|
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 - Anyka
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 37
26
« on: October 11, 2023, 02:00 »
I don't have any similar experiences, but I wonder if you might understand more about how this mistake occurred by looking at the metadata in your uploaded file.
When I was experimenting with Photoshop 25 and generative fill, I used an online metadata tool to look at and compare what was in the new file versus one created with PS 24.x. As far as I can tell from the limited tests I did, if you stay away from the AI-powered features, your Photoshop edited files should be fine.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z_2dnk-QdSpAU47AQZSXgwwPYRhIsa9A/view?usp=sharing
Interesting! Can you tell us which software you used to view the metadata? I just use Irfanview and their report looks totally different from yours ... Also, I read this on DPreview : The new Content Credentials feature attaches metadata to Firefly-generated images to let others know the creator, edits made, and the tools used, what Adobe is calling a "nutrition label" for AI images.
27
« on: September 30, 2023, 01:57 »
Did anyone get a "confirmation" after requesting payout ? After clicking the button, it just changed into a grayed out button "being processed", but no other confirmation or e-mail.
28
« on: September 27, 2023, 06:57 »
This change also has no impact on the elements royalty pool, or elements creators. The royalty pools for templates and ingredients (elements, photos, video, etc) are separate.
Thanks for the good news!
29
« on: September 23, 2023, 09:29 »
"Collaborate, edit, and present on-the-go
Easily edit slides and present from anywhere using Canvas presentation software, on any browser or mobile device."
I think that means that there's no download involved for this type of use but Canva's telling you that will count towards your payout
I think that makes sense - which means it would be good news after all ...
30
« on: September 23, 2023, 02:44 »
Adobe's website says this:
Content created by prompting with artist names if their works are no longer under copyright may be acceptable as long as you verify that no other rights apply to the prompt (e.g., publicity rights, cultural heritage rights, etc.). If you are unsure if you have the necessary rights, do not submit content made using that prompt.
Personally I would not risk it. Adobe has a twitchy finger when banning accounts.
For "Rembrandt" it's far to late, as I use the keyword in the meaning of "Rembrandt lighting" a lot, but the word "Vermeer" I could remove from already submitted images I suppose ... although there are hundreds of "Vermeer" images online, including 200 girls with pearl earrings, and only 8 of them are editorial. I do realize I'm on the wrong topic here, as I was talking about "real" photos, not AI ...
31
« on: September 23, 2023, 01:21 »
"On October 1st, we will start paying for template "usages" instead of "exports".
This improvement means you earn royalties each time your design is downloaded, printed OR presented."
I've read this 20 times now, and I still have no idea what it means ...
32
« on: September 23, 2023, 01:18 »
Did anyone have anything rejected because of mentioning "antique" artists' names? I often mention styles like "Rembrandt" and "Vermeer", but they died 400 years ago ... Does Adobe say anything about long-dead artists? (and do the reviewers know?)
33
« on: September 16, 2023, 02:36 »
But where exactly is the "data cataloge" option available? Maybe that's what I am missing somehow, though I have looked everywhere. 
You're not missing anything, because you're opted out. The "data catalogue" can be found by clicking in the lefthand bar on "portfolio", and then "data catalog". Only you will not find your refused images there, because you opted out, so there's nothing to be found there. So customer support is right : you cannot delete them if you're opted out. I do wonder however, if the "opted out people" are able to resubmit their images if they have been marked "eligible for data licensing". I had a few refusals for MR, "real refusals", so I can resubmit with a corrected MR, but resubmitting the "eligible" ones is another problem, because you really don't know the reason of refusal ...
34
« on: September 14, 2023, 08:28 »
I have opted out about 2 months ago, and this week I also got 1 file "eligible for data licensing". I hope that just means that "it would be suitable for data licensing but we won't use it since you opted out" ...
Or, in other words, "the file is refused, we know you opted out, but we're using the new term because then we don't have to give you any reason of refusal" ...
35
« on: August 30, 2023, 14:20 »
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.
including AI features in PS? content aware fill, upcoming generative fill to extend backgrounds, and especially neural filters?
these effects are not traceable, and have never been considered ai generated in the past
Totally agree there's a gray line here. Using AI tools like content aware fill, background extension etc. is not the same as generating an image in Midjourney.
36
« on: August 30, 2023, 02:59 »
With all this going on, I am not submitting any images containing AI content ... so far. However, I do enjoy using Midjourney and other AI programs, and I do have several images containing AI generated parts. I just don't submit them.
What about this situation :
A normal photograph, shot with a camera, containing fully model released people on a fully released background. BUT, I did not like the cleavage of one of the models, and I made it more modest using AI software.
According to Mat, I think I should submit this image as "AI generated" + add the model and property releases of the real people and background.
Correct ?
Seems not correct to me, as I do have the raw file of the photo, just not the lady's cleavage ...
This is just a non-existing example, but for me, it is the reason why I don't submit these images to Adobe.
37
« on: July 25, 2023, 11:43 »
I'm not charged any additional fee from Payoneer when receiving payments from Shutterstock. Where did you see this fee?
When I receive payments from SS, no additional fees are charged.
But if I receive payments from AS (over $100), then $3.00 fees will be deducted.
Same here!
38
« on: July 13, 2023, 06:50 »
I'm "waking up" this old topic, because I noticed that Payoneer is not so favorable anymore.
Today I received 245 dollars from Depositphotos, and only 242 dollars "arrived" in my Payoneer account. A withdrawal request into euros would result into 212,23 euros.
I stopped the procedure, and did a simulation of the same 245 dollars with Paypal, and this simulation resulted in 213,31 euros, on the same day.
Did anything change at Payoneer, resulting in less favorable exchange rates, or an extra fee?
39
« on: July 11, 2023, 01:08 »
I have no crystal ball, but there is also this possibility : in 10 years, people might 've gotten so used to AI and working with AI generators, that there is no longer any NEED for stock agencies - people will generate the images and videos themselves, without using stock agencies. The libraries could be completely obsolete. So what will be left for us? Direct clients: photographing the people (and their pets) for portraits. Beside stock photography, I'm also a newborn photographer, and at this moment, I can't see how AI will be able to replace that in the near future. People will still want to document the important life events like births and weddings. People will still want a beautiful portrait of their family, in their best dresses, with makeup and the whole "experience" of a photo session? So who will be the losers then? The agencies themselves?
40
« on: June 22, 2023, 00:32 »
Even Adobe's corporate spin at various public events has included the importance of being transparent - tagging AI generated images as such - and surely that has to include the Adobe Stock collection.
"As a trusted partner to individuals and businesses of all sizes, Adobe develops and deploys all AI capabilities with a customer-centric approach and according to its AI Ethics principles to ensure content and data transparency. Content Credentials provide nutrition labels for digital content and are a key pillar of Adobes AI principles."
Adobe also tells its customers they can "trust" Adobe because they compensated their artists for the use of the database ... Even if they "plan" to do this in the near/far future, it is/was not true when they launched Firefly and started accepting AI images as stock.
41
« on: June 22, 2023, 00:05 »
This is good news, but only if they keep the comparison tool. Camera buying guides and reviews can be found everywhere, but I really liked their side by side comparison tool.
42
« on: May 16, 2023, 00:22 »
The second paragraph has nothing to do with the first.
I agree, but the "collectively the Contributor" applies to the entire document ...
43
« on: May 15, 2023, 14:26 »
I have a 2004 Shutterstock model release, and the form is essentially the same. Other agencies have the same idea, but it's expressed differently and thus sounds less worrying.
I believe the reason this hasn't caused any problems is that a model cannot grant rights to anyone that the model doesn't have, and thus there is no way they can grant SS copyright in a photograph when the model doesn't have that in the first place.
The essential part of that sentence is that the model is not making a claim on the copyright; agreeing that the rights are "...free and clear from any claims by me or anyone acting on my behalf."
Very true ... but you might expect from a company like Shutterstock - who I'm sure have a big team of lawyers - would be able to write a less ambiguous sentence.
44
« on: May 15, 2023, 08:36 »
OK, I'm sure you will tell me this has been in the MR for months/years, but I only noticed today ...
It's been a while since I needed a MR, so I thought I had better adjust mine and make it closer to the 2023 Shutterstock release.
Must say I was unpleasantly surprised to read this :
I (the Model) hereby grant to the Contributor and Shutterstock Inc. (collectively "the Contributor") the right to .... (bla bla) ...
and in the next paragraph :
I hereby agree that all rights in and to the Content, including the copyright, are and shall remain the sole property of the Contributor ....
What ? ??
Of course, there is no problem for myself, as I always make a "generic" model release, NOT mentioning Shutterstock or any other Agency, but are there really photographers that simply copy this text ?
45
« on: April 12, 2023, 02:21 »
What I will miss most is the side-by-side camera or lens comparisons. You can do that at on-line camera shops of course, but only with cameras that are still on the market. So where do we go now for a comparison between an OLD and a NEW camera ...
47
« on: April 05, 2023, 09:51 »
I have not received minimum payout yet so I didn't receive the email, but the minimum cashout is $30, so why would you leave your fortune sitting in your account?
I usually cash out 1x per year at Bigstock. But that's not what this is about - the question is : why do they urge me to cash out, while it is in their own interest if I just forget about it ?
48
« on: April 05, 2023, 08:09 »
Now WHY on earth do I get the e-mail message below? They are my lowest earner (3 to 5 eur/month) and I have only 54 EUR waiting there ...
Is this their subtle way of telling me the end of BS is getting closer? Anyone else got this mail?
Did you know you are leaving money behind in your Bigstock account? Cash in this Spring by taking a moment to collect the money your creative work has earned you!
Here are the steps you need to take:
Complete a Tax form: To receive payments, all contributors must have an approved tax form on file. If you dont have one on file already, read how to submit a new tax form in a few easy steps here.
Request a payment: On the main page under 'Commissions' in your account, you will see the 'Payment Preferences' area. Select (or edit) the payment email address for electronic payments to be sent to an existing verified PayPal or MoneyBookers/Skrill account by clicking on the button next to your choice. Then, simply click the 'Request Commissions' button and your request will be sent to us.
Contact our support team if you have any questions and well be glad to assist you!
Thank you,
The Bigstock team
49
« on: March 20, 2023, 08:58 »
Is this for your entire portfolio? I remember that DST used to push non-selling images in the free section, but surely not your entire portfolio ?
50
« on: February 27, 2023, 03:40 »
So we are supposed to accept XX % less depending on the dollar rate. During my years in microstock, this XX has been between -9% (2022) and -49% (2008) !!
On top of that, Adobe will be PAYING in dollars, which will cost us between 2,5% (payoneer) and 3,5% (paypal).
Did Adobe not know they can PAY in euros? Canstock just changed this to our benefit : I am EARNING in dollars at Canstock, but I'm PAID in euros, so I can skip the Paypal fee there.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 37
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
