|
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 - cascoly
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 166
1
« on: Yesterday at 12:52 »
...
How much AI can you jam onto the market, before there's just too much? Individual and unique, useful images, will always be more valuable than many, many, of the S.O.S. The more I look at AI, the more it looks the same and similar to all the rest of the AI images. It has a look, style and appearance, that's what AI looks like. The look is becoming that's had it's time and will be like all the rest, eventually.
...
but that applies to other stock as well, with at least an order of magnitude more images to compete against... plus ca change...
2
« on: May 23, 2024, 17:57 »
For me SS is by far the best agency and the number of sales are constant.
same h ere - my running average has been about the same over last few years, down maybe 10%. AS has been slightly up during that time but is usually < 50% of SS sales. for me, it may be that SS sells my editorials, while AS won't
3
« on: May 23, 2024, 17:54 »
...
It would be interesting experiment to deselect say 5 images from nominated pool you believe have highest potential, keep track of sales and after a year see if any exceeded $5 they would earn in free pool. My guesstimate is none would, or maybe just 1.
Free pool is in some ways like Bank GIC. Low return, but guaranteed
i agree with the last, but the experiment forgets that the images you remove may not have been accepted if you left them in.
4
« on: May 23, 2024, 17:52 »
Not going to nominate any of my selected images.
Some of them are already good sellers on Adobe and others even more so on other agencies.
Also, I value my work enough not to give any "free photos".
I respect other photographers enough not to endorse free photos.
I understand and respect your viewpoint. It is a tough call. I don't nominate any that have sold well in the past or on other sites. Adobe is spending money on this and not getting anything in return so they must think the additional traffic justifies the expense. If some of my images that haven't sold well can get me five bucks apiece and help drive users to the site that results in increased sales later on then it is all good. Of course it people just take the free images and use them instead of buying anything from Adobe or anywhere else then we are just shooting ourselves in the foot for a short-term gain. If the free images cause people to buy Adobe subscriptions but not download any paid images then Adobe gains and we lose (except for the five bucks). Without full information it is impossible to know what is best for us.
doesnt matter what these earned in the fabled days of yore - the question is whether these images that havent sold recently are going to suddenly make $5 in the next year.
5
« on: May 22, 2024, 19:34 »
10% of the nominated assets for me will be very good!  very probably less....
I go all in,then remove only some best-selling content.
but if they're best selling, they wouldn't be available to nominate
6
« on: May 21, 2024, 13:22 »
Is anyone else getting frustrated with the Adobestock rejection rate of Adobe Firefly AI generated images of people?
...
I find I am getting frustrated with the high rejection rate of Firefly v3 ...
Frustration intolerance is a serious issue for immature children, we can understand. But as the years go by, you will become more able to handle it.
Soon, it will no longer be AI images that will be rejected, but AI image contributors... I guess we'll hear more about frustration here...
Fake AI artificial faces with excessive smiles... you really have to want the dream that it sells.
i've had most of my portraits and individuals accepted - images that would otherwise require models which are editorial AS wouldn't accept. you have to learn the failings of generators & work around them (along with post processing - which i do in batches)
7
« on: May 15, 2024, 13:46 »
5) Practice counting the number of fingers
I plan to avoid fingers 
All you need is one finger (middle finger) lol!
yes, afterwards a pinched nerve i couldn't control my fingers, i lost the ability to communicate with other drivers.
8
« on: May 15, 2024, 13:40 »
... I'm just impressed that they somehow sourced a huge press machine thing. I wonder what its normal day to day job is? Looks too flat and open for crushing cars. Good bit of editing as they only had one go at it I assume. ..,.
yes, i thought it a good ad also (though i disagree w apple's closed system, especially for apps, and high prices). [and early on, Jobs defended apple graphics by asking why anyone would need a color monitor] but have you considered that this was AI generated?
9
« on: May 15, 2024, 13:30 »
...
I did articulate that it did not apply to 'everyone'. However, the statements are based off of actual data, correlation between specific types of people who do that, personal experience in working with/dealing a number of different races & cultures, as well as open discussions with a number of people who openly admit that's precisely the kind of thing they do - and it for the most part actually does apply to the majority. 'Stereotypes' are stereotypes for a reason, because they do tend to be accurate, or wouldn't have become a stereotype....
no, you were explicitly claiming ALL members of these groups were involved (eg calling for banning anyone with an Indian internet address, or even with an Indian name) - but since you never show your sources it's difficult to believe anything you say and stereotypes are often based on ignorance or madness of crowds - which in the past has led to blood libel, internment camps, pogroms, lynching & used by authoritarians, both left & right, to blame the 'other'
10
« on: May 15, 2024, 13:17 »
Sliced vegetables, all the way, all day, every day!
Thank you for reminder. Let me shoot a few more of sliced vegetables!
To be honest, I think I did a tomato one day, just to do it. One is probably all I have.  I never shot models, so I'm missing any of that. One pet dog photo, no cats. Maybe a few flowers... I'm missing all the classics?
Always glad to be a motivator and set a personal example for underachievers. 
i never shoot models and i don't collect release when shooting abroad, partly because i mostly shoot crowds -- cafes, tourist sites, etc. i've been concentrating on ai of shots that would otherwise require releases & these have sold 'well' - considering my ai portfolio is less than 1% of my total
11
« on: May 13, 2024, 15:18 »
note, though, you can't have them submit to any agency you've already submitted those images to
12
« on: May 13, 2024, 12:42 »
Hello, About a month ago I changed the Data Licensing option to No on Shutterstock. Despite this, some of the photos I upload are still approved for data licensing. What would be the reason ?
are they approved or just qualified?
13
« on: May 11, 2024, 14:30 »
..
Do you have any idea of the work and time required to produce 500 professional quality images (photo, 3d, vector...) of 500 different subjects, for someone who does not use AI?
..
do you have any idea of the time to create 500 pro quality AI images?--most of these discussions have centered on poor quality spamming
14
« on: May 11, 2024, 14:22 »
..
b) If you somehow eliminated that situation (simple solution, don't approve east indian accounts, and disable existing ones post jan 2023 when the media made a co-rodinated annoucement to 'officially' bring public awareness to theft-based ai, even though it's already existed for years, side topic - most high level "media" (i.e., t.v. "news") is XXXX run, and most big "ai" companies (i.e., midjourney, chatGPT, etc) are XXX run -......
your anti-semitic libels are uncalled for (marked in red above), as are your continued slams against all 1+ billion East Indians
15
« on: May 10, 2024, 14:38 »
What WOULD be effective though - is getting companies like midjourney, "research" companies like stable diffusion/etc RETROACTIVELY paying all the contributors for the STOLEN content they used - and then setting up a system where they PAY IN PERPETUITY (i.e., regular monthly income) EVERY TIME an asset is generated using a model that was based off of stolen content. THAT would be effective + fair. It is easy to set up such a system.
Push for THAT.
You're spot-on 
Sent from my moto g82 5G using Tapatalk
it's far from easy since there's no way to tell the address and banking info of the images scraped - not to mention the 'free' sources which have actually stolen images. the questions about scraping haven't been decided yet. but the much bigger question is who is going to actually make such a proposal and who would enforce it? the UN? the ai companies certainly won't voluntarily agree. why bother to propose plans which are dead on arrival?
16
« on: May 10, 2024, 14:24 »
here's what WS says
https://wirestock.io/about-us what we do
Thanks for the link. I must say I am overwhelmed my the amount of detail they provide:
"Here at Wirestock, we eliminate all the manual steps such as keywording and captioning".
That's it. Not a single scrap of information beyond that one sentence. And if that doesn't convince me that they know what they are doing, nothing will. 
they used to have more details, but i couldn't find them. they always did metadat earlier (w variable results) but i havent uploaded since they went to a premium option
17
« on: May 09, 2024, 12:08 »
Hmmm, I guess Uncle Pete is ghosting me or he has no answer to a simple question. Either way, I think that confirms exactly what I thought about Wirestock.
Pete is busy promoting his crapstock portfolio... here's what WS says https://wirestock.io/about-us what we do
18
« on: May 07, 2024, 13:53 »
The AI generation is the dream for incompetent, lazy people who don't even have respect for the word "artist", who were previously only capable of producing photographic craps. Even ignorant kids play to destroy this previous world by using these new technological toys without even having to leave their room, ...
yes, definitely! always attack all the users rather than accepting the world is changing exactly like the disparagement of mobile pix before they mastered the market. resistance is futile
19
« on: May 07, 2024, 13:49 »
I finally decided to start with AI Generated images. I read a few articles, watch a few video and so far the process looks simple
1) Generate image with Midjourney. It look like it's the best generator now
2) Upscale with Topaz Gigapixel AI or Topaz Photo AI. Which one is better?
3) Create description, upload
4) Profit!
What I'm missing?
if the image is sharp & noise free, use gigapixel, if it needs work, use photo AI and then upsize
20
« on: May 04, 2024, 15:01 »
Even at the WSJ they know that AI is destroying what little is left of the stock photography business.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-last-stock-photographers-await-their-fate-under-generative-ai-822d1e6a?mod=hp_minor_pos1
I guess AI is not destroying stockphostography industry. Its just the beginn of mass production for everyone.
As you look at Adobe Stock, never before so much new portfolios have reached first $1000 income at short time.
With AI you don't need an expensive equipment or studio, or take much time to make an expensive shooting with 4 models or more.
With AI everyone in the world can make at least a few $1000s a year without much effort.
But i think the sales won't rise as much and fast than new images.
and your sources for these statements ? how do you know these figures? how many are actually making $1000 without much effort.SS Contributor royalties payable
2022: $38,649,000 2021: $29,004,000
"Working with its growing community of over 2 million contributors, Shutterstock adds hundreds of thousands of images each week"https://investor.shutterstock.com/news-releases/news-release-details/shutterstock-reports-fourth-quarter-and-full-year-2022-financialso average earnings is $15-20 / year or, at most 30-40,000 contributors could earn just $1000. since many make more than that the number is much less. even those best-case numbers mean just 2% make $1000. of course, many receive more than $1000/year these are just numbers for one major agency, but there's no evidence for many making 10x that amount from all their other agencies SS doesn't accept AI, but there hasn't been any indication that AI contributors make more. so the outlook for new contributors is grim
21
« on: May 02, 2024, 15:39 »
...
in another attempt to call out these silly 'worst case' scenarios - i'll bet you $100 that DT is still here a year from now
Make it $10 maybe that's low enough that you can collect in a year? DT isn't going away for a long time.
i'm not so much interested in making a few bucks as in exposing how little confidence they has in their claim. made it $100 so they won't lose money when DT goes under!
Oh I see, you'll cover their loss if DT goes under, kind of like a one year insurance policy for the amount of the protection. I wouldn't pay $5,000 in insurance for a $5,000 car.
...
There's a simple confidence tester and it only costs him Ten Bucks.
(If there's any doubt, I'll back you, for half the $100 loss, no charge, that's my level of confidence) $10 vs $100.
but i'm not offering insurance - i'm calling his bluff about DT going under - if they're right they're protected but if DTs still here, maybe they'll forgo silly chicken-little predictions in the future -- and the bet is open for a few others who think DT will be gone
22
« on: May 02, 2024, 14:02 »
Even at the WSJ they know that AI is destroying what little is left of the stock photography business.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-last-stock-photographers-await-their-fate-under-generative-ai-822d1e6a?mod=hp_minor_pos1
they start by comparing today with the 70s: Top photographers in the 70s, 80s and 90s routinely earned thousands of dollars from ad agencies, record labels and media companies for one photo. Life was gooduntil digital photography changed everything.and the overblown headline doesn't match the moderately optimistic view of the article, they never say AI is destroying stock - but that much of the 'damage' had already occurred and describe some of those adapting to the new reality.
23
« on: May 01, 2024, 15:19 »
I am happy to report I have now crossed the quarter million dollar earnings threshold at Shutterstock.
That's an average of $27.06 per download.
That's an average of $23.80 per video in my portfolio.
The earnings just keep rolling in.
How many images you have in your Port?
hard to accept their questionable claim as a newbie without a portfolio, so w/o a link doesn't matter what numbers they post and remember this is the same guy who last year they were making $348/hr! and besides, i've made $666,000 so far with my NFT w more sales every day
24
« on: April 30, 2024, 12:24 »
...
in another attempt to call out these silly 'worst case' scenarios - i'll bet you $100 that DT is still here a year from now
Make it $10 maybe that's low enough that you can collect in a year? DT isn't going away for a long time.
i'm not so much interested in making a few bucks as in exposing how little confidence they has in their claim. made it $100 so they won't lose money when DT goes under!
25
« on: April 30, 2024, 12:20 »
@blvdone I save time,and time is money,better to lose 50usd than continue to waste time there!
@cascoly I'm more than sure they will never lower the minimum payout,but tell me if I may ask,how much content do you have there,and how much do you earn in a year?Do you sell a lot of AI there?
i've got about 30K images, only about 150 ai so far. upload i easy, so i continue even though returns are low
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 166
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
