|
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 - SuperPhoto
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 33
1
« on: May 08, 2024, 22:49 »
Lol - both sad & funny.
It's one thing to outright steal someone's work - it's another to be sooooooo lazy to not even try and disguise it... is it/was it a "straight" portfolio copy? i.e., did that person copy 'every' single image in your portfolio?
Not sure what to say...
a) I've been seeing (on amazon) a new "east indian business model" (actually last 3-4 years) - where basically they steal all the images off of pexels/freepik/etc - and they are SOOOO lazy, they do the bare minimum to "make a book" (i.e., the images are sideways, don't fit right - but just to meet the bare mininum specifications for a 'book') - then sell it dirt cheap (i.e., $10) as their own works, no attribution/etc - just passing off the "free" images as their own.
b) apparently - they also do that for various 'clothing' sites/etc (i.e., steal people's images, make 't-shirts' print on demand/etc)...
Of course - it is very easy/possible to rectify this:
a) if an account originates in east india, don't allow it.
b) and/or - do more due diligence.
Of course, blackrock/vanguard controlling the WEF/UN/etc are trying to push the "digitalID" crap (id2020) "for your safety & protection", which of course has absolutely nothing to do with safety nor protection, but rather for survelliance&control... so of course reject the id2020 crap...
Just do more due diligence to make sure the images/content aren't stolen before allowing the account to be created, as well as apply simple heuristics (i.e., if it's an east indian account, high probabability of it being stolen content). Credit card companies do that - easy to implement for websites as well.
(Of course -it's not "just" east indians, there are some arabic nations, some african provinces/etc, and of course 'local' people that do that too) - but easy to apply a simple heuristic algorithm to prevent that kind of stuff...
2
« on: May 08, 2024, 22:38 »
lol, yes, funny + messed up. how about shutterstock gives the full details of the thief's account? ah, but then thieves would probably start filing fake dmca reports to steal that info too...
simple solution:
a) don't allow accounts from east india/nigeria/etc - because most of the 'stolen' content originates from there. it's an accurate stereotype, because those tend to be the 'business models'.
b) if it has an east indian name, don't allow the account to be opened, again --^ see above. OR - require extra proof that the assets are indeed there's - OR - do a little extra checking before allowing such an account to be opened up.
3
« on: May 08, 2024, 11:14 »
Slow week so far, but weekly ranking is above average. Must be a slow week for everybody. It's possible more buyers started generating their own AI images via Midjourney etc instead of buying our images. That's my concern about near future.
I don't believe that is necessarily an issue. It is still "work" (at the moment) to set up a midjourney account. Get a discord account. Figure out how to use discord. Subscribe to their service. Figure out how to do a 'proper' prompt, etc. Even if it was an "easy" web-based interface (and remember - midjourney uses STOLEN content) - it would still be 'work'. Not to mention the 'pesky' little 'problem' of 'removing watermarks' (i.e., because the images were based off of STOLEN content, so needing to remove the watermark). There is a difference between getting 10-15 nice 'fresh' ideas, and 'having to figure out' yourself do you want someone standing, sitting, reading, etc. Much easier to just 'browse' for something. So there is still a market for produced images.
4
« on: May 03, 2024, 08:42 »
---------
5
« on: May 01, 2024, 09:50 »
If you upload to unlimited download sites like StoryBlocks etc, that always happen forever. It'll always be a cat and mouse game. You'll have to constantly searching on web to find thieves making money off of your works. There are also many thieves uploading on YouTube and monetizing them.
I hear ya! There's probably a lot of accounts like this. I just stumbled across it as I was uploading to Motion Array
How did you stumble upon it - was it a "suggested" video?
6
« on: May 01, 2024, 09:49 »
It's particularly odd that there are videos with model releases, such as the one found here: https://motionarray.com/stock-video/beach-girl-334517/. This suggests that either some content genuinely belongs to the uploader, or, more concerningly, there might be a case of falsified personal information.
if they are willing to simply steal THOUSANDS of clips and pass it off as their own, I'm pretty sure they aren't going to have any qualms about falsifying a "model release" which just requires a "random made up signature", etc. Basically - any east indian accounts originating from east india/east indian sounding names should be banned, because the majority of the stolen content is from east indians. If that was done, it would solve the stolen content issue. Quite simple. Most east indians "business models" is just to steal. At the very least, periodically audit east indian accounts for stolen content, then immediately delete them when it is discovered they did, in fact, simply steal from other people.
7
« on: April 30, 2024, 21:00 »
The east indian "business model". Steal.
Yes. Took a look - appears he has stolen from a bunch of different artists. Just pick a thumbnail of any video, do a reverse image search and you'll find the different artists. Definitely a thief account.
8
« on: April 21, 2024, 07:55 »
Did Adobe steal something?No
Did Midjourney steal something?Yes
What about the notion of receiving stolen goods?
And make it the source (even partial) of a business?
so you assume that content generated by AI is stolen content?
so if you have AI content in your portfolio you are a thief too! 
whereas if you don't have AI content in your portfolio,you are consistent with your ideas,and I respect that,but I don't agree with it! 
It's a little bit of a "game" some people play. Say someone steals a vehicle then resells it to you, and you didn't know it was stolen. Did you "steal" it? No - you paid for the vehicle - thinking it was good. However - the fact is, it is still a stolen vehicle, regardless of whether the person stole it sold it to you, or you now "own" a stolen vehicle. Now question is slightly different. Say someone steals a vehicle then resells it to you, and you DO know it was stolen. Did you still "steal" it? I'd say it is a debatable point/gray area - but ultimately/"technically" no - because you paid for the vehicle, and you didn't do the actual 'theft' - so you didn't "steal" it - but you did know it was stolen. But fact is, in this case - it is still a stolen vehicle, regardless of whether the person stole it sold it to you, or you now "own" a stolen vehicle. Is it 'right' (ethical) in ethical case? I'd say no - however... The large companies (i.e., 'midjourney') have set up an environment in which to "compete" effectively - it almost becomes necessary to use their "service" (which deals in pure stolen goods, the ceo according to google is also apparently jewsih- which is significant in that that seems to be the modus operandi of that culture and it's just how their businesses tend to operate, as the backers also are, the major investors, you need to understand the culture to understand how their businesses operate - but entirely different topic)... So... then the question becomes... a) If an environment is set up in which stealing is encouraged... b) Sellers, in order to compete - feel pressure to buy/sell stolen goods... (And I think potentially a lot of creators don't fully realize that the "ai" systems are simply sophisticated theft, and might actually think they are using a 'magical' tool that can 'think', which of course it is not)... c) Buyers willingly (either knowingly or unknowingly) participate in purchasing stolen goods... (i.e., it is possible and likely many buyers don't realize "ai" is simply sophisticated theft, and are actually under the illusion that it is some "thinking" machine, which of course it is not)... To further add to that though... there is a small 'creative aspect' to the goods that the sellers have, albeit small - in that they do actually create a "prompt" (which is a 'new' item), and 'package' the goods (i.e., keywording, titling, etc)... in which case it is debatable - the goods that the "sellers" have - since "some" creative input was required - so it is not "direct" theft - is it still a "stolen good"? It is a "derivative" of stolen goods (i.e., it was 'based' off of stolen goods) - but does now the new "product" (which did require unique/creative input to create) - make it "not stolen"? But then I suppose one could argue... if a vehicle was stolen, and the VIN on the car was changed, the car repainted - would one say that was still a "stolen vehicle" or a "new vehicle"...? But it's a strange environment... when you have (primilary) east indians downloading complete portfolios (outright theft), making a new account to sell goods just to play whack-a-mole... jewhsi backed companies promoting theft-based environments (i.e., chatgpt jewsh/sam altman, midjourney jewsh/david holz) + backers that appear (through various shell organizations/etc) ultimately to be backed by blackrock/vanguard/etc (alsojewish, i.e., larry fink/blackrock)... So how does one remain honest/ethical AND competitive, when dealing with people employing these dishonest tactics? One super EASY solution though is the following...Since companies like midjourney/chatgpt are based off of theft... Put pressure on them to make perpetual micropayments to the contributors whose works were stolen... Of course - they don't "want" that - because they are extremely greedy and have a pyschotic sociopathic desire for "control" - but really doesn't matter what they "want" - because this would make it right. Also - with that system make it so contributors can choose what % micropayments they want, and if they don't want them, to opt out of the system. Despite what any wannabe-technie might say - it is EXTREMELY EASY to implement... "They" (the companies) have the meta data of where they stole the assets from, and it would be very easy (progrmatically) to set up a system to compensate contributors for their stolen works - and pay them in perpetuity (i.e., monthly for the rest of their lives) every time one of their works were referenced in a new "ai image" or "ai video"... It is also possible to make RETROACTIVE payments to all people's whose works were stolen. At the same time... create awareness campaigns (social media/blogging/etc) to raise general public awareness that midjourney/chatgpt/etc are based off of stolen goods... regardless of whether they play the game saying "oh they simply got images from a RESEARCH company, so THEY didn't know it was stolen! <wink wink>". yeah, <cough cough bullsh_t>)... ultimately, they knowingly created tools based of massive scraping & theft, and want to re-package the stolen goods as their own, and are trying to create a system in which for a person to effectively compete need to use "their" tools (at which point they could grant/deny people access on a whim - they are pyschotic sociopaths and simply want "control", in addition to greed). That there is nothing "intelligent" about the current "AI" ("artificial intelligence"), and that it is simply sophisticated theft & pattern re-arrangment... So raise those types of awareness campaigns to help put pressure on them to do the right thing. THEN... the tools are based off of ethically purchased/licensed goods, the derivative works become ethnically purchased/licensed, and a good situation all around... That is one big solution in order to resolve the dilemma.
9
« on: April 20, 2024, 15:00 »
as I said,I find it extremely difficult to think that an AI can be trained on the already generated renderings of other AIs,but ok,if Mat said it I can believe it!
Training AI with AI is a slippery slope kind of thing.
Adobe has said they used up to 5% AI images, which were individual reviewed and vetted, to train the Firefly lab. There's still debate on this, which I'd agree, that using AI to train AI is wrong. Not ethically wrong, but scientifically and system integrity kind of wrong.
I(we) would NEVER have sold rights to use my(our) photograhies to feed machine learning. Adobe forced me(us) by giving money, to infringe my(our) copyrights on MY(our) own images. It seems to me that no choice was offered to refuse this money. In this way, they can suggest a mutual understanding, in possible legal procedures, and claim to act ethically.
I'm not going to say I support how the agencies did this, but I have to answer, that you signed the contract, that allowed this use and you could have refused the money, but they still had the right to use your images. You made that choice when you agreed to the contract.
"I(we) would NEVER have sold rights to use my(our) photograhies to feed machine learning."
You Did.
If you think that's wrong and disagree, you and all those silent people, who aren't here according to you, should get together and file a claim against Adobe. Class action suit if there is any attorney who will see your side of the arguments, after reading the contract that you signed, when you offered to be a contributor to Adobe or Fotolia.
There you are. You signed a contract, now you disagree. Take it up with the courts.
Actually, there is no clause that say they can steal your images to train competing software. Also - some of the agencies (i.e., shutterstock) refused to 'take back' the money. It was "forced", dishonest.
10
« on: April 20, 2024, 06:52 »
Sounds like a crediblity attack. The people at blackrock/vanguard (same ones that organized convid the fakevirus) are really trying to attack any competing company. Midjourney is a blackrockjoo/etc/company. Bloomberg/etc is owned by the same people that own/run/finance midjourney/etc.
"News" organizations aren't "news" - they are propoganda/manipulation machines... You don't see bloomberg attacking midjourney for stealing people's content, ripping it off, then trying to pass it off as their own, do you? No... because it's owned/managed by the same set of companies that own bloomberg, & most major "news" outlets.
11
« on: April 15, 2024, 00:57 »
a) Your question is too generic and broad.
b) Most people don't know the answer to the question you are asking, unless you were asking agencies specifically to divulge that information. And if individuals knew - they probably wouldn't share their hard research because you are too lazy to do it yourself.
c) Sounds like you don't really know what "AI" is. The "AI" images are basically massive theft & "blending" of images together (from 'models' created from that theft), and one of the big "problems" "AI" tools have is how to get rid of "copyright notices" (aka watermarks) to try and hide their theft.
d) Answering the very generic/broad question you have... Some sales are up, some are down, and some haven't really changed. Depends on the subject matter, trends, competition numbers, niches, artistic/commercial value, agency cuts/"good news" broad-casts, etc, etc.
12
« on: April 15, 2024, 00:21 »
1. re: cobalt stating "2,000 ppl making $1k or less from adobe" - how did the ppl in the forum arrive @ that number? seems like pulling #'s out of their butt unless they have some direct inside knowledge. of course - I am not sure what the # would be - just curious how they arrived @ those conclusions?
2. re: rankings - looking, I think my "best" rank was around 200th or so - but just looking @ my numbers, in some ways that is rather irrelevant, because
a) "income" is not really related to rank... looking @ some of my stats, my (weekly) income was actually higher one week @ rank 1000 than when I was @ rank ~200...
b) "income" also depends on a whole bunch of factors... do you luck out and get people purchasing full one-time non sub licenses (i.e., so you get a $30 sale), or is it a whole bunch of $0.33 subs... (i.e., you could get "500" downloads, but @ $0.33/a pop = $165 usd. conversely, if they were all $30 net sales to you, that is 500 @ $30 each = $1500 usd).
c) in some cases it is very seasonal, i.e., say Easter, when "everyone" is downloading Easter bunnies & Jesus pictures, versus say mother's day where it is all about flowers, etc... so you get "lucky" because YOUR picture of Jesus with an Easter bunny is more popular than the other 5,000,000 people with pictures of Jesus & an Easter bunny...
d) There is some degree of "luck" involved. While there are certain principles that are important (good subject, good lighting, trending, good keywords, etc) - sometimes you just have a picture that due to the mysterious nature of adobe's algorithms takes off, while others don't... if I knew the "magic formula" - obviously lol I'd only produce consistent "best sellers"...
There are certain topics which I know are being pushed by the blackrock/vanguard/WEF/UN/etc (the 'pyschotic' board of people) agenda, which "could" make extra $$$, but just choose not to participate in (i.e., the gay/trans/miscegnation crap designed to try & break up families/etc to make ppl easier to control)... others though - don't care - and they just want $$$ and keep pumping out some weird gay/trans/miscegnation crap... simply because some of the weirder, more perverted crap is really being pushed hard... some profiles seem to be pure perverted trans/gay crap... but - I guess they have to live with that - "that" is their "legacy"...
Anyhoo...
Only thing I would take from "rankings" is:
a) if you are ranked "higher" - meaning your downloads are higher relative to everyone else - means specifically with the "adobe" crowd of customers - you are providing the content they want. (Just because it sells @ adobe doesn't mean it would necessarily sell as well elsewhere - the adobe crowd tends to have specific tastes/styles/etc).
b) if you are consistently ranked "high" - it probably means you are consistently doing something correctly that is in demand.
c) bragging rights to make yourself "feel" better if you see you are "doing better" than someone else...
13
« on: April 09, 2024, 21:51 »
The solution actually would be pretty simple.
(a) Don't allow signups from east india (because that tends to be the "business model" there, steal as much as you can, pass it off as your own and hope you don't get caught. if you do, fake an id to make another account and do the same thing). of course, it's not "only" east indians, and not "all" of them do that - but educated (& experienced) guess I'd say is about 60-75%. Another 30% tends to be from very specific arabic countries.
(b) Super easy to vet anyone from submitting another's work.
But - part of the "game" right now is a bunch of pyschos trying to push the "digitalID" - so they WANT people stealing - because then they can manipulate people into "demanding" that their content be kept safe... look @ blackrock/vangaurd/alladin project/wef/un/etc...
But it is actually quite easy to prevent that kind of thing from happening.
14
« on: April 08, 2024, 07:23 »
Tried it with my own files to check how my images are described and what those prompts then create. Thankfully the resulting files were very different. Same genre but not copies.
I also test my image descriptions and titles to see if they create duplicates then modify my titles to be more generic if the results are too close.
I keep browsing their public explore gallery for interesting prompts, then modify them for my own purposes. I never go for copies, I always want the style and vibe for something very different, often a different genre altogether.
But there is a lot to learn about lighting, mood, composition directions. The more specific, the better the results. My descriptions are becoming longer and longer.
eta
now dropped to 5180
that is a low I have not seen in a very long time
Yeah, it's really interesting to browse on the Discord Channel. I love it. Really great to learn and get inspiration.
What kinda brutal is, how many user are now generating banners for youtube, linkedin, social media, etc.
And the most brutal is, how often Midjourney is generating really good stuff, which looks like it is photoshopped.
What I didn't know about Midjourney is, that you can "transfer" image effects of generated images to another.
Some users are creating complex effects, which normally are created with Photoshop's layer blending options.
I believe normal, boring stock photos / images will drop a lot in sales in the future. One have to create unique creative stuff.
And that's why companies like Midjourney, ChatGPT, etc - should be accountable/comepensate the users they stole their materials from, on a perpetual, recurring basis - the same income they expect to get from having stolen it from other people... the "man in the middle" thing (i.e., they got the images from a "research" company, aka "stealing") is total b.s. designed to try and it make it appear they didn't steal stuff, when in fact, they did, and they do. Their business is based off of theft.
15
« on: April 08, 2024, 07:20 »
I'm currently browsing on Midjourney's Discrod Channel to find some interesting prompts, which I would use as basis and modify on my own.
Found several persons using the describe function with some Adobe Stock thumbnails to generate prompts.
Lol, people are just copycats.
Is someone here using this function too?
... as he says that in the same breath and sentence while saying "I'm currently browsing on Midjourney's Discrod Channel to find some interesting prompts"...
16
« on: April 05, 2024, 22:49 »
Regarding "number of faces", this is one thing I don't get. I have also seen on Firefly where faces get almost repeated. With all the vast quantity of images these tools are trained on, how is it that they get stuck with a limited number of "faces"? Is it some kind of "flaw in the logic" of how they work? Is it a bug? If you take human artist, say painter, they don't repeat faces in their work, yet AI seems to do that. Maybe it's some kind of short cut in the algorithms which leeds to this? Just curious.
It's because... and many people still don't seem to get this - the "ai" isn't actually "ai" - it's essentially just stealing billions of images, and "blending" them together. It doesn't "understand" what you are asking - it just looks for certain tags (i.e., "black person", "white person") associated with the images it's stolen, "blends" them together, to make a black/white/etc person... that's greatly simplified (because it first creates "models" of the stolen material), but that's basically it.
17
« on: April 05, 2024, 08:14 »
So, the buyers who search Pond5 are here to find clips they couldn't find on those cheap sites. 
$27/4K
This price cannot be set, the system does not allow it. 
I filed a complaint to Pond5 regarding those $27/4K clips, but they aren't enforcing the minimum price rule.
Some top sellers set their prices at $25/HD and $27/4k.
https://www.pond5.com/search?kw=&media=footage&pricerange=|29&resolutions=4K&artist=fizkes
https://www.pond5.com/search?kw=&media=footage&pricerange=|29&resolutions=4K&artist=peopleimages
PeopleImages is Yuri Aucurs.
It is not the authors who set such prices. This pond5 shows different prices for buyers from other countries. For each region, the site itself determines the minimum selling price.
You can set the price to $50, but this price will only apply to certain regions. For other regions the price will be lower, and this is out of your control.
I'm in the USA. And I see $25/HD and $27/4K on those links. I've asked Pond5 to raise the price, but they responded as below.
"thank you for contacting our Support Team.
Please know, our artists have freedom to set up the prices they would like for HD formats. If they set a price of $10 for HD (for example), then 4K format will be $20. If they set a price of $25 for HD, then 4K format will be $50.
I hope this helps.
Kind regards,
Helena
Customer Care Gladiator & Risk Analyst"
Also... It's only if they have the prices higher on OTHER agencies, 'a la carte'. And I think Pond5 actually specifies if they charge "more" (when I read the agreement). So Pond5 would only 'lower' the prices if they had clips at a lower price on other agencies (a la carte, not subscription). I.e., say it was listed at $150 USD on Pond5, but then had it listed at $25 on another site. Then Pond5 would change it to $25 on the pond5 site.
18
« on: April 04, 2024, 02:37 »
Portfolio size does not necessarily seem to matter... 30k/40k files does not necessarily 'guarantee' one a top spot, especially if say it is 30k pictures of bananas  One thing I've noticed is it seems some very (relatively speaking) "small" portfolios for whatever reason - have a few 'best sellers' that take off like wildfire... Lol obviously if I knew what the 'magic formula' was- I just focus on producing those bestsellers And then I suppose there are some that are difficult to recreate... yes, "ai" (its not real "ai", its basically copying and blending) - is getting better at stealing content & rehashing/blending it... but - definitely not "perfect"... There was one video (I think someone posted here, or maybe I saw it while looking at other things) - where I guess a woman was saying she made $8k from a single image... She shared it - and it was a very good picture of a baby under a white blanket... just happened to have the right expression, right lighting, etc and resonated with a lot of people... Now the "ai" could try and steal that - but it wouldn't be the same... And then also - I think in some ways images sell in "different" ways... I.e., if people see that baby image, they want "that" image for their campaigns, etc... so that probably also helps propel some sales too...
19
« on: April 03, 2024, 11:33 »
Top 100 weekly, top 100 lifetime, less than 10k.
Less than 10k/day? Hmm wow!
20
« on: April 03, 2024, 09:01 »
I learned early on that if anyone is serious about making a career from this business, they should follow one simple rule. Do not divulge or give away details of what works for you including images that sell well. You have to treat it as a business and businesses do not provide, "Secrets of their success" to help their competitors take money from them. It sounds harsh but ultimately it will serve you well. Sorry if this sounds nasty but it's hard enough in this line of work without shooting yourself in the foot.
That said, I do enjoy teaching so when I retire, I would like to teach one or two people about how I did things. Not so much for money etc, just because I like the idea of passing something on.
Well... you could be the first! You mean, you aren't one of those guys selling a "How I make five BILLION dollars a day on autopilot in my underwear, while only working 30 seconds sipping a cappucino - and 29 of those seconds are getting caffeinated - and these secrets can be YOURS - for only $29.95!!!" type of people??? Mmm. I do agree - so was in generic terms if you had certain tips, but if not - that is okay too. So... next question. When do you retire?
21
« on: April 02, 2024, 22:10 »
Not a million miles away. 20k images and sales are distributed across my port not just a handful of top sellers. Ive been doing this type of work since 2010 probably 2013/14 with Adobe / Fotolia. No AI in port.
Pretty good! Tips/strategies/recommendations on how to create a better selling/balanced portfolio?
22
« on: March 26, 2024, 07:53 »
Part of the reason it seems to be "encouraged" - is it appears to be part of the blackrock/vanguard "strategy" to get people to "demand" a "digitalID". (I.e., id2020.org).
If they "let" people steal (usually east indians/different culture, considered "good business" if you can steal someone's stuff and get away with it) - then people "demand" to be "protected", and "voila", "digitalID" (and the digital ID is actually really really bad, because it is a control mechanism designed to take away people's income if they "disagree" or say something against a "govt" entity, i.e., what happened last 4 years).
That's the 'bigger picture' view.
And I also do agree since the agencies seem to just 'keep the income' if it is reported - it is a 'bonus' for them.
So in terms of what should be done...
a) Keep getting those accounts that steal shut down.
b) Get pressure on the agencies to give the income to those whom it was taken away from.
I'd say what this guy is doing is very good, making a public database of stolen accounts.
23
« on: March 23, 2024, 09:23 »
I am trying!! But I rarely upload more than 20 files a day. Maybe it will get better with midjourney, we will see.
Also started again with regular photos/videos.
I must diversify and also send content to other agencies. You never know what happens, perhaps ai will die next year if so many people are pushing content in.
Especially editorial should keep its value or might even go up in value.
Firefly is better in my opinion,Midjourney is better for some things,but the way it works with Discord is too annoying,not only do you have to use stealth mode,but then you would have to operate in a private server,with which you only have the Midjourney BOT,and you have to adjust the settings so that no one can access your server,and then all this is not enough,you also have to unpublish the images in the Midjourney feed,not just in Discord.
so while you do all this your images will still be seen by other users in the Midjourney feed not in the Discord feed.
before I started operating in this way,I discovered that someone was copying all my prompts,in Discord there are people who do just this,they follow the feeds and copy and paste the prompts...very annoying!
Could you please clarify? As far as I know - all images are stealth... what "midjourney" feed are you referring to? Thanks!
24
« on: March 23, 2024, 08:18 »
P5 sales for some reason dropped like a stone several months ago. "Slight" improvement over the massive drop, but not yet where they should be historically.
25
« on: March 23, 2024, 08:16 »
pos 2940
probably not bad for a 4200 file port, but I was hoping for much better spring sales.
need many more files. now upped my midjourney contract to 60 dollars to enable stealth mode. and hopefully that will push me to do more with midjourney to get better at using it. i still don't feel really comfortable but it does make much better people than stable.
also trying to do more with firefly.
now have prompting costs around 100 dollars a month. but longterm it should be worth it.
Just triple your content and you'll get near 1,000th. Not bad for 4,000 images.
Not really. Tripled/quadrupled/etc content does not necessarily correlate with increased sales. I.e., if you had 5,000 pictures of bananas, and went to 15,000 pictures of bananas, you probably wouldn't see an increase in sales, of course, unless, people went bananas for bananas...
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 33
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
