|
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 - Uncle Pete
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 181
1
« on: Yesterday at 14:28 »
would like to see a link to the Guardian article ...
Even single use on a website, 16 ? That's an insult. Yes, much higher than Connect, but still stinks just as bad.
2
« on: Yesterday at 14:25 »
Wow, I had no idea!
Its also a very insulting test to those of us who dont know what cats look like.
They are very groovy, wear Sunglasses, (day and night) have a goatee, probably wearing a little beret and a turtleneck.
That's what a cat looks like. Did that help you?
Beatnicks, the Jazz and coffee shop people, the Cool Cats, (and folk music too) were pretty much wiped out by the Hippies and the British Invasion. 
3
« on: Yesterday at 14:22 »
A sparrow in the hand is better than the pigeon on the roof.
Adobe's remuneration for moderately performing images is fair, real and ends up as tangible money in your bank account.
Everything else is speculation for which you can't buy anything.
I would concur with this in general. Specially in these times when entire microstock industry is in freefall.
But there are other factors, some even depend on type of person. Some like to play it safe, some like risks. (i.e. "This is good image, I'll take a gamble it will take more than $5"). Some like to rely on intuition ("I just have a hunch, really good feel about this one" - or "This one just won't do anything - grab my $5 if I can"). Etc etc
There are many other variables, outside Adobe - do I make this image RM Alamy exclusive, where it can sit for years making nothing, but then 4-digit sale tops all 10-or-whatever cents it would accumulate in the meantime elsewhere? Bottom line is, ports are assets that need to be managed in best possible way and there is no universal answer that applies equally to all.
It's possible to have a best seller on some other site, that hasn't sold 4 times on AS. There's no absolute answer, but as I pointed out... click all, and review individually, for anything that already makes more elsewhere or could next year. If it's not a good choice, don't do it. For all the rest, take the money! But if anyone believes that buyers don't shop sites for images and free people, aren't going to buy these, no matter what, there's no loss. These free images at Adobe, are not competing against our own identical images on iStock or Shutterstock. I think some people worry that "oh no, my image is getting used for free" which if $5 for a year, vs not getting used at all, or making 35 to 99 for the year. And my view is, $5 is more than $.99, more than maybe more, more than what if, and I know, more than nothing at all.
4
« on: Yesterday at 14:03 »
Its also a very insulting test to those of us who dont know what cats look like.
They are very groovy, wear Sunglasses, (day and night) have a goatee, probably wearing a little beret and a turtleneck.  That's what a cat looks like. Did that help you?
5
« on: Yesterday at 13:25 »
I don't understand how there are still people who waste their time uploading images and videos to agencies like this one. And the great thing is - you don't have to understand that either ;-)
In my case, 123rf generated revenue on par with Shutter up to and including February 2024, which was probably due to the adoption of AI images.
Since the beginning of March, however, things have gone haywire, uploads have stopped and sales have fallen dramatically - another agency is doing away with itself.
That's not because 123 is so good, it's because SS has become so bad?
6
« on: Yesterday at 13:20 »
One BIG thing is... people should be focusing on getting midjourney to pay authors RETROACTIVELY for the STOLEN works they made their tool based on, as well as set up a system for RECURRING PERPETUAL works going forward. discuss that. that is effective.
I am not a fan of AI, but your request is flawed. When you read a dictionary and learn what a word means, do you pay a royalty, every time you speak or write that word? When you look on the web for an answer and learn how to bake a cake, do you pay for that knowledge, every time you bake a cake? When a machine learning program, looks at an image and learns what a cat looks like, should every image the software looked at to learn, get a commission, every time the AI creates a cat image? The software is not "using" the original image, it isn't referencing the original image, it has learned elements of what a cat looks like. Second flaw, the companies don't know where they got the images or who made them. There's no source association, no one to one way to identify, which image or images were used to train or which images were used to create the output. When rain falls from the sky, do you know where that water came from, originally through evaporation? If 100 million images were used to train the AI, do you know which tiny bits were used to create each part of the specific image? The only agencies that seem to be blocking AI and not allowing people to upload, are the ones that have their own pay system that produces the same kind of images. They just say "no AI" because they want to block our competition.
7
« on: Yesterday at 13:01 »
Given that Apple only have 16% of the US personal computer market (2023, Q4), one wonders who the sheep are. 
And just over 18% of the world uses iPhones, but reading the web and the news, you would think, it's the biggest, best invention of all time. Every new release, the loyal sheep, line up to buy an upgrade. Until recently we didn't have the right to repair our own phones. What Apple does, is makes the old products obsolete by just saying, they are, and then doesn't support them anymore. I have an iPhone, I think it's 100 times better than any Android phone I ever owned. Reliable, works, doesn't lock up. Good design and interface. If someone asked me what phone system is best, I'd say iPhone. That's as a phone and for Apps. But I'm not going to answer every question that anyone asks about technology with "Anything Apple of course".  I've worked on an iMac, (in some Windows simulator mode) they are excellent, fast, bright, pretty much, all around wonderful. MAC laptop displays for many years, were far ahead of anything else. But modern PCs, the processors, the graphics cards, and everything else, is equal, and sometimes better. "The satisfaction of belonging to a cohesive group leads people to suppress their inner doubts. Loud voices overpower quieter ones, dissent is quashed, and the outcome is flawed..." That describes the devoted Apple cult members. They can only praise anything that Apple produces.
8
« on: Yesterday at 12:40 »
The question is: what is going on?
UAPs are what they are, but the alien claims, are neither testable nor falsifiable, so UFO/UAP Alien Visitors, what they are or aren't, does not fall within empirical study. Scientific skepticism regards it as pseudoscience.
Lacking a way to study or confirm or deny, will lead to real science to be skeptical and avoid embracing something, without proof. The believers have a personalized, based on meaningful coincidences, conjecture and some very creative, but unsupported, always changing evidence.
You build a straw man and then you burn it. I don't have any beliefs when it comes to UFOs. But obviously, the phenomenon is real and I am freaking curious to know what is behind it and I would like to find it out.
Maybe no one knows? How can they disclose the answers, if "they" have no answers. I bring up aliens because the UFO people seem to associate the two and explain that all of this comes from alien visitation. Grusch? You say, why did I mention aliens? Grusch claimed that "the U.S. federal government maintains a secretive UFO (or UAP) recovery and reverse engineering program and that it is in possession of "non-human" spacecraft along with their "dead pilots"." Non-Human, dead pilots. What would that be? Where do you find the truth and facts, when most of the UAP information is mistaken, mis-identification or made up fabrications and distortions. How's that for science. Lets have some evidence to back the claims. I'd go for that. Claims need proof. The phenomenon is real, it is not new, it could potentially be of the most important things in human history. Why? Do you know what it is that makes it so important? We don't know. Show me the facts.
9
« on: Yesterday at 12:27 »
iMac is the best
I hear their voices, Baaa, Baa, Apple, iMac, iPhone, softly murmuring in unison, as a flock, Baa, Baa, baaaa M3 Starts at $1,299 but what you will want and need costs about $2,700 and up. Note: you can't adjust the height or angle of the screen? It does tilt a little. Answer: PC
10
« on: May 28, 2024, 10:37 »
I just had an interesting experience when submitting images.
After clicking submit I got the verify box with 'pick all the images with cats'.
Did that & then it went to another page where it asked me to 'describe the above image'
Minimum 5 words required.
Is this being used to help train their AI?
Besides being a pain in the a$$ requiring another step - I do not want to help with their AI training in any way.
Don't think I will be filling in anything useful going forward.
Not AI training, it's to stop the Bots. The click the cats has been going on for months.
11
« on: May 28, 2024, 10:31 »
The trick for me is I have a bunch of eligible images that are part of a series. While individually it might be great to get $5 for one, I greatly fear it would cannibalize sales from the others. Why buy the image you really want if you can get a super close one for nothing?
Noting to Fear but Fear itself? I have never seen sales change for anything, after years of allowing, almost all images into the free collection.
$5 for the accepted images, last year, is more than the lifetime for those same images, across all platforms and agencies.
Percentages just because someone asked.
Around 5% are nominated by Adobe, of those 20-25% when I click all (except one, for one round) are accepted and I got paid. Easier numbers, if it's at all relevant, 1% of my total images, have appeared in the Free and Other use collection. $5 each, in my pocket is more than all except that one, has made and I can't say what might happen, but if an image hasn't earned $5 in seven years, I'm not going to assume it will suddenly just leap off the page and grab $5 in the next year?
I'll stick with the sure thing.
I agree with you Pete.
A sparrow in the hand is better than the pigeon on the roof.
Adobe's remuneration for moderately performing images is fair, real and ends up as tangible money in your bank account.
Everything else is speculation for which you can't buy anything.
I only approve for possible inclusion, any image that hasn't earned $5 total, across all sites, in the last year. Most of what Adobe says are eligible have 1-2 sales, lifetime. This isn't rocket science. If the image makes more than $5 a year, or earns over the long term, don't include it. Kind of you to call them moderately preforming images. (at least mine) These are dormant dogs, which will not suddenly wake up and start running. However I will take the money and run.
12
« on: May 28, 2024, 10:21 »
...
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...
I was writing about all and other stock, not just AI.
13
« on: May 27, 2024, 11:36 »
The trick for me is I have a bunch of eligible images that are part of a series. While individually it might be great to get $5 for one, I greatly fear it would cannibalize sales from the others. Why buy the image you really want if you can get a super close one for nothing?
Noting to Fear but Fear itself? I have never seen sales change for anything, after years of allowing, almost all images into the free collection. $5 for the accepted images, last year, is more than the lifetime for those same images, across all platforms and agencies. Percentages just because someone asked. Around 5% are nominated by Adobe, of those 20-25% when I click all (except one, for one round) are accepted and I got paid. Easier numbers, if it's at all relevant, 1% of my total images, have appeared in the Free and Other use collection. $5 each, in my pocket is more than all except that one, has made and I can't say what might happen, but if an image hasn't earned $5 in seven years, I'm not going to assume it will suddenly just leap off the page and grab $5 in the next year? I'll stick with the sure thing.
14
« on: May 27, 2024, 11:22 »
I have a portfolio I think of a few thousand assets there (both video & pictures), and strangely enough don't really see any sales there (haven't the last couple years). Not sure what is going on there end, not sure if anyone is earning anything significantly there, but seems to be a bit of a waste of time...
Understated, but since so many people are still waiting for the Great Pumpkin, the Easter Bunny or trying to catch the Leprechaun for his pot of gold? They stay and wait and hope that 123 will some day change. The buy-out by some big company, is, maybe something? Maybe nothing? Inmagine Group, https://www.inmagine.com/I've gotten over hoping and wishing and working for places that just don't pay. The market has changed, the boom is over, now there will be more sorting out and more closures.
15
« on: May 27, 2024, 11:10 »
The question is: what is going on?
UAPs are what they are, but the alien claims, are neither testable nor falsifiable, so UFO/UAP Alien Visitors, what they are or aren't, does not fall within empirical study. Scientific skepticism regards it as pseudoscience. Lacking a way to study or confirm or deny, will lead to real science to be skeptical and avoid embracing something, without proof. The believers have a personalized, based on meaningful coincidences, conjecture and some very creative, but unsupported, always changing evidence. Another way of describing pseudoscience is, the lunch counter buffet type of science. They only take what they want and ignore anything that doesn't agree with their preconceived belief system. Lets look at some basics. UAPs or UFOs are what they are. Unidentified. The definition is the description and a fact. There's nothing, no proof or evidence that UAP equals Aliens. They are not one in the same as is assumed. There's a leap of logic in assuming that UAPs are caused by alien visitors and not some natural event, or simple misidentified natural phenomena. What's going on is personal belief vs basic science, with the believers using faulty logic and poor scientific method to claim, to have come to some valid conclusion. In another way, the UFO people have more of a religion system, than scientific system. If they believe something, it's true. Anyone who denies or doubts, is attacked and demonized. The essential flaw is, how evidence is collected, while excluding anything that doesn't fit, denying skeptical questions, and censoring opposing views or facts. The other side of that flawed "science", is only including data that fits the theory, selected agenda and what supports the claims. Bottom line: the claims in favor of Aliens, who are visiting in UFOs are are neither testable nor falsifiable. No one can prove they don't exist, and there's no way to test the selective evidence for truth, when most of it is made up or invented.
16
« on: May 27, 2024, 10:41 »
Is $2-$3/hr a good rate for you?
but I will be getting this money forever
no you won't. your images are not living alone, they are in a sea of millions of other very similar files you are competing with.
even if you get lucky and you actually have a file that sells well and makes its way to page one of a search term...you will get instant copies by other "inspired" artists.
with ai it is extremely easy to copy not just ideas, but the actual composition, you can choose simlar models, styling, locations.
ai is a great tool, but the easy gold rush is over.
now you need to work with complex prompts to make it less easy to copy.
so when you create content and get something you really like...please check if the exact same image has not already been uploaded 2000 times...
if you work hard and have a few thousand files you can build a regular income. but it will take 2-3 years to become intersting.
you also need to do normal photos and videos, to get income from the agencies who do not take ai.
Right. I suggest anyone new stick with the idea that many years of hard work, will possibly produce some residual income. After that, don't count the money or spend it, before you have it. Nothing in Microstock is forever. Make AI now, learn and keep the door open to moving past that. 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. Sorry but drone video is also reaching that same over abundance. While it's much better and more creative, the angles and distinctive look and feel, is becoming, everyday.
18
« on: May 15, 2024, 11:41 »
Is $2-$3/hr a good rate for you?
but I will be getting this money forever
I like a your profile image ( a dime $.10) because that is what what we get from Shutter all the time lol! Good luck and may the force be with you.
You'll like this one too? 
19
« on: May 15, 2024, 11:31 »
Is it documented anywhere what Firefly does with "reference" images a user uploads?
- Does it save them?
- Is it any different than what Adobe does with contributors images relative to AI?
No answers, too bad. I'd wonder the same as you do, how they are stored and used, maybe for future training? But I think, unless there's some vetting and monitoring, some human would still need to look at each one and evaluate them. Nothing in the terms?
20
« on: May 15, 2024, 11:29 »
I do high end motion graphics work and make fractal art and after 6 years of my previous Intel Mac I have updated earlier this year to an M2 Studio and it seriously rocks.
As humor, I ran into a guy at a bar, who was "into fractals" and he had just bought the latest 486 so he could make them better and faster. We never stop going faster and better?  Cute ad, I still don't understand what was offensive. I mean the whole idea, without the ad, that an iPad Pro would be the creators tool of choice and replace all the others, is a complete farce, but so what? Politicians and special interest groups, tell us that electric cars are the future and people swallow that?
21
« on: May 15, 2024, 11:21 »
https://chng.it/Q4mPz45mrG
" We can't get enough of this deluge of Ai content, there is a need for a limit and I will present this petition to Adobestock if we reach a significant number of signatures. "
I just signed the petition of Antonio Gravantes StockPhoto, who for those who don't know him, is a professional stocker who has managed to close many fake accounts on shutterstock and AS and I think that this initiative that he is now trying is important regarding the massive AI content
Needs a bump to put the petition back on top. 
22
« on: May 15, 2024, 11:15 »
My point would be, not denying what you have observed, honest or not, or however you want to label your comments about the truth and reality of things.
You can attack a subject, or an activity, and point out something is wrong, without calling out an entire group of people, for what some individuals do.
I am not politically correct or woke, but I do stand up when it comes to generalizations about entire cultures, races, regions or religions, based on a smaller number of that population who are anti-social, criminal or only see the world, from a self-serving perspective.
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. Glad to hear you aren't "woke" though lol. (I admit - 4 years ago when the media started publishing being "awake" and "woke" I thought they were the same thing - thinking someone 'woke up' and was now 'awake', not realizing of course they are in many ways polar opposites).
But then I suppose that is why some (of course, not all - because some microstockers are very intelligent) - but referrering specifically to some microstockers are on here whining & complaining like children, because they are not international businessmen, but rather hoping they can stick their head in the sand and if they throw a big enough tantrum, someone might do something.
But I'll agree with that one!
Sounds good!
I honestly think Woke is a stupid term, but since everyone else, knows what it means, I'm forced to use it. I might have said apologists or history revisionists, but fine, one word does it now. There are different views of who's woke and what it means, one more possibly vague modern, overused term? I see it as misguided people, who are over the top, finding fault, wrong and complaining at every opportunity. I looked up a definition: "alert to and concerned about social injustice and discrimination: " Well I'm concerned, but I'm not alert and over the top, awake. Candidates use it to galvanize the conservative base around culture war issues. Well I'm not politically aligned with any party. I believe in people thinking for themselves and not being led to the slaughter of party politics or mindless, voluntary, thought herding. The obvious, which I stated, I'm not politically correct or Woke.  
23
« on: May 14, 2024, 14:47 »
note, though, you can't have them submit to any agency you've already submitted those images to
And you don't always have control over that. If they onboard a new agency and it's one that you are already submitting to via a personal account, you might end up in a situation where they submit images that are already there... and get accepted. Easy to miss such notification from them because their mails tend to end up in a spam folder or you just might be on holiday and miss it. I have that with Getty (via iStock on my personal account, and via Wirestock). And they sell via both channels. I haven't seen any consequences of that, but I guess theoretically it can happen that one of the accounts get suspended.
Anyhow, that's a situation you have with any distributor. Same with EyeEm in the past.
Yes, there's another negative. I don't know how or what I could do to end the 3 uses by Extra Channels. Maybe that was Evanto or ? They did add everything to IS when that came back online. I'm sure I have duplicates being sold under two accounts. Pond5 wrote me to say I either stole and image or mine was stolen, because two accounts have the same image. Guess what? It was mine from Wirestock. Hasn't hurt me, but you are right, there is some lack of control. On the other hand, I won't pay to play, so only the oldest images from, upload everything and see what passed, when WS opened, is online. It's "everything" going back to about 2009. AS, SS, I upload on my own. Which makes WS prefect for distribution of aging Microstock, where I don't have to have an account and wait 10 years to cash out. IS, AL, DT, I have some from both myself and WS. There's my biggest attraction. Make $30, anywhere, any combination of agencies, get paid. Sorry for the thread hijack: Shutterstock is an embarassment
24
« on: May 14, 2024, 14:36 »
The message was simple - the new iPad can take the place of all these things and be your new creative tool. The execution was horrific because you didnt know where it was going until the final punchline.
100%. Exactly how I saw it. Ad itself is horrible, but message is clear.
Re Apple, just like with most other things, there are those that hate them and those that love them. But quality of their products is superior. cca 2009 I switched from PC to Mac and never looked back. MacBook Pro that had wine spilled over between other things is still functional.
But if your Mac dies mysteriously from a know parts malfunction, the Genius at Apple will open is and look at the secret moisture detection tabs and say, "sorry, your device was subjected to water damage, no coverage." This is not uncommon, even when there was no wine or water damage. I worked on a Mac and loved it, but I have everything PC. I see others who have Macs and they are nice, great display, I heard very wonderful for photo editing. I also know entire business that had so many problems with their MACs that the switched to PCs and have been happy ever since. This isn't as easy as, this vs that. Either system is fine, for what someone needs and how they use them. Same for the phones. I have a crappy old SE and it's better than the best Android I ever owned. My iPad just kills the Samsung tablet I use. This is live me, I own both, not I like one better because AppleNazi's are aggravating, or I don't like the business model. Some Apple products are better, some are overpriced and a bunch of sugar coated fluff.
25
« on: May 14, 2024, 14:24 »
Thanks for noticing. I was wondering how many East Indians are Jews?  Oh I see, it's those two groups and probably more.
My view is, it's unnecessary to blame and label people for origins or their ethnicity or religion as the cause of problems in the stock industry or our business.
Could we stick to business and AI an skip the personal attacks?
Lol, hey pete. Not sure if you are trolling, just bored - or genuinely curious to the answer to your question. That question I don't know - I 'spose you could take a poll?
If someone gets upset at stating the obvious - it's like saying "hey, that car is GREEN!". And then someone replying "OMFG! yOU ARE an ANTI-GREEN CAR person! OMFG! ANTI-GREEN! ANTI GREEN! ANTI-GREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" (Which lol - in itself makes no sense - because you simply stated a car was green. One could argue that you are actually PRO green because you made people aware of the lovely greenness of the car).
It is significant understanding how different sets of people conduct business. Like, using a different example - if you went to China to do a business deal, and the first thing you did was to start discussing business, you'd have a very short trip. It's not how Chinese businessmen conduct business. It's relevant to understand what types of individuals/groups/background are responsible for certain things in order to deal with it effectively.
Otherwise - ignoring how a different culture/person/etc conducts business because you'd don't want to be "perceived" as some label (which - actually IS a "business tactic" employed by some groups - making ppl 'fearful' to be 'labelled' a certain way state the obvious) is actually rather foolish.
But then I suppose that is why some (of course, not all - because some microstockers are very intelligent) - but referrering specifically to some microstockers are on here whining & complaining like children, because they are not international businessmen, but rather hoping they can stick their head in the sand and if they throw a big enough tantrum, someone might do something. Thing is - if one wants to stick their head in the sand and figuratively go 'la la la la la can't hear you la la la la!' - while that is their prerogative - one should be aware that the different people/groups/etc find that incredibly funny and certainly would take advantage of a person who conducts business "that" way...
My point would be, not denying what you have observed, honest or not, or however you want to label your comments about the truth and reality of things. You can attack a subject, or an activity, and point out something is wrong, without calling out an entire group of people, for what some individuals do. I am not politically correct or woke, but I do stand up when it comes to generalizations about entire cultures, races, regions or religions, based on a smaller number of that population who are anti-social, criminal or only see the world, from a self-serving perspective. But then I suppose that is why some (of course, not all - because some microstockers are very intelligent) - but referrering specifically to some microstockers are on here whining & complaining like children, because they are not international businessmen, but rather hoping they can stick their head in the sand and if they throw a big enough tantrum, someone might do something. But I'll agree with that one!
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 181
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
