Edit: wanted to add that it's very hard to tell at miniature size so I might have given some (too many) AI photos the benefit of the doubt probably... 

Yes, but the stem of a glass, coming out of someones thumb tends to look like AI? Her hand looks like a fist and has a distorted shape. It's not what I'd say is a natural way someone would hold a wine glass. The bubbles if champagne or if that's supposed to be condensation if something else, look artificial.

OK I'll play, but considering the images are too small and I'm not going to waste lot of time looking closer. 7-14-21 are real, the rest are much like AI might produce.

Yes I confess, I am unethical and greedy, I use a digital camera and photoshop my images. 

Customers are not supposed to be people who create images, customers are the ones who choose a photography by seing a thumbnail, that they click then decide to buy. The competition between real photography and AI illustrations that look real takes place from the thumbails. If we do think as a customer, there is no care of what happens at the pixel scale of the photo, in the majority of cases. Of course, it's harder to find out if it's real or AI with thumbnails. But the question is to detect if the images have comparable merchant potentials. My (our) main concern is to assess the competitive aspect (and yes first, we are competitors all here). And I find it hard to believe that in the stock photography industry, traditional photography will be able to survive the AI ​​tsunami. The fight is truly unequal and unethical.
But I would be happy to know that others oppose this AI surge, and prefer not to follow this deadly panacea. Since the generation by the AI ​​will completely do without the human, it is the next step, there will be no more intermediary. Even no more ChatGPT professionnal prompters. The stock photography platforms will then be autonomous.

I confess, I need money too for a living 

[...] AI is not replacing you "doing" images. You use AI to make your images.
[...] you should give a try and learn the new processes too. After all you use these days more the PC with email/internet and not letters with post riders.

My reason is more ethical than technical. And I can have a relevant opinion on multiple things without even having to try them.
But true, the question is doing real photographs instead of AI images, I go change the word in my post.
Whatever, you're welcome to participate to the game I proposed, since you come and write here

A day is a twenty-four-hour period, from one midnight to the next. It would be troublesome if European nights did NOT occure each day.

23 hours 56 minutes. There are schools and teachers here where I live 

Really, this is even more interesting than I imagined. Of course, I have (for the moment) a lead over you and that's not the goal, but you will see later that it is a real source of lessons, especially when you detail the reasons for your choice.
Thank you for your participation and patience, because the more participants there are, the more we will get a clearer idea about ​​the question of AI vs traditionnal photography.
And I can tell you that even knowing behind the scenes, I measure my inability to discern 100% reliably.

Here is a structure for the answers. You can copy and paste
1- Reality / AI
2- Reality / AI
3- Reality / AI
4- Reality / AI
5- Reality / AI
6- Reality / AI
7- Reality / AI
8- Reality / AI
9- Reality / AI
10- Reality / AI
11- Reality / AI
12- Reality / AI
13- Reality / AI
14- Reality / AI
15- Reality / AI
16- Reality / AI
17- Reality / AI
18- Reality / AI
19- Reality / AI
20- Reality / AI
21- Reality / AI

Show Adobe the way to light and truth

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on June 08, 2023, 11:47

Quote from: Injustice for all on June 08, 2023, 11:20

Maybe I'll start complaining when I won't earn anymore!

just maybe the same difference between screaming before the accident and screaming in the grave 

you mean maybe,wrap your head before you break it!

YOU "said":

Maybe I'll start complaining when I won't earn anymore!

I just wanted to suggest that it would be too late. Nothing more, nothing less. I like anticipating, more than sheeps do 

I think that in some cases, approval ratio is just perfect! Massive satisfaction about acceptations of gen AI here, just an exemple:
https://stock.adobe.com/search/images?filters%5Bcontent_type%3Aphoto%5D=1&filters%5Bcontent_type%3Aillustration%5D=1&filters%5Bcontent_type%3Azip_vector%5D=1&filters%5Bcontent_type%3Avideo%5D=0&filters%5Bcontent_type%3Atemplate%5D=0&filters%5Bcontent_type%3A3d%5D=0&filters%5Bcontent_type%3Aimage%5D=1&filters%5Bcontent_type%3Aaudio%5D=0&filters%5Binclude_stock_enterprise%5D=0&k=eiffel+paris+generative+AI&order=relevance&safe_search=1&limit=100&search_page=1&search_type=asset-type-change&acp=&aco=eiffel+paris+generative+AI&price%5B%24%5D=1&get_facets=0

But here are the guidelines:
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/generative-ai-content.html :
Don�t: Submit works depicting real places, identifiable property (e.g., famous characters or logos), or notable people (whether photorealistic or - even caricatures).

Lost in the rules at Adobe Stock, but human reviewers may know them well.
Not sure that - So old-fashioned - real photographies will still be accept in a near future.

It's late here

ADOBE, we pray for you!

Please, vote for my post!

I trust Adobe.

Tha'ts all they want from sheeps, before they invite them in a plate.

.