Quote from: Big Money on February 05, 2024, 14:08
I didn't even bother to read their Exciting News email this morning.

Exciting News are never good news ...

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on November 30, 2023, 23:10

Quote from: spike on November 30, 2023, 22:54
... and the real Adobe where there are hunderds of contributors from certain geographic regions who spam the system, and the reviewers are not doing a great job at catching them...

Reviewers are maybe from the same geographic regions 

There have to be thousands and thousands of reviewers in India looking at images within a few seconds.

Quote from: Big Toe on November 11, 2023, 15:51
I was always under the impression that most agencies do not allow upscaling. Am I mistaken there or has this changed with AI?

Upscaling is just making your image larger. Never been a problem - if the resolution is good enough. Have been used since the beginning of photography.

Quote from: Big Toe on November 11, 2023, 15:51
I was always under the impression that most agencies do not allow upscaling. Am I mistaken there or has this changed with AI?

Upscaling is just making your image larger. Never been a problem - if the resolution is good enough.

Quote from: spike on November 11, 2023, 16:24

Quote from: Injustice for all on November 11, 2023, 12:12
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.

We can hope that Adobe drowns in customer complains ...!

Quote from: Injustice for all on November 10, 2023, 16:10

Quote from: Bauman on November 10, 2023, 12:33

Quote from: Injustice for all on November 09, 2023, 20:02
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!

"this is no longer creating but madness" .. right!

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.

Quote from: Bauman on November 09, 2023, 10:25

Quote from: ADH on November 08, 2023, 14:45
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.

I haven't sent any AI images, and don't think I ever will.

I get help from AI for my post-production, but I'm not interested in generative AI.

I agree. But anyway there is lots of complicated post production involved in creating good AI-images.

It's boring, and the images are all the same, all with the same style.

Producing 100 images with AI takes just two or three hours, so photography and illustration categories will soon be saturated with millions of images uploaded in no time.

I think eventually, people will get bored, and the majority of AI users will create their own images.

I hope in the future, there will always be a niche of customers who prefer real images captured with authentic landscapes, models, and objects. And I continue to work for that niche.

We'll see in a few years.

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on November 08, 2023, 18:27

Quote from: ADH on November 08, 2023, 14:45
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.

I don't think it will be quite that bad.

Cameras won't die out. Hardly anyone will have their travel or wedding pictures recreated with AI, for example  .

Of course portrait-, news- and some site specific photo will not die. But generic photographs - and most illustrations! - will die.

But it will of course hit some photographers hard. For example, I wonder whether real food photography still makes sense with all the effort involved.

As my portfolio mainly consists of real locations and editorials, I don't see myself at risk here for the time being and will keep my camera.

Quote from: cobalt on November 07, 2023, 00:38

Quote from: Injustice for all on October 23, 2023, 16:19

Another thing to consider is that Adobe Stock subscribers will have 500 credits to generate,this is not good news for me,it would have been better if the credits were only available to Adobe software subscribers,or less credits for Adobe Stock customers,500 for a month are more than enough for a customer I think.

in any case we'll see,in a year or less,we'll all have clearer answers,I believe and hope that Adobe has considered all this,we'll see!

But surely Shutterstock isn't accepting AI-images ..?
But Adobe users also need these credits for generative fill or other generative uses within Photoshop.

https://helpx.adobe.com/firefly/using/generative-credits.html

So I wouldn't worry too much about losing sales to image generation. As we all know that is still very time consuming.

Quote from: blvdone on November 06, 2023, 15:18

Quote from: ole999 on November 06, 2023, 14:31

Quote from: blvdone on November 04, 2023, 13:55
regular photos I shot on cameras.  Anybody else feel the same?
I pay $120/month on Midjourney and also bought Gigapixel AI to create those AI photos.  So, it's a confirmation that what I'm doing is working for me.  That doesn't mean I stop shooting stock photos with my camera, but it's good to see people are actually buying my AI generated photos.

At AS - how can you see which images sell? I don't think one can see all the individual images one have sold like on other agencies?

Type in keywords and sort by downloads.

Thanks - but I ment my own images ... sorry..! I can't watch them on daily or monthly basis ..?

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on November 05, 2023, 20:28
https://petapixel.com/2023/11/05/genai-and-the-forced-evolution-of-photography-from-artifice-to-authenticity/

I like the notion that "Photography is more than just an image—it's our connection to the real world, to one another, and to moments that inform our decisions."

His twitter feed references this article

https://futurism.com/adobe-caught-selling-ai-generated-images-israel-palestine-violence

I think the pseudo-editorial images have to be removed - like the 9/11 images that were allowed in and then removed a few months back.

The Futurism article doesn't mention Freepik, but their collection of over 30 million genAI images includes over 40k for a search for "gaza"

https://www.freepik.com/search?format=search&last_filter=query&last_value=gaza&query=gaza&type=ai

And even Shutterstock's sad collection of DALL-E creations includes a couple (along with their standard note "Important information - This content was generated by an Artificial Intelligence (AI) system. Shutterstock does not review AI-generated content for compliance with Shutterstock's content compliance standards. AI-generated"):

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-generated/gaza-city-palestine-2-children-playing-2384676855
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-generated/outdoor-photo-gaza-city-palestine-2-2384676351

Yes - a lot of AI images are coming out from Gaza to the social media.

Accepting those files and not removing it from collection is enormous disrespect toward working people - illustrators , photographers videographers.
[/quote]

Exactly.

Quote from: blvdone on November 04, 2023, 13:55
regular photos I shot on cameras.  Anybody else feel the same?
I pay $120/month on Midjourney and also bought Gigapixel AI to create those AI photos.  So, it's a confirmation that what I'm doing is working for me.  That doesn't mean I stop shooting stock photos with my camera, but it's good to see people are actually buying my AI generated photos.

At AS - how can you see which images sell? I don't think one can see all the individual images one have sold like on other agencies?

Quote from: Josephine on October 26, 2023, 17:51
I need of a slide scanner for old Diapositives and -negatives. Any recommendations for a decent scanner plus software?

For 35 mm negatives or dias this Opteka is great - and only 59 dollars. There are a few downsides though, but I've had a lot of use out of it.

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Opteka-HD2-Slide-Copier-for-Olympus-SP-570-SP-565-SP-560-SP-550-UZ-Digital-Camera-Includes-Tube-Adapter-Bonus-10X-Macro-Close-Up-Lens/41377407

Quote from: waitingonthestuff on October 27, 2023, 10:43
I currently have an ad running on Pinterest which points to a specific Adobestock collection of mine. Now I am wondering if I have made a mistake.

If I point someone to an Adobestock collection, can they easily buy an image from within that? (It's difficult for me to know as the account owner)

Thanks In Advance

The images you make yourself are your own property. You can do with them what you want.

Quote from: MatHayward on October 16, 2023, 23:34

Quote from: Uncle Pete on October 16, 2023, 17:16

Quote from: MatHayward on October 16, 2023, 17:11

Quote from: Hannafate on October 15, 2023, 16:10
I have sent you the information.  Thanks.

Thank you @Hannafate. I received your email and have removed the generative AI tag from all the files you listed. I'm sorry for the inconvenience the mistake caused you and others.

Regarding the comments from @Synthetic, you are correct that the support team is particularly busy these days, so it is taking a longer time than we would prefer to resolve many contributor issues. That said, this is not a low priority at all. We take it very seriously and are working to resolve this, and all other issues as quickly as possible.

As always, your patience is greatly appreciated.

-Mat Hayward

Does it make any difference? I mean should I search and report any images of mine that are not AI that are labeled as that? Or can I just ignore the problem and see if something changes?

It's hard to say. If your image was not created with generative AI software but was inadvertently tagged as generative AI, I believe it is a reasonable request to remove that tag. The team is doing their best to get through support cases as quickly as possible. You are welcome to reach out to me directly as well.

Thanks,

Mat Hayward

Hi Mat, are you guys willing to throw the necessary resources after that AI halloy? The amount of AI images will multiply a thousandfold in the near future Alone review time. Do you have any plans at all? What about all those who are getting their accounts closed at the moment - what is the reason for this and is it ok that people are waiting for months?

Quote from: Mir on October 17, 2023, 08:58

Quote from: Anyka on October 17, 2023, 08:48
Probably a very dumb question, but how do you check your own port to see if there are AI images in them?  Up till today I did not upload any AI to Adobe, but when I read this thread, I 'd like to check if Adobe mislabeled any of mine ...

https://stock.adobe.com/contributor/contributornumber/contributorname?&filters%5Bgentech%5D=only
Replace contributornumber and contributorname with your actual number and name.

The link is dead.

Today I received a rather general mail on my request, whether despite "the excting news" I would like still delete my account. On my deletion so far one did not come at all.
[/quote]

I also received 'exiting news' from EyeEm: 'You sold this photo on Getty Images via EyeEm Market for $0.04 USD'.

Quote from: selensergen on October 15, 2023, 11:12
I saw that some of my works were sold on another account on Shutterstock and I reported it. You too can look and check.

Later, I came across the same account on Videohive.

If there are other such accounts, let's identify them and delete them.

Did Shutterstock close your accout ..?

https://www.shutterstock.com/tr/g/Sohail+Khann/video

https://www.shutterstock.com/tr/g/design50/about

https://videohive.net/user/paktia50/portfolio

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on October 10, 2023, 17:34
At Shutterstock, a real non-AI travel photo (beach scene with people) was rejected today with the reason:

"AI Generated Content: AI generated content is prohibited. Repeated submission of such content will result in account suspension and/or termination."

This is an older photo that I post-processed with Topaz Sharpen and Topaz Gigapixel AI and then with the latest version of Photoshop. I did not use the AI functions of Photoshop. I have been using Topaz for years without any problems.

Does anyone have similar experiences and maybe know where the problem is?

I'm holding off on my uploads for now and waiting for Shutterstock to respond.

It is noticeable that the tone of the agencies has become harsher and more threatening since AI.

Adobe is setting lots and lots of ports on hold. Long time contrubutors can't get in touch with Adobe and nobody know why. But it has to do with the AI. It's totally wild west ..!

'Funny' .. was three legs part of the keywords ..? 

I don't think the agencies even check keywords anymore except for banned terms. Apparently it's also quite easy to get a lot of photos accepted at Adobe via AI - see the three here. And strange hands and a lot of wristwatches ...

Just tried Adobe Firefly, but Midjourney is much better.  Firefly generated images aren't on point and not usable for stock photo yet.
[/quote]

Firefly is terrible - but will be better. Adobe is a clever company. Adobe should never have allowed the use of Midjourney, it's unethical.

Quote from: Espie on September 12, 2023, 21:26
You can opt out of the data licensing in your account settings

Thanks - is it here?

I think (I'm almost sure) they are rejecting lots of images just to mark them 'Eligible for data licensing'.

At least Adobe is paying something. Midjourney and the others are not paying the artists anything at all ..!