Quote from: PigsInSpace on August 22, 2023, 22:07
I don't think it would be enough to say I gave the AI a prompt, so it's copyrightable

I didn't say that a simple prompt will be copyrightable, I only said that the judgment, subject of the topic, seemes to me not really applicable to AI images produced with human interactions 

Copyright of AI images will be widely discussed in the near future

I think that it should be read carefully.

The full news says that this decision apply to image "created by AI" without human interactions; and it's very explicit saying it.
A machine creating an output without human.

So it cannot be applied to any works created with prompt, or any human interactions

EDIT:
Cascoly wrote in a different thread a more detailed post about this point:
https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/generative-ai-collection-of-links-and-important-articles-videos-court-cases/msg591118/#msg591118

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on July 25, 2023, 13:43
Oh sorry, I did not understood you were a customer.

I'm not. But trying to think as a customer is the first step to produce good images.

Anyway, your catastrophic precditions could be right, who knows meanwhile, if you think about so terrible future it would be better to change your job.
Because one thing is absolutely sure: AI is here, is useful, is available to everyone, and nothing will have the power to take us back in time

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on July 24, 2023, 19:16

Quote from: derby on July 19, 2023, 11:07

Quote from: Her Ugliness on July 19, 2023, 10:29
Yeah, right. Customers don't have 5 seconds of time to write a promt in an AI generator - pretty much the same time that it take to enter the same text in a microstock search bar -  but they have time browsing collections for inspirations?

Such naivity....

But it doesn't work this way.
To have a nice result you have to adjust, change, modify, and try multiple variations [...]

Oh... little dear... really?

Oh yes dear  a nice result for specific subject, specific concept, specific needs, takes much more time than a generic "nice" result 

It would be funny to imagine a test, where we choose a specific subject and test in how many seconds you can have a ready to use upscaled image 

Quote from: Her Ugliness on July 25, 2023, 07:15

Quote from: derby on July 19, 2023, 11:07

Quote from: Her Ugliness on July 19, 2023, 10:29
Yeah, right. Customers don't have 5 seconds of time to write a promt in an AI generator - pretty much the same time that it take to enter the same text in a microstock search bar -  but they have time browsing collections for inspirations?

Such naivity....

But it doesn't work this way.
To have a nice result you have to adjust, change, modify, and try multiple variations [...]

Then you are doing something wrong or are using the wrong AI generator.
I get "nice" results withouth adjust, change, modify, and try multiple variations.

Of course

Everyone know that you can get "nice" results even if you put just a question mark in the prompt 
You can get tons of "nice" results in few minutes, I'm agree.
But "nice" result is not the same as "useful" results for a buyer, this is the point.

By the way, we have different point of view. It's impossible to know at the moment if, for buyers, it will be better to have someone dedicated in creation of AI images, or if it will be better to pay and search for ready to use images

Quote from: Her Ugliness on July 19, 2023, 10:29
Yeah, right. Customers don't have 5 seconds of time to write a promt in an AI generator - pretty much the same time that it take to enter the same text in a microstock search bar -  but they have time browsing collections for inspirations?

Such naivity....

You still think that entering the prompt means to reach immediatly the result you want.
But it doesn't work this way.
To have a nice result you have to adjust, change, modify, and try multiple variations; then you have to open, correct if needed, upscale if needed.

And all of this assuming the buyer has a really clear idea of the image: I think that most of buyers search for subject and/or concept, for sure they do not describe exactly the image in a search bar

Quote from: Dimaximus on July 17, 2023, 13:04
https://stock.adobe.com/ua/contributor/211410870/Fai  top 200 with 100 photos....

Just to understand, where do you find the "top 200"?
I can't see a so extended list

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on July 08, 2023, 01:26
There are over 114,000 photos marked as generative AI and over 8,000 vectors. I thought the rules said Illustration category only.

I have few of them, some AI marked as photo, probably just because I forgot to change the category during submit process. I wrote to support to change that (because I can't do by my own) and after several days woithout answer I ask to Mat to help to correct this issue.
It's quite easy to forget to change category from photo to illustration, even after flagging the image as "AI Generative"; and I'll probably did this mistake for some images

Quote from: Tarelkin on July 11, 2023, 17:21
The person downloaded my images from Adobe Stock (I doubt he bought them). He inserted them into Midjourney (or other AI program) and generated new pictures and sells them as his own. Is this legal? Didn't Adobe promise to protect authors from this? What compensation will I get as an author while stolen content based on my work is being sold?
I find a lot of works from other authors who obviously operate in the same way: they download an image and generate similar images in Midjourney based on my work and sell them. Yes, they are not selling my work specifically, but they have used my work to generate new work. Is that acceptable? How is Adobe Stock going to protect me from this?

I already told you about this one. Why are not asked the necessary and sharp questions during the streams. Why aren't the interests of the authors being defended in the streams?

Adobe AI images restrictions are very clear. You cannot upload works based on someone else work. It's not allowed, and that's all, what else could Adobe do to protect the works?

About "copycat": looking at others works and replicate them in different ways is what 99% of stock producers did from the very first day.
The only difference is that now it's much more easy to do. But of course you can't pretend to have copyright on a tomato, or an apple, or anything else: anyone can produce a new image on the same subject. Anyone can get a camera (or a pen, or a digital pen) and produce similar images.
And now anyone can use an AI image creator.

This is not an AI issue.
This is a human issue.

Personally I didn't find great problems in last weeks, some rejections yes but nothing to complain.
The only bad thing really changed is the timing of review for AI illustration.
I contribute with both photo, also editorial, and clips

Quote from: [email protected] on June 27, 2023, 10:52
adobe rejecting a lot of video files suddenly

As Mat said, you can eventually ask him help sharing your account and files rejected number, he could give opinion, otherwise it's useless to complain in blind mode

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on June 27, 2023, 10:57
Portfolios of people selling AI generated images already in Recent top sellers at Adobe. In photos section!
https://contributor.stock.adobe.com/en/insights/best/contributors

They have mixed portfolio, so possibly their position is on top for the photo section, not for illustration

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on June 26, 2023, 15:51
How about promoting human-created imagery by showing off "epic AI fail" pictures?

There are lots of examples, particularly where AI tries to show the real world. Case in point, some pictures of beach loungers (that I can't see being used 'cause who'd want to look like an idiot?)

Over 14,000 images in the regular collection where the beach loungers are set up in a more useful and enjoyable arrangement - facing the ocean and where you can actually get into the chairs!

Well, I love Adobe, but to be honest it's simply unbelievable how so many failed images has been approved

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on June 21, 2023, 21:14
This story shows how much extra work is generated when people try to follow up on made-up information (in this case a newspaper article that was never published because AI made it up). It's only a time saver if you don't care about accuracy

Yes this point will be absolutely THE point in the next future: it's better (translate: it's faster) to do your job by yourself (news article, images, research... anything), or it's better (translate faster) to let AI do the job... and then check it for errors?
It's all about the time, that is one of our precious thing. Probably the most precious.

About the accuracy... of a text, a photo, or anything else, how deep it should be is a human choice, not AI choice. Your examples in other threads of how low accuracy there is in many AI generated images is the answer. Lot of people think that accuracy is not necessary, because AI save a lot of time.
Putting accuracy in AI generated images take hours of work, it's absolutely not easy at all.
So, in the end, in our microstock images world, what we're asking (for example to Adobe, but it's the same for others) is to put same accuracy (translate: more time) in review images.

In few month AI engines, in my opinion, are reaching the point; humans are starting to ask themselves the weight of accuracy; and the critical thinking; and this is really a good way to use the AI

Why do you think anyone can have an idea here without any clue? Just write to Adobe support and ask them, they usually answer and there are usually good reason for locking/deleting account

If you use the apply button instead of invite, you can submit a simple form to send them your port

Quote from: Her Ugliness on May 15, 2023, 09:52

Quote from: Yakystockero on May 15, 2023, 09:07

And personally I have not seen any cases of plagiarism by AIs yet.

Now you have.

https://gizmodo.com/ai-art-generators-ai-copyright-stable-diffusion-1850060656

This has clearly nothing to do with AI images creations, and
It simply seems a low quality jpg, or overcompressed image.

As Cascoly explains well, if you give to the AI ONE image of a woman and then ask for a woman, it will recreate that specific woman for the simple reason that it has no other way to reproduce a woman. So this image and the story is totally misleading.

by the way, please try by yourself to create images in MJ and then try to find the original.

The REAL issue with AI is the copyright breach in the use of dataset without consent, and this is REALLY the point to discuss. But if you want to transform this in the fact that AI would produce "copy" of existent images, well this is totally wrong, because AI CLEARLY produce original images.
Based on copyright breach for unappropriate use, probably.
But original

Very interesting Jo Ann, thanks!
Maybe we can ask @MatHayward if he can clarify some aspects of this marketplace, and how it matches with Adobe stock contributors

Quote from: Digital on April 10, 2023, 09:27
An interesting side effect of fooling around with Dall-e2 is that it made me appreciate real photography even more.

I'm currently using the technology for quick mockups, but not for the final image production. It's fun and free, so nothing to lose, really.

Totally agree.
I'm using Midjourney, and also sell some AI created images throgh AS, but I'm absolutely sure that in the middle term this tool will give photographers new life: real photography will have higher price and sales, and the market will change surviving to AI creations.
For what I can understand using MJ, the major problems will be for illustrators, not for photographers. And, anyway, to create a good image or illustration, you always need an idea, much more than a tool that can do the job for you

Ok, thanks and sorry, my mistake!

To be exact the checkbox says:
"I allow users to use my media for free, even for commercial purposes, without further attribution or compensation to me"

Quote from: amabu on March 30, 2023, 17:59
Well, you clearly can't see very well...

Have you tried to upload AI?
Selecting AI category there is a checkbox down under the page, and you HAVE to check it. It says that you agree to give it for the free section. And it's necessary to check it to proceed.
And it's different from photos upload.
So maybe it's you that clearly can't see very well :-D

Quote from: Noedelhap on March 30, 2023, 12:33
And it seems they decided after all to accept AI images:

QuoteDear Contributors,

123RF now accepts your AI images!

We are thrilled to announce that our platform now supports the upload of AI-generated images. This is a big step forward for us and we believe it will greatly enhance your portfolio at the same time offering a more diverse pool of content to our users.

*Please make sure you include the keywords "AI-Generated" and "AI Generative" to aid searchability.

For AI-generated content guidelines, please go to our blog or click this link : https://www.blog.123rf.com/123rf-guidelines-for-ai-generated-content

We're excited to see the amazing creations you'll come up with using AI technology! If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to reach out to our support team.

Best regards,
Community Support Team

For what I see, if you send AI generated images in appropriate category, you are also forced to consent to give it away for free also for commercial use.
So, stay away from this agency

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on March 22, 2023, 18:00

Quote from: cascoly on March 22, 2023, 17:46
[...]natural selection moves along

Sorry but nothing "natural" in AI...

Also digital camera had nothing "natural" vs old analogue camera... at the time when digital was born

Quote from: SVH on March 22, 2023, 17:46

Quote from: kirstenharris on March 22, 2023, 16:36
Zorba, you need to be opted in to receive marketing emails in order to receive Adobe Stock Contributor related emails.  Send me a private message here with your Adobe ID email address and I can check if we have the right email on your contributor account.

Thanks Kirsten for letting us know, after the fact, that our photos were used to train Adobes new AI tool. Can you eloborate a bit about your compensation plan for this?
It is not that we have had a chance to opt out or is it somewhere in the fine print?

I think you've misunderstood, Kirsten is talking about the missing announcement mail, nothing about photos included.
By the way I've missed too, so I'm sending a pvt message