality of the AI generator.
That would be rather specific motifs.
Or they could resell their storage with unwanted stuff, which haven't been sold for years in the past, to smaller tech companys, who want to develop own AI models and avoid copyright infringements. This could also be an additional source of income for the agencies.
@ Back to topic:
The resolution has also an impact of the acceptance ratio.
I upscale now the AI images first 4x, retouche obvious artefacts or generative errors and scale down by approx 0.6 to max. 0.75. The max. resolution is then 5376 x 3072 pixel.
I believe most time the problem is the upscale noise, generated by Topaz AI. Upscayl seems to generate less noise but the images are sometimes over-sharpened.
Show Posts
