|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
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.
Messages - Injustice for all
Pages: 1 ... 22 23 24 25 26 [27] 28 29 30 31 32 ... 37
651
« on: March 13, 2024, 10:10 »
yes Cobalt,multipolar world is better for us producers,but the problem is that multipolar world is over. all these agencies offer no real guarantee of an investment of time. Shutterstock is sinking,Istock cannot be trusted,I know you are thinking of reactivating your port in Istock,but I warn you that you cannot trust Istock,they deleted 4000 of my contents in one click,years of work,nights without sleeping,and then suddenly from one day to another they sent me an email,in which they had already made their decision regarding an issue,which in reality did not exist,and they didn't even ask me if I had anything to say about it and I lost years of work,and a good part of my earnings from one day to another. I don't trust anyone anymore,but at least Adobe has already shown us that they seriously intend to continue this business with Adobe Stock,they give us the software for free,they give us various bonuses,better royalties,an active participation here in microstockgroup too,a completely different way to interact with contributors. That's why I prefer to work only with Adobe,I know that I can have a solid income with Adobe over time,and I prefer this rather than giving my work and my time to who? Dreamstime? who don't even deign to bring the minimum payout at 50,or who?Alamy or Shutterstock that you have to hope that maybe one day you win the lottery? with Adobe this year in January 2024 I sold 40% more than in January 2023,in February 50% more,March up to now is more or less always going between that 40/50% more. so there is a concrete trend,an increase in real and concrete time with Adobe,which is not the case with any other agency apart from a few exclusive agencies,but even with Arcangel for example there is no trend,there are no guarantees,yes if you sell it's generally good money,but with Adobe there isn't any IF. I don't want anymore IF in my life,I need concrete things,and after these experiences,also with Istock,which thanks to my work has earned tens of thousands of dollars if not more,thanks in particular to some mock-ups that I created by hand,I drew them by hand,and which sold up to 30 times a day for the first years,and what was the thanks?At the first problem they didn't even bother to ask me if I had anything to say about it,and they did it right at the time I had invested in better hardware and the Adobe plan for all apps,and I found myself in difficulty because I lost part of my earnings just when I invested in the microstock. Adobe Stock is the only serious agency, apart from Stocksy and perhaps others that I don't know,of course AS is not perfect,but at least they do their best to be so,they have already demonstrated this often. I've already written a book  and I'm drifting away from the main topic,so back on topic: I currently have 87 AI contents waiting,some for over 20 days,then due to the bug many show a month,so I don't even know exactly how long they've been there anymore. please Adobe review my Easter contents they are nice!  I never have quick reviews for AI content,but I send a few a day,I'm also busy with real content. and please RaiNews,stop downloading content from Istock,Getty or Pixabay!Buy them on Adobe Stock!Support working Italians!
652
« on: March 12, 2024, 18:36 »
2,but maybe 3 or 4 soon:
if you like to go skating on the thin ice don't be surprised when a crack in the ice appears under your feet,and you slip into it as you claw the thin ice.
653
« on: March 12, 2024, 15:54 »
thanks Cobalt for your reply. regarding AI: yes,I know that you try to do things well,and you waste time on the contents you create,because you know that in the end,even if it takes more time,the curated contents will rise,and the storm of content generated compulsively without any waste of time,with perhaps a few exceptions,will sink to the bottom. quality is better than quantity,the problem is that quality faces a storm and is slowed down,and everything goes very slowly for those trying to produce at least decent content without generation errors. Unfortunately apparently there is no underlying filtering system,for Adobe it is perhaps impossible to separate those who send thousands of contents per month as individual contributors. regarding other agencies: I only upload to Adobe,I think it's the best decision(at least for images)for the moment,I've left the ports active in the other agencies too,but I simply don't think that today it's worth wasting time with the other agencies anymore. apart from some exclusive agencies,like Stocksy or Arcangel perhaps,I don't think it's more convenient to waste time with other agencies. I then believe that supporting Adobe is better,imagine for a second if all the contents of all the contributors would only be in the hands of Adobe,having no competition,Adobe Stock would be able to raise content prices and increase our royalties,unfortunately,this cannot be done because they must remain competitive on the market and maintain competitive prices. The fault of the low royalties is ours,not Adobe's,as long as we continue to support agencies that exploit us like Istock or Shutterstock. if all of us contributed only to Adobe,we could earn much more,but unfortunately I believe that most contributors are more interested in short-term profit,and take everything they can from any agency,but then better we don't complain if we see 0.35 cent sales in Adobe,because if this happens,it's our fault too. I think this,which is why in my opinion it is also important to contribute only on Adobe Stock. about real contents: I agree with you,a lot of real content cannot be replaced by AI,and certainly creating real content is important,I do everything,AI,video,vector,illustrations,editorials...everything I can and that is within my possibilities. lately i am little tired,because earnings increase too slowly,but I guess it could be worse!
654
« on: March 12, 2024, 11:57 »
it is clear that the system works in a certain way and must work that way,there are reasons behind it,because the sales system must somehow favor active contributors,and obviously those who have been contributors for longer,I think it's normal.
Cobalt,how long have you been an Adobe stock contributor?Or rather, Fotolia contributor?12 years?Yes,then you stopped for many years,but your port remained online,and then when you went back to upload your portfolio it started selling a lot more and now perhaps sales are stabilizing.
but the point is that in my opinion,this sudden surge in sales of yours happened because you have been a contributor for a long time first of all,and then there may be other factors.
yes you have 4000 contents,less than me,but you have 2000 content for much longer than me,this is the point.
and I think it's also right,I'm not saying it's wrong,it's right that those who have been contributors for the longest earn more.
I like how Adobe's sales system works,because it is a system on which you can build a business,unlike Shutterstock which is now just a lottery, and I have no longer contributed to SS since September.
regarding AI reviews I believe Adobe needs to do something to reduce AI spam.
because there are contributors who send more than 1000 contents per month, and doing something like this means sending contents without even looking at them,therefore contents full of generative errors,only creating excessive spam and colossal review times.
I can get to the point of sending 500 or fewer AI content per month for review,and to do that I probably have to be Superman (or Flash) because all generated AI contents have errors,90% of them,and all AI content need photo editing,generative fill,generative expand,resolution enhancement,filters....and after even index them,so it is impossible to send more than 500 AI contents per month,those who do it don't care about all these details and just spam.
655
« on: March 12, 2024, 09:20 »
Hi everyone,I hope you are all well! please approve my Easter content too! I had already sent them and they had been waiting for 20 days,then I deleted them from the queue, because I wanted to improve them,and now I've been waiting again for about 20 days. not that it makes much difference I think,because my account is set up to make 40/50% more every month compared to last year,I don't think that if I have 3000 AI contents for sale it will make much difference,because I have to sell what i have to sell, no more,no less.(I just hope I'm wrong) only last year in September I reached position 3210 for a short period,then this thing never happened again. this reminds me of a livestream from Mat from a couple of years ago in which Mat,talking about the importance of having copy space for text in content,showed a photo he had taken of a plant against a wall and which he had sold many times,what I thought at the time and what I still think,is that if I had taken the exact same photo I probably would never have sold it,or maybe once or twice,because unfortunately this is the case,I am Injustice for all,and he is Mat,a well-known contributor who obviously sells more easily anything he does,I think it's normal. some accounts are favored by the sales system for reasons such as how long you have been a contributor or decisions made by the Adobe Stock team,I don't know,obviously I don't know just as no one knows. Don't take me the wrong way,I'm still making 40-50% more every month compared to the same month last year,which isn't bad,at least I see an improvement,but 50% of little money is still little money,and having to wait at least another 2-3 years before having a more solid income from Adobe is becoming difficult. I hope this AI content makes some difference,when I have at least 1000 AI contentent for sale I will evaluate the results. for the moment I have generated 15,000 between Firefly and Midjourney,and then I had to find a way to improve them, because unfortunately I work with hardware at the limits of what is possible,now I've found the way and much more AI content will follow soon. I was rather disappointed by Midjourney,for what it costs it still has many,too many generation errors,very soon Firefly will be the best AI,I have no doubt about it,it is already better in many aspects. so I don't have much AI content for sale at the moment and I have 85 in review. I really hope that with this AI content I can speed up my earnings on Adobe,because time is passing and I'm not getting any younger!
656
« on: November 13, 2023, 18:09 »
Injustice for all:
Useful Posts:+0/-0
Sorry. Btw, this forum saves me more and more time, since I read it less and less. Life is outside from here, for better, or the best.
Since I already asked in the other thread on the same subject, sometimes I think something is lost in the translation and "Injustice" might be saying, there should be a acceptance limit and it should be published. Maybe not that there is some secret limit that's hidden from us? I don't know, but the last post seems to hint at that.
Simple fact is, since Microstock started, and there could be an exception, almost all agencies have had the one account per person limit. One exception was, someone could open a second group account and with others, all contribute to that. Something like Africa Studio and some others. https://www.shutterstock.com/g/africa+studio
1,305,470 stock photos, vectors, and illustrations are available royalty-free.
Alamy, one account, many pseudonyms.
SS:
Can I share an account with someone else?
Your account may only contain your own work and cannot be shared
Per Shutterstock policy, there may only be one contributor for each account. Each account owner must wholly own full copyright to any content that they upload within their Shutterstock account.
Accounts cannot be shared between spouses or other family members. Accounts cannot be registered to the names of spouses or other family members if the content submitted is created by someone else. For example, if a husband and wife are both photographers who want to license their images with Shutterstock, they must each create a separate account. They cannot register an account just to the wife's name and submit content that was created by both of them into that portfolio.
Account ownership or payments can be shared if you have a Shutterstock business account.
Pete,thanks for understanding.
657
« on: November 13, 2023, 07:48 »
Yes, it seems that Adobe started those AI generated "vectors" removal.
Unfortunately....they do it just for files which are reported by contributors.
There is still HUGE acceptance rate for those fraudulent AI generated files.
Another reason to know the limit of acceptable AI content for sale by Adobe per account.
knowing this limit,which already exists but no one knows what it is,I think is important.
in this case,for example,knowing the limit of AI content that Adobe can accept per account per month or year can be a deterrent for the creation of multiple accounts in order to circumvent these limits which are currently unknown.
but this is only one of many reasons,officially knowing the limit of AI content that Adobe can accept per account per month or per year is important.
Mat,I repeat my proposal in case you missed it in the other thread:is it possible to know what these limits are so that people know it,and act accordingly,in order to adapt to these limits?
Do we all agree that knowing is better than not knowing?
There is nothing that supports your idea that there's a acceptance limit on Adobe. The only support is your idea, reading between the lines, your personal translation, and coming up with a odd theory. There is an upload limit, but no invisible secret acceptance limit.
'' the limit of acceptable AI content '' ? ? ?
Please....change dealer.
Guys,is it possible that you don't understand anything? I'm really shocked! How is it possible that no one here understands the importance of having an official limit declared by Adobe on the AI content that can be accepted for sale per month? this limit already exists,because it is written in the terms,and it is also evident given that the Adobe Stock AI collection grows by only about a million per week,it is evident that many AI contents are rejected. then you Madoo,you come here to complain about the illegal multi-accounts that are created and that upload contents that are not allowed,I offer you a partial solution and you also row against me? the point is that this limit perhaps cannot be declared,Adobe perhaps prefers not to set limits,and to have the freedom to act as it sees fit. but the best thing for us contributors would be to have an official limit declared,and I'm more than sure that Adobe has at least thought about it. Look,I don't care,I have better things to do than waste my time. I proposed that a limit be decided and officially declared,to avoid many problems that I have already listed in the other thread,and which I do not intend to repeat again. if they want to do it they do it,if they can't or don't want to do it,they don't do it,Adobe does as they want, I'm sure they know how to act for the best since they have the complete picture of the situation. but my idea is valid,it's a good idea,I'm more than sure that it will at least be taken into consideration. and that's enough,I've already wasted too much time and I don't intend to waste any more!
658
« on: November 12, 2023, 13:31 »
Yes, it seems that Adobe started those AI generated "vectors" removal.
Unfortunately....they do it just for files which are reported by contributors.
There is still HUGE acceptance rate for those fraudulent AI generated files.
Another reason to know the limit of acceptable AI content for sale by Adobe per account.
knowing this limit,which already exists but no one knows what it is,I think is important.
in this case,for example,knowing the limit of AI content that Adobe can accept per account per month or year can be a deterrent for the creation of multiple accounts in order to circumvent these limits which are currently unknown.
but this is only one of many reasons,officially knowing the limit of AI content that Adobe can accept per account per month or per year is important.
Mat,I repeat my proposal in case you missed it in the other thread:is it possible to know what these limits are so that people know it,and act accordingly,in order to adapt to these limits?
Do we all agree that knowing is better than not knowing?
There is nothing that supports your idea that there's a acceptance limit on Adobe. The only support is your idea, reading between the lines, your personal translation, and coming up with a odd theory. There is an upload limit, but no invisible secret acceptance limit.
so do you agree now that there is an upload limit? ok this is the point, and I hope you will agree with me that it is better to know and quantify this limit if possible. Maaaat!!hahahahhaha!! can you see that I'm already on the verge of madness?Please have mercy on me!
659
« on: November 12, 2023, 12:40 »
the limit for AI content already exists,we just don't know what it is,and I think it's better to know for many reasons.
in the contributor terms:
"We dont permit multiple account creations to submit similar or identical content to inflate sales,or to bypass upload limits for generative AI content".
as you can see,if this rule exists,it means that there is already a limit for AI content.
if it is not possible to know this limit ok,but I think it is better for everyone to know it.
They had the same rules before AI, most agencies, including those that don't take AI, have the same rules, one account allowed. Upload limits are real, your theory that there are acceptance limits is just your guess.
is not so,because it is clearly written that it is not allowed to create multiple accounts to bypass upload limits for generative AI content. I'll ask you a more direct question:"Wouldn't it be better for you to know that there is for example a limit of 1000 AI contents that can be accepted per account per month?" for me it would be better,so i don't send 2000 AI contents just for finding myself with 1000 rejections,it would just be a waste of time. it would be a deterrent for those who want to create multiple accounts,because they would know from the start that there is a limit of 1000 AI contents per month. it would be better for those who want to send 10,000 AI contents per month for sale without even looking at them,so they don't. it would be better for not overload the review. it would be better to not completely cover real contents. There are so many reasons why it would be better that I'm starting to forget them! the point is that there may be other reasons why this type of information needs to remain confidential. I support transparency,and Adobe Stock is an agency that has always supported transparency,even if at times it has found itself making difficult and necessary choices which too often have not been understood,here because for this reason that I take the liberty of raising this issue. I believe it is better for us contributors to know a defined limit of AI content acceptable for sale,and you should too!
660
« on: November 12, 2023, 08:29 »
Yes, it seems that Adobe started those AI generated "vectors" removal.
Unfortunately....they do it just for files which are reported by contributors.
There is still HUGE acceptance rate for those fraudulent AI generated files.
Another reason to know the limit of acceptable AI content for sale by Adobe per account. knowing this limit,which already exists but no one knows what it is,I think is important. in this case,for example,knowing the limit of AI content that Adobe can accept per account per month or year can be a deterrent for the creation of multiple accounts in order to circumvent these limits which are currently unknown. but this is only one of many reasons,officially knowing the limit of AI content that Adobe can accept per account per month or per year is important. Mat,I repeat my proposal in case you missed it in the other thread:is it possible to know what these limits are so that people know it,and act accordingly,in order to adapt to these limits? Do we all agree that knowing is better than not knowing?
661
« on: November 12, 2023, 08:01 »
the limit for AI content already exists,we just don't know what it is,and I think it's better to know for many reasons.
in the contributor terms:
"We dont permit multiple account creations to submit similar or identical content to inflate sales,or to bypass upload limits for generative AI content".
as you can see,if this rule exists,it means that there is already a limit for AI content.
if it is not possible to know this limit ok,but I think it is better for everyone to know it.
662
« on: November 12, 2023, 07:51 »
I agree 100%,but that's another question,those who create multiple accounts to circumvent the rules pay the consequences,you can be sure of that,the fact is that sometimes it takes a while to catch them.
I firmly believe that to reduce AI content spam,and don't create this crazy rush of 100 contents in 2 hours,favor review,favor real content,lighten the load,increase the quality produced... for many reasons I firmly believe that Adobe should place a limit and announce it officially.
let this limit be 1000 per month or whatever they want,but there must be an officially communicated limit, so that people get their act together, and try to create more original and quality things instead of starting an "assembly line"
I'm sure Adobe has already thought about it.
Mat,if you read me,try to raise this issue with the team if is possible and if you can.
See if it's possible to have an officially announced limit of AI content per month or per year per account,I think 1000/1500 per month is more than enough,otherwise we'll all go crazy here,including you!
Limits on new accounts are ok, limits on legacy accounts from contributors who know what they're doing - nah
Why implement this limit only on genAI? You can take your smartphone, take literally 10,000 photos in an hour, and send them all for review. That's a lot more than you can create with AI. Yet, nobody is advocating for upload limits for traditional photos.
It's the job of the reviewer to reject all images that don't satisfy criteria. You can't expect the contributors to "self censor" when it's not in their best interest. If they have a 1% more chance of selling by uploading an extra 10 images, they will do it. If someone can generate 10,000 good images per month - this means, good subject, inpainted faces and hands, upscaled with SD ultimate upscale - then great, let them! The issue doesn't come from those contributors. It comes from those who buy a Midjourney subscription, generate 1000 images, upload them all after upscaling in Topaz, and they pass review. The underlined part is the issue. Adobe doesn't have enough skilled reviewers to distinguish between good and bad upscales. They talk a lot about "educating contributors" but they should educate their reviewers.
If it were up to me, I'd delete over 90% of their current genAI collection - it's crap, mostly midjourney output upscaled in Topaz or something similar, no realistic skin textures, and it all looks samey.
There are a few contributors (and I count myself among them not because of an inflated ego but because of the skills I needed to learn to get where I am) who submit proper content, proper technically, proper theme, proper upscale and inpaint. With consumer hardware, it would be very hard to reach 10k images per month like that. Not impossible, but hard, and your machine would need to be generating and upscaling almost 24/7.
Once Adobe recognizes that it's not those contributors who are the problems, but the mass from a certain low-COL geographic region (no racism, just go on youtube and search for adobe stock ai earnings and see who's uploading) who spam their system with their crappy midjourney upscales, and the reviewers who, for whatever reason, allow this type of content in the adobe stock library.
Me personally - I am waiting for an AI-only "high end" stock agency, where such stuff will not be allowed. I've given up hope that Adobe will ever clean shop.
but it's a completely different thing, with AI you can create 1000 completely different contents in a couple of days if you don't pay attention to details and do everything quickly. I'm sure that having an official limit means that Adobe's review system can be more efficient,and it's better for everyone and for many reasons.
663
« on: November 11, 2023, 07:12 »
I hope that the AI upload limits on Adobe Stock are limited to a maximum of 10,000 in a year,or even less,and that they clean up all these images with logos,or with bad generation that escape review.
I think that 10,000 AI contents maximum per account per year it would be better for everyone and also to have quality content in the Adobe Stock collection and also to not overload the reviewers and have shorter review times.
We all stand to gain if Adobe places a limit and communicates it officially,on the number of AI content that each contributor can have each year on sale.
It will not work as people are so clever that they will create multiple accounts to increase their upload limit.
Everyone wants to earn and they don't care how they earn or what spamming they are doing.
Agencies needs to take action to control these stuffs to promote more authentic work and real artists.
Sometimes I feel there is a huge requirement for a Microstock Organization and all RF and RM companies should come under them. Through this they can control pricing and authenticity both. Moreover can also organize a annual microstock meet to reward and also motivate people to work for such field.
I agree 100%,but that's another question,those who create multiple accounts to circumvent the rules pay the consequences,you can be sure of that,the fact is that sometimes it takes a while to catch them. I firmly believe that to reduce AI content spam,and don't create this crazy rush of 100 contents in 2 hours,favor review,favor real content,lighten the load,increase the quality produced... for many reasons I firmly believe that Adobe should place a limit and announce it officially. let this limit be 1000 per month or whatever they want,but there must be an officially communicated limit, so that people get their act together, and try to create more original and quality things instead of starting an "assembly line" I'm sure Adobe has already thought about it. Mat,if you read me,try to raise this issue with the team if is possible and if you can. See if it's possible to have an officially announced limit of AI content per month or per year per account,I think 1000/1500 per month is more than enough,otherwise we'll all go crazy here,including you!
664
« on: November 10, 2023, 11:10 »
Producing 100 images with AI takes just two or three hours?
do you mean to generate unfinished images,just prompts?yes,you can do even more in 2-3 hours,but the work is just started.
I just sent 10 AI images to Adobe and it took me 2 days!
I'm no expert, but I see that many succeed.
They may not be the best images in the world but it is possible to take 100 images in 2.5 hours. Watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cS9N4NqEIs
If I remember correctly there was a contributor here on the forum who had uploaded 3000 AI images in a month (100 per day).
yes that's the mentality,that's why Adobe Stock ends up with a bunch of AI photos with lots of generation errors,because people just want to generate,expand(in a quick way)and upload. I hope that the AI upload limits on Adobe Stock are limited to a maximum of 10,000 in a year,or even less,and that they clean up all these images with logos,or with bad generation that escape review. I'm sure that even if they are approved in the beginning,will then be checked and deleted if the images have generation errors or too much similar,or other reasons. however there are limits on the AI content you can upload to Adobe,so I don't see the point in all this rush. is it right that there are limits,or this is no longer creating but madness. I think that 10,000 AI contents maximum per account per year it would be better for everyone and also to have quality content in the Adobe Stock collection and also to not overload the reviewers and have shorter review times. We all stand to gain if Adobe places a limit and communicates it officially,on the number of AI content that each contributor can have each year on sale.
665
« on: November 10, 2023, 05:04 »
Vecteezy accepts AI generated content,images and videos,I think since September,whether it's worth it or not,I have no idea,but I think it's a waste of time.
Vecteezy's policy regarding AI generated content:"Vecteezy will now accept AI rendered images and videos provided that they are high quality and do not go against our policies and standards"
666
« on: November 09, 2023, 17:30 »
Reviews are moving much faster now. This month, I had a batch of AI images approved in a week which totally surprised me. I only uploaded a little over twenty images and haven't uploaded much since late May due to ongoing vertigo, so my uploads for the year are low. I waited longer for regular non-AI illustrations to be approved back in mid-May, while photo reviews have been consistently speedy. It seems they've gotten the review process much closer to normal now, at least when not uploading hundreds of images at once.
I really jumped into using Adobe Firefly late last month and already have a few thousand to do a second cull through, then process and upload a small fraction of those. I did a huge batch the last few days and hope when I view them at 100% they are as good as they looked online on my laptop. Did a bunch of anthropomorphic animals so I'll have to pay close attention to those paws and faces but from a cursory look the program has really improved.
I find it is very creative. Working on one concept can really get my mind going in so many different directions. I can try out a concept immediately without setting up my lights and buying/building props which is fun, though the better the program gets the worse it is for those of us who have actual photography, drawing and post-processing skills. Given the improvements in such a short time, I worry that it will affect all our livelihoods, although a customer who doesn't have the imagination to come up with a concept will still need someone to create images for them even if they use AI.
I figure it's a skill I have to learn and so far, it's been really fun. Hopefully they'll start selling.
I held off on uploading Christmas stuff figuring it's too late so I'm focused on stuff for the spring and summer or timeless concepts. Will see how it goes. Glad I have time to practice before having to buy the pricier plan because it takes a lot of trial and error to get it right, though I'm getting much faster and better at prompting. It's awfully fun and very addicting so I'm thinking it'll be costly down the road.
yes Firefly improves very quickly,it is still a second beta version,and it is already at a good level,however the generation errors are still many,and when you go to see the images you generated at 100% magnification you realize that are not exactly as they seemed. for the moment there is still a lot of work to be done on the generated images,I'd like to have a residual credit counter visible and on display,for the moment I think you can only see them in your Adobe account,however I haven't seen how many credits I have left,I can't see it,sorry I'm going blind! I'm sorry about your dizziness,don't tell me,I had a terrible headache for two days,I'm working too much,I have plans for a 9 month trip to Asia next year,I hope I can make it,I have to increase my income,and I'm doubling it the efforts. I'm about to send Christmas content shortly before the end of the week,but few,it's a too overloaded topic in my opinion,I don't intend to waste too much time on it. my Adobe subscription for all apps will expire soon,I haven't decided what to do yet,I'd like a plan with illustrator,because in my opinion it's unbeatable,in the past I've tried other open source software but I was rather disappointed. it's a mess!
667
« on: November 09, 2023, 15:46 »
Most important: do something that doesn't exist.
but I want to upload flowers photos!
Why not, today alone 3 flower sales 
plants and flowers sell like anything else,the most accurate descriptions can make the difference. yesterday was the day I earned the most since I've been an Adobe Stock contributor! keep it up Adobe!
668
« on: November 09, 2023, 15:29 »
in the terms of the account and submission guidelines of Adobe Stock:
"We dont permit multiple account creations to submit similar or identical content to inflate sales,or to bypass upload limits for generative AI content".
this is the fact,judge for yourself,the limit is how much AI content can be accepted,and this probably extends to real content too.
the only thing I can be sure,after reading this sentence in the terms of the account and submission guidelines,is that there are limits to the amount of AI content that can be accepted.
what these limits are,whether they are on an annual or monthly basis,or whether these limits are also extended to real contents,I don't know,just as nobody knows.
I reported this because I saw that many complained about entire AI and non-AI batches being rejected.
I have never had any particular problems with rejections because I upload around 1000 content per year,and I have never had particularly long review waiting times.
I agree,quality beats number,but number is also important,and quality is also description and keywords, something that in my opinion is underestimated by many.
the truth of everything is that in microstock making money is not easy,you have to be good,you have to have patience,a lot of patience,you have to be informed,up to date,you have to try to be innovative...it's probably among the most difficult jobs in the world!
only if you really like it can you do this job,and if you are strong enough to reject all criticism!
the only thing that is certain is that it takes a long time to earn significant amounts of money,it is not something to choose if you want a profit in the short term.
then there are those who see microstock as a hobby and is fine.
and then there are people that break all possible rules,they don't care,they just want to make a few hundred dollars if they can before they get caught!
669
« on: November 09, 2023, 15:02 »
Producing 100 images with AI takes just two or three hours?
do you mean to generate unfinished images,just prompts?yes,you can do even more in 2-3 hours,but the work is just started.
I just sent 10 AI images to Adobe and it took me 2 days!
I generated them with AI yes,but then I completely renovated,improved,added particular effects...it takes forever!
photographers and videographers will always be necessary,AI changes the game but cannot replace real content.
let's put ourselves in the customers' shoes:
I need to buy an image,a composition of a Carbonara pasta dish where i can see all ingredients needed for prepare the dish.
What do you think I should choose?
I believe that at least 80% of customers prefer to purchase a real image of a real Carbonara dish,you no?do you want a fake Carbonara dish?ok..you are in that 20%
all AI images are labeled,so there will be no possibility of confusion.
generative fill contents instead in my opinion are more like real content,even if unfortunately they must be labeled as AI,because it is probably not possible to quantify the level of AI used,even if the main subject remains real,it is labeled as AI.
i advise to all contributors to don't give up,then everyone has their own point of view,and obviously makes their own choices.
670
« on: November 08, 2023, 11:49 »
I have no doubt that at the rate artificial intelligence is advancing, stock photography has a maximum of two years left to live. Right now the smart thing to do is to sell all the lenses, equipment and cameras on ebay before it is too late and they become worthless junk.
don't make this mistake! instead look for good real content that can override AI if you want,or start uploading AI content if you aren't already doing so. then it's your life and it's your choice. I see that you need a more "fresh" point of view because I know how difficult it can be to have dedicated so much and then see that today with a prompt everything can be done!It can be depressing and difficult to accept. Don't give up!Instead change and adapt!
671
« on: November 08, 2023, 09:14 »
Still about one month review time for me.
the review time may be linked somehow to the upload limits in my opinion,I don't know how much content you upload in a year.
For example,before AI,I uploaded about a thousand content in a year,and I always had much fewer rejections and shorter waiting times compared to others.
Maybe. But I never uploaded anywhere near the numbers of AI images some people here mention that they do and I never even came close to reaching any upload limit.
Not sure that's a factor. I do not know what it is, but apparently some contributors are treated very differently on Adobe than others.
Could it be that the limits of AI content are different from the limits of traditional content? if it is true that some contributors are treated differently from others,it would be interesting to know what parameters change this.
672
« on: November 08, 2023, 07:40 »
I think the upload limit,or it would be more correct to say the acceptance rate,is on an annual basis,there are several things that make me think this. Yes I thought that from November the inspection situation would start to improve,because there were elements that made me think this and certainly from the new year things will be noticeably better. but please don't read me,because I'm the one who always talks nonsense! I go against the grain,I have never been a sheep and I never will be,I question everything and I don't take anything for granted! common thinking is often the wrong one,when everyone thinks something is right,it is often wrong. Anyway parenthesis closed,we're talking about something else here. I had seen that the results for japan web had dropped considerably,so it seems that Adobe has worked quickly to solve the problem.
673
« on: November 08, 2023, 07:24 »
Answered your other post but putting it here too:
I think it is already fairly well known that there are upload limits. If you join the Discord community you will probably be more informed about this. Newbies have a limit of 50 files and it goes up from there depending on factors that AS does not disclose.
I don't think it's very well known,given the number of complaints about rejections!
674
« on: November 08, 2023, 07:18 »
Still about one month review time for me.
the review time may be linked somehow to the upload limits in my opinion,I don't know how much content you upload in a year. For example,before AI,I uploaded about a thousand content in a year,and I always had much fewer rejections and shorter waiting times compared to others.
675
« on: November 08, 2023, 07:12 »
I think it is already fairly well known that there are upload limits. If you join the Discord community you will probably be more informed about this. Newbies have a limit of 50 files and it goes up from there depending on factors that AS does not disclose.
If it's really well known as you say,why do many people complain that there is all this rejection? Why I have noticed that those who upload a lot of content towards the end of the year have an increased rejection rate? of course there are upload limits for newbies,and of course there are set limits that probably depend on the sales that are made when the system favors you,the level you are at and how long you have opened the account,i.e. how long you have been an Adobe Stock contributor,the latter in my opinion is an important factor. I also noticed that those who opened a Fotolia account 10 years ago,and uploaded few content,let's say a couple of thousand, then stopped uploading for many years,then when they started uploading again they started selling much more compared to those who have more content but have been contributors for less time.
Pages: 1 ... 22 23 24 25 26 [27] 28 29 30 31 32 ... 37
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
