|
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 - aprott
1
« on: January 26, 2024, 19:40 »
But as I already wrote, your subscription is very expensive. In order for your subscription to generate good income, go to the pricing scheme of envato or storyblocks.
Wow you seem to be a real pro economist. So I suppose you upload all your images to Unsplash and receive unlimited money in return? Or are you just an image buyer trolling these stock contrib forums?
2
« on: January 03, 2024, 17:14 »
My account thankfully was unblocked after nearly 4 months today by Mat after I finally sent him a message. He told me my account was blocked because of referencing artists in metadata and because of not ticking the AI checkbox for AI generated content. He asked me to go through my portfolio within one week to delete AI content not flagged as AI.
I immediately went through all my 4423 images and noticed that all AI generated content was flagged as AI. But I found 37 additional images which were somehow flagged by Adobe (inspection?) as AI but in fact are not generated by AI. I do a lot of 3d rendering and it seems like inspectors or (AI?) machines sometimes mistakenly flag 3d rendered content as AI content. I found one AI image with a reference to "Disney" in the keywords. So that was the only issue I found.
I sent my assessment to Mat and am looking forward to the reply.
OK, I got a reply. The information I got was not correct: The images with problems concerning references to artists were already removed, there were two similars. The problem with not flagging as AI was instead a problem of mixing up file types photo and illustration because in the past AI content had to be uploaded as illustration (now it can be uploaded as photo if photorealistic). That's one of my common mistakes because default is photo and I sometimes forget to change to illustration when uploading. The falsely labelled AI images will be relabelled as non-AI. It seems to me that an immediate ban is rather harsh - a warning with concrete feedback would have been nice.
3
« on: January 03, 2024, 16:01 »
My account thankfully was unblocked after nearly 4 months today by Mat after I finally sent him a message. He told me my account was blocked because of referencing artists in metadata and because of not ticking the AI checkbox for AI generated content. He asked me to go through my portfolio within one week to delete AI content not flagged as AI.
I immediately went through all my 4423 images and noticed that all AI generated content was flagged as AI. But I found 37 additional images which were somehow flagged by Adobe (inspection?) as AI but in fact are not generated by AI. I do a lot of 3d rendering and it seems like inspectors or (AI?) machines sometimes mistakenly flag 3d rendered content as AI content. I found one AI image with a reference to "Disney" in the keywords. So that was the only issue I found.
I sent my assessment to Mat and am looking forward to the reply.
4
« on: November 23, 2023, 07:47 »
Also even if it will be back some of the images will never perform as before, because it is out of the scope and trends for a few months now. Adobe should dedicate a team or department for these account blocking cases, because contributors everyday living can depend on this (if he/she takes it seriously and it's not just a pocket money). I would be happy to even decrease the % we get by 1-2% just to know it won't happen randomly. People put into the production 100s and 1000s of hours and it might happen that it will be lost forever. This is an underrated issue, I really hope someone from Adobe will take care of this situation and figure out some sort of solution.
You are so right. That's why I differentiated direct and indirect damages in the past postings. I had several images which where number one in search for certain keywords so the effect of several months of blackout will be devastating.
5
« on: November 23, 2023, 04:30 »
72 days or nearly 2 1/2 months now and I still don't know if I am currently being punished by blocking my account or if Adobe just doesn't have time to look into the case. No word from Adobe since the initial email answer.
My portfolio used to generate well beyond 1000 USD/month in the summer months mostly from non-AI images and video before the block on Sept 12. The damage is on my side since people who have a subscription will just use another image from another contributor - so Adobe doesn't need to worry except for a reputational damage in the relation to contributors.
6
« on: November 05, 2023, 11:49 »
aprott, I really feel a bit sorry about the useless comments here for you.
Therefore my appeal (I hope others will follow, we are somehow a community here in the forum):
Mat, aprott seems to be a loyal, likeable contributor of many years who has expressed his cooperation and at least has not maliciously made some silly mistake.
Can you please ensure that the examination is accelerated ?
Thank you for your support, Ralf. I will report here when I am contacted by Adobe.
7
« on: November 02, 2023, 12:17 »
I meant exactly this when I wrote: "your problem doesn't seem to me to be related solely to AI".
the real problem is that you submitted content that infringes intellectual property rights,whether they are AI content or not.
did you reference other artists in the prompt?Have you created AI content that featured famous people or characters?Have you included names of well-known characters,people or artists in the description or keywords?
I don't even want to know,I'm just telling you that you were blocked for one of these reasons.
However,in my opinion,if it was an isolated mistake,you will probably be unblocked.
if there is anything else,I don't know,only you can know.
As I already stated several times in the thread I do understand what contrib support wrote but I couldnt find any image which might have triggered this. Theres nothing more to say until Adobe reveals the alleged problem - the analysis already takes 51 days.
8
« on: November 02, 2023, 07:27 »
I'm just wondering one thing that I really can't understand:
"given your considerable experience in microstock,didn't you realize that you were uploading content that violated the upload guidelines?"yes,you knew but you did it anyway.
As I wrote I am not aware of any images in my current portfolio which would violate the upload guidelines for AI.
I don't know this,but what I see is that your problem doesn't seem to me to be related solely to AI.
I say this because in the response that you received and that you reported here,it does not seem to me that there is reference to the fact that you have violated the guidelines regarding AI,but that you have violated intellectual property rights.
I had another look at the message from contrib support and it definitely says AI content: ----- Your account was blocked after we noticed that you have submitted Generative Ai content that is not within our guidelines. You have submitted files that refer to famous artists, people, characters from popular culture, and/or other existing subjects such as video games in the image, title or keywords. We take intellectual property rights very seriously and your uploads are a violation of these rights and thus violate the upload guidelines. Your account will remain blocked until further notice. ---- Edit: Sorry for the confusion: I had omitted the first line in my earlier post because I had already talked about it being triggered by AI related images.
9
« on: November 01, 2023, 14:10 »
I'm just wondering one thing that I really can't understand:
"given your considerable experience in microstock,didn't you realize that you were uploading content that violated the upload guidelines?"yes,you knew but you did it anyway.
As I wrote I am not aware of any images in my current portfolio which would violate the upload guidelines for AI.
10
« on: October 31, 2023, 04:33 »
OK, perhaps biweekly is the right pace to keep this thread up - toady it is 7 weeks (!) since my portfolio was deactivated by Adobe because of alleged problems with "in the style of" in my small AI related part of my portfolio (around 5% of all assets).
I still don't know which image/s might have caused a red flag since I had proactively deleted images which might have caused problems with the amended rules of AI submissions.
The direct damage has passed the 2.000 USD mark for sure. Not to speak of indirect damages by a portfolio ranked down in the search algorithms when/if it gets activated ever again. And not to speak of the seasons related images waiting on my harddrive which now surely will not make it in time.
No reaction from Adobe contrib support whatsoever on my proposal to just delete the AI related part of my portfolio, which I made two times.
PS: I saw examples of people reporting images in Adobe Stocks Discord channel as not ok which can be generated with the term "in the style of pop art". This does not relate to any specific artist - nevertheless the results can be close to Warhol oder Lichtenstein or whomever did pop art. So what now?? Are art styles also fordbidden?
11
« on: October 17, 2023, 07:26 »
Five weeks now without a verdict. I think I will switch from weekly to monthly reports here. Have sent another email to Diego/contributor support.
<sarcasm>Perhaps it takes longer to check a portfolio where you find nothing wrong</sarcasm>
12
« on: October 10, 2023, 04:43 »
Today it will be four weeks - the damage is adding up... I had bestsellers appearing as number one in certain searches, this will all be over once my port gets activated again because they will be displaced by other images which sold in the last four weeks.
13
« on: October 04, 2023, 04:58 »
Three weeks now and waiting . Direct damage well beyond 800$
14
« on: September 23, 2023, 13:29 »
I am wondering about it too. From the first glance I was unable to find any images missing.
So you dont even know which images where in question?
15
« on: September 22, 2023, 16:16 »
So the email restates the general prohibition, but does not specify which of your images violates this rule?
And they can't just rescind the approval of the images in question - assuming there are any?
.
Exactly. I think the email is just an intermediate information triggered by my urgent second email. I think (or better hope) that the process is still in the making - a positive interpretation of the phrase Your account will remain blocked until further notice.
Amazing. I've experienced EXACTLY the same sequence of events. On my second email marked "Urgent" I've got exactly the same response, signed by Diego Gomez. That was the only piece of communication I got throughout the whole time my account was blocked. The account was unblocked three weeks later without any "further notice". I am still waiting for the explanation...
 Mine was also signed by Diego Gomez Did they remove any images when unblocking your account?
16
« on: September 22, 2023, 15:42 »
So the email restates the general prohibition, but does not specify which of your images violates this rule?
And they can't just rescind the approval of the images in question - assuming there are any?
.
Exactly. I think the email is just an intermediate information triggered by my urgent second email. I think (or better hope) that the process is still in the making - a positive interpretation of the phrase Your account will remain blocked until further notice.
17
« on: September 22, 2023, 13:38 »
OK here is the answer to my second urgent email to contrib support:
----
You have submitted files that refer to famous artists, people, characters from popular culture, and/or other existing subjects such as video games in the image, title or keywords. We take intellectual property rights very seriously and your uploads are a violation of these rights and thus violate the upload guidelines.
Your account will remain blocked until further notice.
----
As I have mentioned in my OP I went through my account before the block to remove images which might pose a problem. Perhaps I missed something or they refer to an earlier state of my portfolio.
I answered that I immediately went through my portfolio and deleted all images which might pose a problem according to the concretized AI requirements and apologize if I have missed anything. For a speedy unblock I proposed to delete all my (limited number of) AI related content.
18
« on: September 20, 2023, 01:34 »
One week now - still waiting on a reaction by Adobe. Shoot first - ask muuuuch later
19
« on: September 15, 2023, 08:16 »
On istock they have a clear reminder that even if a small part is changed with ai, it is ai generated and cannot be sent to istock.
On Adobe it would have to be marked as generated with ai tools.
This would now also apply to the Generative Fill in the new PS version. Even if you only use it for removing things like cigarette stubs on a sidewalk. So we all should use the "good" old methods of removing things. Furthermore Adobe says in the user guidelines that you are not allowed to use the results for AI training or allow third parties to do so on your results. So in effect you won't be allowed to upload those images to any stock agency because most "lend" the images for AI training.
20
« on: September 14, 2023, 15:02 »
Please let us know if at least the payout arrives.
Sure, I will keep you all updated. Thanks to all for the supporting comments. I would really appreciate if someone from Adobe would pick up all the good ideas on a respectful, fair and transparent process. Mat???
21
« on: September 14, 2023, 06:58 »
3 week block could be several thousand dollars. But in any case it is nearly one month income missing.
If there really was NOTHING wrong with the port, then Adobe should seriously consider compensation. Because then it must have been their algos that made a very serious mistake.
This is the most important buying season. You don't just lose the sales you also lose on the lightboxing of your files for future sales.
I am amazed that Adobe is not understanding that stock is not a hobby for the producers but actually their main income. At least for the old timers who have been uploading for years.
There must be a different way to handle this problem.
example:
- Notify the contributor that their account is under investigation. Give them a case number and communication place to ask questions.
- Give then a time frame estimate when a human will look into the problem.
- Until them let them access their account, their money and also give them the ability to delete files themselves.
- After the process is complete give them a real report what happened, what the problem was and how it was resolved.
Couldn't agree more! An additional negative impact is the lost "search juice": your images will rank deeper because of less downloads in the blocked weeks.
22
« on: September 14, 2023, 01:52 »
This makes sad reading.
The most important earning season of the year.
I sincerly hope they get to you soon.
I dont understand why Adobe cannot create a better process to handle this issue.
Terrible, I am so sorry.
Thanks, Jasmin. I dont even know whether I will ever get my not yet payed out earnings of 1,5 months (around 1800 DLs).
23
« on: September 14, 2023, 00:29 »
Wow! 16 years of experience in the stock industry. Gone through the tough school of early iStock quality control - Jasmin knows what Im talking about :-). After giving up iStock exclusivity 6 years experience as Adobe Stock contributor with a very high acceptance rate. Currently 4000 assets and heading for 18000 downloads in 2023, all time rank below 3600, weekly around 1000. You know how much effort goes into building such a portfolio and I think I produced value for Adobe.
On Tuesday evening my account was blocked and I am waiting for the verdict. Have played around with AI a little bit, but wasnt satisfied with the image quality. So I only have a very limited AI portfolio. After the new warning not to use in the style of I even proactively deleted all images which might pose a problem.
So in fact Im more of a victim of the AI spammers because of the long inspection times. And now Adobe blocked my portfolio without explanation and lets me wait until someone has time to explain. Adobe used to be my favorite and most valuable agency because it seemed to be the most fair one - you can be so wrong.
Im hoping for a speedy and fair trial so I can move on - you can imagine my daily loss of revenue and opportunities for seasonal uploads which are waiting on my hard drive. A solution for me might be reactivating my shutter account which I cancelled in protest of their new payment structures of 2020. Or even going exclusive with iStock again.
PS: I dont know whether I got the Wednesday surprise bonus for AI training, since my account was already blocked.
24
« on: September 14, 2023, 00:23 »
Really don't like the way these companies basically say:
"Oh yah, we stole, erm, 'trained' our AI tool on your images... Here's what we figure it's worth, now don't bother us".
It's theft. Plain & simple. Doesn't matter how "they" justify it - if you did not explicitly give permission to do so, it's theft. Some "justify" it saying "well we have rights in our license agreement" - eh, no. BECAUSE of the way they've "approached" it - they KNOW it is wrong. (I.e., why would you have to 'hide' what you are doing, and after the fact say 'oh, here's some random money, now don't bother us' if you didn't feel it was wrong - because they KNOW - or rather - pretty strongly suspect - if they said to contributors 'Hey guys! We want to make a tool that will make US more money in the long term, and you less - so we basically want to rip of your images so we can do that, but we'll pay you a couple bucks so you don't feel bad, how does that sound?" MOST contributors would MOST LIKELY say, em, no.
Obviously dall-e/midjourney/etc were the first to just simply STEAL images... and one of the "pesky" little "problems" they have is getting rid of "watermarks"... hmm... how EVER could WATER marks have GOTTEN there? OH the mystery!
(While I have used the tools - and I do admit they are 'cool' - I think the approach to creating them is wrong and they should compensate artists for the hard work they did creating them - PLUS - future compensation for every single images generated based on those. Programatically - it IS VERY EASY to set up such a system. RETROACTIVELY - it is ALSO POSSIBLE. More work - but definitely doable).
Then shutterstock basically ripped things off, then said 'oh haha, yah, here's some money, SOOOOOOOreee! we already ripped it off, so you can't get it back, but here's what we randomly decided to pay you!"...
Sad to see what I would have considered better companies now following suit.
BY THE WAY...
CONTRARY to what these "AI" companies say (i.e., midjourney/dall-e/etc) - it actually IS possible to "backwards compensate"/"retroactively" pay/compensate contributors for the images they took IF they chose to do so...
(a) They "tracked" which images they fed into their training set.
(b) People who generated images used certain 'neural nodes' to create that image.
(c) They keep EXTENSIVE track of EVERY SINGLE THING created with the software.
So it IS possible to to write an algorithm "AI" to do super micropayments (like fractional cents) for EVERY SINGLE IMAGE created, THEN it IS possible to find those contributors (i.e., those images that had the 'pesky little watermarks') - and compensate them - and then it IS POSSIBLE to PAY OUT for EVERY SINGLE IMAGE going forward based on those BASE IMAGES...
It may be a little bit of work - but just an FYI - it IS possible. Contrary to what "they" might say. You'd just have to write a computer algorithm to do so.
So going forward - for EVERY single "AI" image created - you could be compensated fractional cents for 'neural node' inputs to create an image (i.e., $0.0001, because components of your image were used in making a new composite) - which - with the hundreds of thousands (more likely millions) being created every day... would quickly add up. AND - give you a nice future consistent revenue stream.
I see your point but dont think it is technically possible to tie output to specific learning material which went into the model. So in fact you would need to broadly distribute money to creators undiscriminate of the quality and usefulness of their work. So if 100.000.000 images went into the training the compensation would need to be split between all of them - and MidJourney doesnt even know them because they scraped the internet.
25
« on: July 23, 2020, 13:48 »
Ooh they are afraid of their own suppliers. Another nail in the coffin...
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
