|
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 - ravens
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 16
1
« on: March 16, 2024, 03:09 »
Yes.
AI can't make anything that's AUTHENTIC. Can't do news. Can't do illustrative editorial. Can't do anything real.
AI can make pictures, but most of them are crap.
2
« on: September 13, 2023, 21:30 »
Adobe doesn't respect copyright at all.
We need an option to OPT OUT!
3
« on: September 13, 2023, 21:19 »
Mat,
we need an OPT OUT.
4
« on: April 23, 2023, 03:21 »
5
« on: March 24, 2023, 10:01 »
Great post, DiscreetDuck! I used these websites for test purpose to build a watermark not easy to remove. The key is that it has to merge with the design. You can use these websites to your advantage too, if you want to sell by yourself 
Gameover, You would see the advantages of dropping an atomic bomb, because it can also regulate the proliferation of bacteria...?
Well, I am surprised, no particular reaction against this here.
My point is if you want to sell by yourself, you don't use AI to produce received images. Steal one picture, it's bad. Steal thousands like does Deep learning methods: oh, it's good... Mediocre photographers can now feel like artists thanks to AI, while destroying the incoming of traditional artists.
6
« on: February 22, 2023, 07:36 »
Thank you Adobe & Mat! 
7
« on: January 10, 2023, 23:36 »
Just to clarify, Arcangel does NOT accept AI generated images. Arcangel
8
« on: January 10, 2023, 23:32 »
Wonderful, Adobe & Mat! This new policy is totally in line with abolishing the bonus code for 2023. Screw human artists! Bring on the robots!
I don't think I'll bother with photography any more. I'll get an army of robots and train them to blab text commands to robotic AI software night and day. These smart robots will vacuum pics generated by other robots, re-order pixels and create brilliant new pictures. (some say that's crap but they're only jealous, and live under a rock or something) Soon I'll have a portfolio of 100 Million brilliant AI images on Adobe Stock. I will be so rich! I will buy a villa in some place tropical, heck, I will buy an island of my own! I will buy a luxury plane that makes royalty, presidents and celebs jealous!
Thank you Adobe, you made my day. Screw artists, Robots are our future.
9
« on: October 04, 2022, 02:58 »
Dall-e 2 and other ai software are just what we need: more junk & crap images.
Interesting your point of view... don't expect AI is like a jukebox where you push a button and that's it. It's not.
You need to figure out good prompts, train models or acquire good trained models (which depends of what are your needs) then... set up number of steps and among a big list of parameters that you can tweak.
Nevertheless i've been selling here and there Ai images/animations since 2018. For me AI is just a part of improving my performance of work. I just see AI for Image as a tool like Photoshop or a simple color pencil to help me create.
Why go all through that trouble when you can excel in photography or creating illustrations, learn and do great work on Photoshop and with other image editors yourself? If you have patience, skill and willingness to learn that is? Besides, It is always a good idea to read the terms of service. You can't even be the copyright owner.
10
« on: October 03, 2022, 06:11 »
Dall-e 2 and other ai software are just what we need: more junk & crap images.
11
« on: July 10, 2022, 01:43 »
In another words, you opted out 1st April but THEY opted you in.
She doesn't mention ever opting out, unless I am misunderstanding something here?
Oh, OK, sorry! However --- Those June China 0.05 sales, AFAIK, belong to the same NU pool than the infamous December China sales. In January, Alamy reassured that images not belonging to that pool have been removed by their distributor. Well, that's not true. The only thing they did now is selling at the lowest price ever. I'm out distribution (all) since April 1 this year and out NU for years. Doesn't help. All I got was this Long Lead Times crap. I mean, humans fly to the space and robots perform surgeries every day, and a stock agency can't get their act together in a few months??? Hello??
12
« on: July 08, 2022, 08:02 »
Thank you, Luisa, for the link.
What a maddening reply you got. You have opted out, and yet C says "you are opted in".
In another words, you opted out 1st April but THEY opted you in.
And then they have the audacity to advertise the "sizable revenues" of the distributor scheme?
To a contributor who writes in due to 0.01 sales??
Unbelievable.
This is Alamy, the most EVIL stock photo agency on this planet: First they break the contract, give our images for 0.01, and finally, insult us.
What surprises me though is that there is no movement against Alamy (like there was against Shutterstock). Why? 0.10 was bad but 0.01 is alot worse.
13
« on: July 07, 2022, 08:34 »
If you've opted out, report it to Alamy. I did and ended up getting 100% commission. There was a fault (which has been corrected) but you'll need to check and get in touch with them
Congrats - good for you but what did you say, and who did you email to?
I reported my 0.01 sales and all I got back the usual "long lead times" BS. And yes I've opted out both NU and distribution.
I knew I'd opted out of Distribution sales in China back in April this year and that I'd opted out of novel use scheme back in 2013. That's all I told them and that I'd already complained about receiving 100 of these sales at the end of last year. I was told that there had been an error (now corrected) and that they'd refund 100% commission. That was it.
Thank you, HalfFull for posting this. Basically, my situation was the same - opted out distribution April this year, been out of NU for many years. Though my ultra-low net sales were measured in tens, did not reach 100, but that shouldn't be the issue. All I was told was the "long lead times" BS: "These images were downloaded and used before you opted out of distribution in April this year. Many of our distributors have long lead times and the sale has only just been reported to us. We've instructed the distributor that the image is now no longer available for licensing" Anybody else contacted Alamy about the 0.01 net sales? What kind of respose did you get?
14
« on: July 07, 2022, 01:14 »
If you've opted out, report it to Alamy. I did and ended up getting 100% commission. There was a fault (which has been corrected) but you'll need to check and get in touch with them
Congrats - good for you but what did you say, and who did you email to? I reported my 0.01 sales and all I got back the usual "long lead times" BS. And yes I've opted out both NU and distribution.
15
« on: July 07, 2022, 00:59 »
There are comments in the Alamy forum that this is a bug - an obsolete storage program that surfaced when they made the changes for the new 20% royalty rate July 1. Several people say they reported it, but perhaps the more reports the better?
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
Yes, this was a bug which has now been corrected. We don't charge submission or storage fees - this is an obsolete bit of code from many many years ago.
Apologies for any confusion this caused.
Why wasn't this "obsolete bit of code" deleted when it became obsolete, no longer in use? What was the point to save it?
16
« on: July 03, 2022, 11:24 »
Steve, Alex, I am horrified that talented photographers like you are chasing 7 cents at Freepik. You are wasting your time! The time spent uploading could be time spent creating premium work, prints and book covers.
If your customers find out you value your work at 0.07 why would they want to spend $$$ to purchase your prints or book covers?
17
« on: July 03, 2022, 02:21 »
I think mobile phone photography is to blame.
Suddenly everyone is a "photographer" taking zillions billions trillions photos.
Low quality, massive quantity.
People get used to technically bad photos. They are praised as "lifestyle" imagery.
Microstock, social, free sites becoming refuse dumps for such content.
18
« on: July 02, 2022, 05:36 »
Another contributor (not me; I left Alamy earlier this year) reported that Alamy's answer to their query about how they could still be getting cheap distributor sales so long after opting out was that the sale was from much earlier (before opt out). Distributors take a long time to report sales to Alamy.
I believe Alamy has no control over their distributors. I too got this staple reply yesterday when I queried why I got lots of 0.01 sales. FYI, got an identical reply sometime earlier too. They seem to do a lot of Copy+Paste. Hi XXXX The image was downloaded by our distributor before youd opted out of the Distribution scheme in April. Many of our distributors have long lead times and the sale has only just been reported to us. Kind regards
19
« on: May 06, 2022, 07:36 »
Wow. I would contact Alamy support asap.
20
« on: April 27, 2022, 00:58 »
Good morning all,
In regards to the referral link(s), further to reading the above valid comments and having a good think about everything, I've decided to remove them from the interview. Should anyone have signed up in the time between publishing the interview and removing the link (and I do eventually earn anything) I'll refuse the payment.
Within the past two months or so, Elijah uploaded a large batch to them. Let's give it a bit of time for those images to mature and start selling and, as mentioned earlier, he'll then be publishing a full comprehensive and unbiased review. Should be interesting to compare average RPI between all the agencies.
Alex
Alex, I'm kind of a bit disappointed that you have taken this route. You have a very interesting and helpful blog and I know you have promoted other avenues for increasing one's income, such as the book covers - which was really interesting and informative. But there are still other ways that do not devalue a person's work.
There are lots of places where creatives can set their own price. POD sites, designer resources agencies, direct selling, etc. (As an example, after putting a bit of time into researching what other type of buyers are out there, and changing what I shoot, I am now earning an additional $500 a month from these places, on top of my microstock earnings. Plus there is potential for even more growth.)
I have even put my prices up recently on some of these sites and increased my buyers. So, it can be done.
Hi Annie,
I hear you. I admit that sometimes I get frustrated and instead of looking at different revenue streams I'll just look for more agencies (I will submit a smallish batch to Freepiks and Vecteezy as a trial to later add some insight into the reviews)...my thinking is that if they're already keyworded, what's the harm? But there's not much point in earning an extra $20-30 a month on another 5,000 images. The industry is broken and it's only going to get worse imo in terms of returns for the time/investment put in.
As I've heard many times from those on the inside, many buyers don't mind paying a bit extra for quality work so it makes sense to price our work correct when we have the option to do so. Or, what I'm doing more and more is submitting my work to premium agencies, Arcangel for book covers and recently signed up to Overflightstock for my drone stuff.
One of my yearly goals has been to try to get my (paid) FAA up and running again to add more images / curate the portfolio. I do have sales on there every few months but I want to push it more, plus better ways to promote my work. I've done OK at Photo4me and will keep adding on that. The drone aerial shots add to my arsenal and I'm only getting started.
Alex
Alex, I forgot to say that if you do have 5,000 pre-keyworded commercial photos then you would do better on FAA. Yes, definitely pay the $30/annum fee. It has lots of advantages.
First of all, if you pay the annual fee, you will receive a free website via their other site, Pixels.com. Its a nice looking website where you can orderly sort your photos in collections (via the FAA site - everything is done on FAA. Pixels just mirrors what you have on FAA). And for those who don't want to pay much for their own website, $30 a year is much cheaper than $30/month. This has the extra advantage then of enabling you to show your work to those asking to see your portfolio.
Once you are on Pixels, you will also have a wider range of print on demand products. Its a lot more commercial than just putting up your best 'artistic' work for prints and wall art. As I said to a friend the other day, I am always surprised what people print on shower curtains. lol
With that in mind, don't curate your work too much. Let the buyers decide. I've had lots of things sell that I wouldn't have thought would - if I curated my own work too much.
I also sell a lot of greeting cards, but also surprised at how often someone will come along and place a bulk order. For example, a recent sale where a buyer purchased 6 packs of 25. Total commission for me = $150. And this was when they were having a statewide sale. So, money can be made from just selling greeting cards, not just large wall prints.
And of course, don't price your work too cheaply! I always add a little extra than their recommended markup.
Uploading (at only 5 at a time) does take a while. I uploaded 4,000 there, a little bit every day while I was working on something else, and noticed all these sales coming through. The algorithm seems to favor new uploads. So, regular uploading seems to help.
Thank you, Annie. This is valuable information. You are doing great on FAA. Do you promote your images much? I'm on FAA also, and I'm rather happy with the sales, but my port is still small-ish. Uploading takes some time, but it's not too tedious (like on some other sites, Redbubble for example). The annual fee is small compared to the fact that you get your own site. There are many POD sites out there, and everyone will surely find the best fit for their work by searching on Google. Different type of images do better on different sites, just like on stock.
21
« on: April 27, 2022, 00:32 »
As I've heard many times from those on the inside, many buyers don't mind paying a bit extra for quality work so it makes sense to price our work correct when we have the option to do so. Or, what I'm doing more and more is submitting my work to premium agencies, Arcangel for book covers and recently signed up to Overflightstock for my drone stuff.
One of my yearly goals has been to try to get my (paid) FAA up and running again to add more images / curate the portfolio. I do have sales on there every few months but I want to push it more, plus better ways to promote my work. I've done OK at Photo4me and will keep adding on that. The drone aerial shots add to my arsenal and I'm only getting started.
Alex
THIS sounds tons better, Alex. Are there any other agencies for book covers in addition to Arcangel and Trevillion? Best of luck with the drone shots!
22
« on: April 27, 2022, 00:18 »
Im approaching another milestone and thought about posting a thread but I dont think people would be interested.
I would be very interested! Milestones always are interesting.
Justanotherphotographer, I would be very interested too!
23
« on: April 26, 2022, 01:11 »
Good morning all,
In regards to the referral link(s), further to reading the above valid comments and having a good think about everything, I've decided to remove them from the interview. Should anyone have signed up in the time between publishing the interview and removing the link (and I do eventually earn anything) I'll refuse the payment.
Within the past two months or so, Elijah uploaded a large batch to them. Let's give it a bit of time for those images to mature and start selling and, as mentioned earlier, he'll then be publishing a full comprehensive and unbiased review. Should be interesting to compare average RPI between all the agencies.
Alex
Alex, I'm kind of a bit disappointed that you have taken this route. You have a very interesting and helpful blog and I know you have promoted other avenues for increasing one's income, such as the book covers - which was really interesting and informative. But there are still other ways that do not devalue a person's work.
There are lots of places where creatives can set their own price. POD sites, designer resources agencies, direct selling, etc. (As an example, after putting a bit of time into researching what other type of buyers are out there, and changing what I shoot, I am now earning an additional $500 a month from these places, on top of my microstock earnings. Plus there is potential for even more growth.)
I have even put my prices up recently on some of these sites and increased my buyers. So, it can be done.
Well said, Annie! Alex, Annie just gave you great ideas for your blog. Most photographers are ambitious folk. As we shoot more, we learn more and our work becomes better over the years. As our content improves, we want to earn more. We don't want to earn less. THIS is where photographers need your help. We don't want to hear about "Stock wizards" who are the blood-suckers of this industry. How about getting Photographer's Market Guide 2022 for better agencies to review?
24
« on: April 25, 2022, 00:35 »
Haven't really bothered with Alamy Measures or CTR. Maybe more attention to them would help or then not, can't really say. How does the system know who clicks your image - is it a buyer or somebody looking for suitable UK keywords, or just someone on Google looking? Clicks are not equal to sales.
Only tried to caption and keyword as accurately as possible, and upload relevant images.
25
« on: April 24, 2022, 04:30 »
...in the spirit of Alex's approach, it will be unbiased ...
In the spirit of Alex's will it also end in a referral link?
EDIT ooof, looked into it, 10% of earnings for a year, no wonder they are suddenly finding it in their hearts to write up these sites. Alex: maybe also let readers know it is a referral link. You even have a "Disclaimer" section, but don't even mention there you will be earning money if people sign up. Journalist lol.
EDIT 2: Holy molly, even the link in this paragraph, the actual "disclaimer", claiming that you arent promoting them is a referral link:
"Disclaimer: As someone who has been consistently critical of the free-download model, this interview is an opportunity to try to better-understand the benefits, if any, of such models from someone on the inside the industry. Therefore, my intention is neither to promote or dis-promote Freepik."
No hint of irony there? Do you not think this presents a clear conflict of interest and could cause unconscious bias? Was this not covered in your journalism course? I am assuming you have been on one as you claim authority as a journalist.
Exactly. The referral link: " If you feel the information provided in the interview is helpful enough, you can take the next step and sign up here." That's just a bait for anyone new to stock to start selling their work for peanuts and start earning you $$$. Alex, this is sick.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 16
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
