For my test I updated a few images. I did chop off the last 7 keywords or so. I agree that 45 is more than enough and most of my images only have 25-35 words. The weighted sort is a nice choice.

Looks good.

Quote from: cascoly on January 13, 2024, 13:35

I didn't think amazon supported digital delivery - how are these images being sold?

Prints on canvas, printed coffee mugs, calendars, postcards, printed mousepads and so on and so forth...

If it's one of the POD sites, they don't pay for the license, until something is sold. They use the thumbnails for free to advertise.

Really? Do these people have inventory or are they shops like FAA that have an Amazon store. Highly unusual.

You mean one like this, or something else?  https://www.amazon.com/stores/page/F4E82D18-8DF0-4087-95FC-1070C75CF5EB/?_encoding=UTF8&store_ref=SB_A0367353WSK8MBPG929W&pd_rd_plhdr=t&aaxitk=05e19d141be29abf039f6ce8f30fcdd0&hsa_cr_id=9878709820001&lp_asins=B0897W64GZ%2CB08DK2Q6H5%2CB08D6VXJ8H&lp_query=amazon%20coffee%20mugs%20on%20demand&lp_slot=auto-sparkle-hsa-tetris&ref_=sbx_be_s_sparkle_lsi4d_ls&pd_rd_w=WxMbb&content-id=amzn1.sym.417820b0-80f2-4084-adb3-fb612550f30b%3Aamzn1.sym.417820b0-80f2-4084-adb3-fb612550f30b&pf_rd_p=417820b0-80f2-4084-adb3-fb612550f30b&pf_rd_r=FM2G86J1H096TMR35346&pd_rd_wg=J6R8o&pd_rd_r=68f32856-391b-4d15-b79c-e9cf16b79aa4

Not sure how long there have been Premium AI images - $249.99 for large, $119.99 for small.Why on earth would a buyer pay that much for AI generated stuff? None of the typical reasons for the premium collection apply to genAI images. Nothing at all wrong with this image BTW, other than the price

Premium AI images? There's something that just seems all wrong about that.

I want to share my custom keywords generator.
I've used it for thousands of stock images I've published in the last year with great results.

It's quick and easy to use,
generates a list of keywords and a breakdown for each keyword with amount of results.

it's free, try it here:

https://upstock.guru/keyword_checker

Interesting. I like the 45 words and they appear to be ranked by how many images and uses. The keyword separator works with my Breeze Browser Pro, some of the others, if I copy a word set, and there is no space after the comma, it makes one big mess and only one word. Nice!

Looks like Shutterstock images? The database doesn't include "all" images. Did you have to pick what you wanted to include?

It works. Next image I'll give it a try for real.

Quote from: Uncle Pete on January 11, 2024, 14:50

Just for comparison, what percentage of real photos have been sold from the entire collection?

AI in so much alike and so many that more of the same helps no one. Not us or the agency. When does Adobe say, enough is enough? At 66 Million or when the new images change nothing for the volume of downloads? There has to be a wall.

According to the Adobe search engine in total around 194 million of the 242 million classic photos and illustrations were never sold.
This corresponds to a share of almost exactly 80%.
Conversely, 20% were sold at least once.
In my view, this is a plausible result and can often be observed as the Pareto principle in markets with very unequal concentration distributions.

It is possible that the AI images will sell better in the future after there has been a market shakeout of the bad skilled contributors.
But I'm also very curious to see whether Adobe will close the floodgates for AI content this year.
I can't imagine that they can manage 2 to 3 million new images every few weeks in the long term.
I also fear that the ranking and keyword order will suffer damage. There are so many images either with the wrong tags or in the wrong categories.

All in all I am surprised that nobody tries to individualize the Midjourney image look with own filters.
It's like a collective frenzy at the moment, who can generate more content.

20% of the entire collection with at least one sale is an amazing number. Although people here, have listed their stats for sales, and are higher than that. I'm lower.

Keep in mind that a number of agencies and other places, offer AI image creation, directly for consumers. Anyone can go to many of those and make their own images, get just what they want, without artists, so they don't need to buy one from a stock site.

I have to laugh that you worry about rank, tags and keywords. I think we've been writing the same thing about stock sites since I started and that was 17 years ago. Spam keywords, deceptive tags, just plain wrong locations and tags, and never in the whole time of guessing how image ranks work, has anyone come up with anything that shows a benefit to keyword spam, or incorrect information that leads to more sales or better rank. In fact, if the system works at all, bad data would harm the rank of images with spam or inconsistencies.

Use Alamy clicks and views, and zooms and sales, as a starting point how other agencies are likely to rank images. Too many negative results and the image drops in rank. I don't think any of this is as simple as views and sales, it would be illogical to think and agency is that thoughtless to have some simple rudimentary system.

And then there are the "secret" reviewers rank, when an image is uploaded. Might be AI now, but you could upload 20 of the same image, and one of them will be ranked much higher, show pages higher, and come up more often in a search. Wouldn't they all be equal? Uploads have a rank, before they are live on the site. Spam, bad work, marginal content and junk files, won't have a higher than average starting rank.

We have now reached over 33 million AI photos and illustrations on adobe stock.
Of these, less than 3 million have been sold, which corresponds to a share of just 7%.

The majority is therefore literally data garbage that has no buyers.

@Cobalt
I think that there will no longer be a market for generic motifs (people, life style, interior, etc.) and that this will be completely replaced by the stock providers' own AI models.

Where there is still some market potential are only niches, where AI can't produce high detailed images without errors.
Contributors like https://stock.adobe.com/de/contributor/205024019/ipopba are now melking for short future the current demanded niches.

Some successful contributors specialized on generic motifs have already switched to the video market in time.

Just for comparison, what percentage of real photos have been sold from the entire collection?

AI in so much alike and so many that more of the same helps no one. Not us or the agency. When does Adobe say, enough is enough? At 66 Million or when the new images change nothing for the volume of downloads? There has to be a wall.

Quote from: stoker2014 on January 09, 2024, 13:48

Or are you trolling and flooding?

Are YOU trolling or flooding?

 

I don't think someone should have to explain a joke or humor, especially if the person who doesn't "get it" reacts with insults and can't see past their anger.

There will be NO being silly here. ALRIGHT? 

None, you hear?

My favorite foil is aluminum.

Quote from: Her Ugliness on January 09, 2024, 02:03

Quote from: Mifornia on January 08, 2024, 22:36

Where can you check your acceptance rate and rank as a seller? Thanks in advance for reply, can�t figure out where to find tjose

I do not think Adobe shows you your acceptance rate, you have to keep track of that yourself.
But your rank you can see on the upper left corner of your dashboard. You have to select a timeframe (week, month, year, all time)  from the drop down menu and then it will show you your rank for that time.

weird -  it shows rank for lifetime & this week, but not for month or this year

do we know how many users are?  my rank this week is about 9000 - month or year would be more useful

lifetime won't change much, week is too random

I wasted a month or two watching that. Your summary is right. Besides, rank means nothing for sales or searches. It's just for our personal entertainment. Maybe an ego boost for some, but I know mine isn't.    I'm firmly locked in at lifetime = 25,100th. Only number anyone I know has said that's lower, is no rank.

I've hit a bit of a snag with my AI-generated content. Lately, about 75% of my stuff is getting the thumbs down, even though I'm using the same tools and upscaler as always. I get that Adobestock is all about top-notch images, and that's 100% the way is SHOULD be. But this sudden drop in acceptance in 2024 feels like a seismic change.  Something's definitely up.

Maybe it's something with DALL-E or Topaz Photo AI, or maybe Adobestock have changed their game. It would be super helpful to get the lowdown on this. Knowing what's going on would let me tweak my process and set my expectations right for what Adobestock is looking for now.

You may be correct, that the standards have changed. I have things that I uploaded in recent years, not AI, that are now getting rejections. I can only look and guess that the standards for "grain" have changed and there's some fineness tool that reviewers can now see. What I mean is, somehow they are being shown or there's detection for the many small pixels that AI creates when making the images.

I remember years ago, before AI, when leaves, grass, sandy beaches and water, was often rejected for quality, because whatever software the reviewers had, somehow saw it as grain. Then it seems to stop and things were judged better. Now we have AI images and the same type of rejections for that every-loving "Image Quality" are more often, for me, than they used to be.

AI images are not large. In order to make then big enough, we have to upsize. That means pixel pitch and definition will suffer. I'm sure there are people who can share better answers and how to correct this problem. Since I don't do AI photo quality and hardly anything in the way of fine illustrations, I'll just say, there are people who know how to correct the pixel problems, and get their images accepted at the agencies. AS is the most critical of these quality issues.

My answer? Not very special. Upsize to 4400x4400, using some sort of scaler for resizing and refining, edit, then downsize to 4 or 5MP.

Here's to better tomorrows.

Welcome Back

judging by the poll the main agencies are adobe, shutter and istock.  if those were the 3 you were contributing to would you consider adding any more?  personally i contributed some to pond5 and alamy and have exactly $0 to show for it so i gave up on those two.  wondering if any of the smaller ones are gaining any traction to maybe try to diversify and see what happens.

Looking for gold on a sandy beach? Maybe you are thinking there's some undiscovered oasis in the desert of Microstock? Depending on if you make video, and there are good answers from others, for photo only, you've got it. Adobe, SS, and IS.

The only other that might be of interest, in my experience and opinion, is DT. They are reasonable about what they accept, the reviews are reliable and fast. You're going to need thousands of images to make any consistent level of downloads. Like others, most of mine are 35� subs. Minimum payout is $100 which seems to make it a long time.

That's the only agency I'd suggest to someone looking for more income. I wouldn't add P5, Alamy, DP, or 123RF. Maybe years ago, but now, they are Microscopic Stock.  If you do video, see what others have written.

I would leave 123RF off any list of best agencies unless you are asking about 5 or more years ago.

Alamy still sells ok for me, although down last year, and what they have been doing isn't very encouraging.

DT remains steady, and they haven't screwed contributors in a long time, but they are also pretty small compared to AS, SS, and IS. Almost all sales there are .35 subs.

Did you mean DP?  Seems they have the history of shady deals and nasty tricks. Yes, Alamy has gone from interesting money, into to more sales, less money.

I got this weird email sent from Fine Art America:

I'm interested in buying a few of your artworks for my exhibition, about 5-10 artworks.  But I'm only interested in buying them as NFTs.

I�ll offer $2500 for each of these artworks I purchase from you as I�d love to purchase these artworks as digital artworks(NFTs). Do you have a knowledge about this or should I explain further?

This is a typical NFT scam, intending to convince greedy gullible "artists" to pay hundreds of dollars on "specialized" NFT sites, to register their "art" as a prerequisite for these promised sales, which will never happen.

I received two offers for things I have for sale on Amazon. I have nothing for sale on Amazon. (deleted)

Got this last week:

OpenSea Offer Alert

A new offer has been placed on one of your NFT listings.

    Offer Details:
    Offer Details: 0x85hB2P
    Offered by: Fluchy


Link is to someplace not Open Sea where the url is Name-Name for a site that's real is NameName (without the hyphen) and the one with the hyphen is blacklisted and blocked. The real one is up and doing fine.

Good that you tried to warn us, because Cons rely on the greed and gullibility of people who make money on their own side jobs.



Of course some people will believe this is a real story. 

Didn't you guys hear that AI vectors are now allowed?

Yes I did and that's welcome as I do illustrations and not fake photos. I immediately upload all of my most recent which was two.  But I'm happy with the additional opportunity and allowance.

Go Packers...