|
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 - Deyan Georgiev Photography
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 15
1
« on: May 28, 2024, 22:15 »
I have upload more than 100000 AI files to adobe stock. And I have developed some tools to help me to get it.
Such as
keywording automatically.
upscaling automatically.
remove the background automatically.
Upload automatically.
SO if you have some questions, You can ask me.
Ok, I'll bite.
How do you remove the background automatically to produce good pngs?
I always have to refine every single file, so I find producing pngs quite tedious.
Do you have a good acceptance rate (over 90%)?
Because uploading many files just to have them declined is not very efficient.
Are you having good sales with your port?
50 dollars a week, 500 a week, 5000??? - just a sample range would be interesting for many I am sure.
100k files is what many people dream to have over a lifetime.
You are already there after 18 months.
I agree with all this, but over 90% acceptance is not necessary, 40-50% is a good acceptance rate for the agency and for the author. It is normal to upload double more files and the editor to choose the best. Trying to achieve 100% acceptance will limit your productivity 2-3 times and as result 2-3 times less files on sale. I think those 100K files on sale can be true if there was 250K submitted which are 13K monthly, this can be done only by multiple accounts in the months back, now the review situation is completely different.
2
« on: May 25, 2024, 02:46 »
Some of the issues I have:
1. Slow close to 0 review time.
2. Low FTP folder limit like for 300 files.
3. Problems to import files, slow import timeframe or errors.
4. Problems to be processed the files or delays.
..but one positive change recently the servers works much fast for uploading after years of slow uploading.
In the beginning of AI images acceptance there was a very good sales score and before like 2-3 months ago it stopped sharply like for one night and it continue until now.
3
« on: May 23, 2024, 15:24 »
Free collection is free to the customers not for the contributors as they pay us 5 USD for weak images with no sales in the past 2 years, Adobe do it in the most correct way possible.
4
« on: May 11, 2024, 06:55 »
as I have already said,I am in favor of the petition,I hope it will be accepted. 
I think creating using AI is a good thing,but placing a limit on the AI content that can be uploaded is an equally good thing.
I believe that 500 AI contents in queue per account are more than enough,it seems like a good wide limit to me.
but in any case mine is a limited vision,while Adobe has a broader vision of the situation,so I'm more than sure that they will do the best thing.
Just to clarify, queue limit does not mean less submission volume, if those 500 images are reviewed each day will bring much more content online than 3001 in queue reviewed once monthly. The presence of queue have diferent purpose.
5
« on: May 07, 2024, 22:42 »
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?
strange is that now that you have decided to start with AI I have decided to stop with AI! 
I didn't sell even one of the last 115 AI images I made,which have been on sale for about a couple of months,in December instead I had about twenty for sale and I sold 3 of them.
anyway it's ok maybe they will sell later,frankly I'm realizing that this AI content is a flash in the pan.
the fact remains that in any case it is better to try to do everything,at the moment however I am more focused on doubling my "real" video library by the end of the month,and in general I'm more focused on "real" content.
Unfortunately this volume of images would be profitable 15 years back. Today you need put two more digits like 11500 images in order to make some sales conclusions. This days we need volume and quality(and diversity), not just quality like in the golden days. Talking about AI images you even have to multiply it by three.
6
« on: May 03, 2024, 10:06 »
The company where my husband works has already adapted to the new realities, they have cancelled the subscription with one of the most important stock agencies they have worked with for 15 years for another subscription with mid journey for $30.00 per month.
They are saving thousands of dollars a year with this move.
Out of curiosity do they have a feel for how much employee time is spent generating an image vs. searching a stock database for an image?
Let them play around with this for a while
7
« on: April 24, 2024, 21:35 »
A bit off topic, but on the right have several agencies which have no place in the list.
Like Clipdealer which do not pay to the contributors!
Canstockphoto, Featurepics and Crestock were closed.
8
« on: April 18, 2024, 11:06 »
Sadly today's world is a fake world of fake food, fake textiles, fake movies, false human relationships and so on. Of course as continuation today we have fake photos. I'm positive person, but that is the reality.
The people want a lot, want it fast and cheap and here we go, the cheap fast photos(just like fast food, fast fashion..) are here.
9
« on: April 15, 2024, 08:19 »
How much is AI taking away from "normal" stock photo sales? - As much as every other "normal" image uploaded additionally to the Adobe Stock collection.
10
« on: March 17, 2024, 05:59 »
Strange how they sell 1000 licenses for 5 USD and pay you 14 USD for those 1000 licenses, looks hot deal for them, lol
11
« on: March 16, 2024, 23:07 »
We do not provide specific, detailed custom rejection responses as that would extend the wait time for moderation far beyond what it is now. I suggest you post a sample of content you feel was rejected in error here for impartial feedback from the MSG community. It's hard to see our own work through impartial eyes, you may get some feedback that you hadn't thought of before.
Good luck,
Mat Hayward
Hi Matt,
Here is one example of rejected image:
What is the conception here?
12
« on: February 27, 2024, 10:24 »
Hi there!
Do you think it's worth starting your 123rf adventure in 2024? I'm a fairly successful contributor on Adobe Stock where my monthly revenue is between $2,000 and $3,000 and my portfolio is 35k images. I'm wondering if it's worth putting my entire portfolio on 123rf and to start uploading there on a regular basis?
I also noticed that they offer PREMIUM or PREMIUM+PLUS sales - which option is better according to your experience?
No
If you do not need additional $100-$200 than do not submit.
Is that every 5 years? Will 123 be in business in 5 years?
No, that is for every month and in accordance of the monthly income and portfolio mentioned above. Ofcourse not every portfolio can make such amounts.
13
« on: February 26, 2024, 11:11 »
Hi there!
Do you think it's worth starting your 123rf adventure in 2024? I'm a fairly successful contributor on Adobe Stock where my monthly revenue is between $2,000 and $3,000 and my portfolio is 35k images. I'm wondering if it's worth putting my entire portfolio on 123rf and to start uploading there on a regular basis?
I also noticed that they offer PREMIUM or PREMIUM+PLUS sales - which option is better according to your experience?
No
If you do not need additional $100-$200 than do not submit.
14
« on: February 26, 2024, 01:46 »
"Dreamstime makes it extremely easy to upload."
extremely??
For me it is one of the most tedious to upload, so much so that I hardly upload anything there anymore. 2023 stopped selling me almost nothing, and in 2024 nothing. Port of almost 30k images.
+1 Yes, uploading 10 files is "extremely easy" anywhere, try 100, 1000 will cost you hours while same quantity are uploaded in Adobe in minutes. Dreamstime has a vintage submission system suitable for retired people who have all the time in the world. Nevertheless it is sympathetic agency and I hope it will be around for many years.
15
« on: February 25, 2024, 08:41 »
You are assuming that every customer wants to spend time playing and learning ai.
I know a lot of people with agency plans that tried it but quickly gave up.
Especially when you really are not sure what you are really looking for and need, it is a lot faster to browse a very large database and pick out a few files.
I do believe people will use ai to adapt what they download.
You need to have a basic understanding of photography or video to even prompt what you want. If you dont know what rembrandt lighting is, how different lenses affect an image, what color processing you might prefer etcthere are endless variations. Differences between acrylic and oil color painting or even a percentage wise mix of different art mediait is very complex.
Plus a lot of the people with an agency plan are normal people, not media professionals with years of training.
Again, those who believe it is all over, it is probably best if you readjust your income sources.
But it is not over for everyone.
Agree, just to add one more detail on Ai generated process. It gives us many "superstar" images just in coincidence on many factors all together in the proper moment and prompt, then this great image will be available in the stock agency for cents. You may not reach such a great photo for hours of prompting while one professional who work this will have it routinely in the working process.
16
« on: February 19, 2024, 07:58 »
Yes some are making more in Adobe stock because AI is permitted but the AI models are evolving so fast that in no times customer will no longer need to look into a library. Not a second. They will generate what they want and with tons of option, styles etc. Video will take only a little longer to follow that path but as we saw with SORA just a few days ago it is arriving faster than I thought.
It is a total game over for all stock producer. This will no longer exist in 5 years at most.
Will be as easy as to type and search into a library with Ai images. The advantage in library is that all there is a curated collection for which someone spend his time to generate, select the best and edit, then on second level curated from the agency side. I wouldn't bet on Ai generation over curated Ai collection, but who am I to tell, for example Shutterstock bet on Ai tool exclusively and they are recently "extremely successful"
17
« on: February 17, 2024, 09:28 »
Everybody has mobile phones with excellent image and video quality.
And still people buy our images instead of making their own.
Mobile phones certainly don't have "excellent image quality" compared to a real camera. There are worlds between these qualities.
True, but maybe about one percent of all buyers cares about this, the average microstock client needs "a picture to sell the story" no matter super-duper camera, mobile phone, Ai or whatever. Ai photos are very successful and popular, this will happen with the video too, just watch..The content is much more valuable than the quality.
18
« on: February 16, 2024, 17:04 »
I see this wrong logic from time to time in discussions. No, no one buyer will search for your image on other agency to buy it cheaper. Even if he want it's almost impossible to find it in the search straight away, as a whole this does not work. Selling in many agencies will only extend your income and competition between them and from there better commissions to the contributors. I'm in this business from 2007 and I'm full-time and I have experienced view on all this.
I agree that individual buyers will generally not search to find a specific image at the cheapest price. However, it does not follow that it's fine to supply free and all-you-can-eat low price agencies.
Over time, and in general (i.e. not for any particular contributor) Unsplash, pexels, the various free sections at agencies are all eroding anyone's ability to make a decent living licensing stock. It used to be that free images were of obviously lower quality than paid ones, but that's no longer true. In looking at uses of an image featured in another thread here there were many hundreds and all the credits I saw were for Unsplash and pexels, not iStock (where it originated).
I've been licensing stock images since 2004 and about the only constants have been agency drives to increase their share of the buyer's money and contributors ignoring long-term harms for short-term cash. Often the excuses of the form "it's all going to hades anyway, so might as well make a little money before it does" or "if I don't someone else will and then I'll lose out on both short and long term"
We are too diverse a group with too many divergent points of view (and many contributors who don't do the math often enough to see what's in their interest and what isn't) to balance out the agencies' power and self interest.
And Freepik's history is deeply unsavory. I wouldn't trust them further than I could throw them. And I'm not all that good at throwing
I only point on the fact that is not profitable to reject license posabilities. Not about free images, of course I'll never support this option.
19
« on: February 16, 2024, 07:56 »
I see this wrong logic from time to time in discussions. No, no one buyer will search for your image on other agency to buy it cheaper. Even if he want it's almost impossible to find it in the search straight away, as a whole this does not work. Selling in many agencies will only extend your income and competition between them and from there better commissions to the contributors. I'm in this business from 2007 and I'm full-time and I have experienced view on all this.
20
« on: January 31, 2024, 15:14 »
Accept AI images instead, much more promising.. 
21
« on: January 26, 2024, 02:06 »
Good day everyone,
I had a batch of images that was approved more than a month ago (approved on mid December). Until now, i couldn't find my own approved images using all the method i could possibly think of including typing, the image id, title, or relevant keywords on different browsers.
Could it be that the images are not indexed hence the fail to appear on the search? ie: some of the images when i typed in the keywords combo, there are only 3 pages come out as a total result for the category. but my images still not appeared on those.
Appreciate if anyone who had encountered a similiar scenario to shed some lights on this matter or to direct me who i can contact with to seek a solution to this matter? Thanks.
The approved are sorted by most recent uploaded first, not recent reviewed/accepted.
22
« on: January 24, 2024, 16:06 »
But... did you generate your images with AI yourself? (it seems to be). If the case, you don't own any copyright and you should not even complain. 
In this case he have the rights to sell those images, the other no. A big difference.
23
« on: January 24, 2024, 10:12 »
Adobe Stock reviews are ULTRA fast! Kudos to the editors... absolutely amazing work!
You talk about regular content or AI ?
24
« on: January 20, 2024, 08:35 »
A few days ago, 100% of my photos accepted. Today, one more time, 100% acceptation...
Really, it's soooo boring. 
I've got no reason to complain for... 18 Years! (since Fotolia of course)
Hem, guess to understand why...  Rejections were the best way for learning. I know, it's Ok Boomer attitude.
I don't submit the 100ks photos that I took, but my best work. Hey!!!!! try-it!!!
Of course, no use of AI, thanks, I want to be the one who has capacities, not the machine!
It is rare to see such positive and encouraging posts in this forum. Keep on rockin!!!
25
« on: January 15, 2024, 00:24 »
am sure Getty/istock will take ai once their legal team has found a way to make it work for them.
If the nvidia generator is good, they might restrict themselves to content created from it.
But if they want to have a good collection, they will need enough suppliers sending in good content.
Shutterstock, at least according to their last comments on their financial reports, seems to think just licensing their media bank for training ai is their new business.
They made 80 million selling stock but already an additional 20 million licensing data. And they seem to be sharing just a minuscule amount of that with creators.
I personally think that is a dead end. Only allowing customers to create content will not build up a stellar ai collection.
But whoever had a great business brain seems to have left for now. They still have editorial and video/pond5 though. And with new and good managers they could turn that ship around very quickly.
The smaller agencies , deposit, envato etc.. will probably start taking ai at some. Perhaps like dreamstime without people content.
At the moment Adobe reigns supreme. They made the best decision and have increased the value of their Adobe stock offering immensely.
And of course the tight integration with ai photoshop tools.
After releasing Midjourney V6 they already lag behind on every level of AI generated image.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 15
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
