What exactly is 'illustrative editorial'? You mean just taking a picture of a building with logos would be fine as a photo submission?

Another thing I thought of...

While the VIP trends seems "nice" - main reason it exists obviously is so other people can "copy" what is working - and I don't really like my data being used to create new competition for myself...

I.e., let's say I found something really good that works... if the "trends" goes up - then all of the sudden people wanting some quick $$$ then want to jump on the 'trending keywords', making (potentially) more competition for myself that was totally unnecessary...

Is there a way of opting out of having data that is used in processing keywords, to opt out of the 'trending data'?

A couple BIG critisisms:

(a) No way to sign up with just an e-mail. Looks like the dev took the super lazy way and "authenticates" with google/facebook/github. If someone doesn't have any of those accounts - no way to sign up for the service, not to mention - many people (including myself) just don't feel comfortable USING a "google/facebook" account to "create" an account. (privacy is one of those reasons among others). Big no-no. So no way of signing up with just an e-mail.

(b) He doesn't specify how much credit packages cost.

(c) His online chat bot isn't actually connected to anyone - so asusming he is sleeping right now - so if you try to message, just says "failed to send"...

So... it "might" be good, but obviously still needs a lot of work right now.

Quote from: cobalt on November 06, 2023, 02:16

While 120 a month is a lot, I am sure you will make your money back. I also think the privacy option is very important.

Still haven't tried midjourney, one day I will.

Happy to see you are enjoying ai.

The sales will come and bring a nice balance to your video sales.

Plus...everything you learn now you will be able to use when ai video comes.

Is there anything else other than Midjourney to generate usable stock photos?

Shutterstock "AI"?

$120/month?  What plan is that?

They (recently) introduced a new "mega" plan, for 60 hours "fast generation" per month. For regular stock producers, not sure that plan is really necessary, unless of course someone wants to mass produce a lot in a short period of time.

Quote from: SuperPhoto on November 05, 2023, 10:09

I'm not sure how well people are doing with "AI" images overall, but to me it seems:

(a) Some people may have 1-2 images that "take off" (i.e., maybe make them $100-$200 over the course of several months, if they are really lucky, maybe $200-$300). The rest never really get seen. If you live in a country where $3-$5 USD/hour is a "good wage", then you are ecstatic. (I.e., like an american say getting $700-$800 for an image).

(b) The "ai" stuff is being flooded from people in countries where that is the case. To properly post produce, edit, crop, find good keywords, properly title, etc is a very time consuming process - but I suppose that is why is a number of people just don't do that. (So you see 3 arms, strange titles, or simply the actual prompts, etc). And I've seen a lot of people skipping that process.

(c) I suspect it is a little bit like gambling on slots. If/when you "hit big" (i.e., generate $100 in cumalative sales for a single "ai" image) - then you think EVERY image is going to be like that, and you start going a little nuts (not realizing not every image is going to be like that).

One question - if you are spending $120/month on image generation, are you at the very least seeing that as a return? More specifically - a significant return?

My guess is the majority (i.e., 80%+) are just making say $100-$200/month from the "ai" images, while of course a very small majority making more than that...

you have to produce a lot of them,over time you start to earn more,you certainly can't arrive and start making 100usd a week from one day to another.

the OP was right in making this investment in my opinion,and is an experienced contributor,who has managed to see what many experienced contributors don't want to see,that times have changed and we need to adapt,those who manage to understand this only have to gain from it.

Re: producing a lot - I agree.

What I am asking is if the time invested is worth it. I think if you live in a country where the cost of living is low (not sure how things have changed in recent years, but it used to be places like say the phillipines, ukraine, etc) - where "$3/hour" was "big money" - then I suppose it would be worth it. For higher cost of living countries (i.e., some parts of europe, north america, etc) - not sure whether the time invested is worth it.

Because yes, you'd have to produce A LOT. And have them sell too.

It's difficult to measure the effectiveness of it.

(a) You don't really know what buyers are searching for (you are guessing).
(b) You probably won't tweak a 'good selling' image.
(c) Only way you'd know is if you tweak something that sells nothing (that you think should be selling something), and then see a big spike in sales. But that would be a very time consuming process (especially as it seems it has been made deliberate difficult to tweak keywords once approved, i.e., you have to use your mouse, drag/drop keywords/etc).

So no. I think I did do it 1-2x, but it was so time consuming, and there wasn't a real easy way to see if it made any difference at all, just left it.

Quote from: Uncle Pete on October 30, 2023, 11:33

There's more to the story than what you are telling

In 2016, a certain dude (one of the highest paid photographers) sold a dirty potato for a million bucks... to a guy who'd had four wines?

Imagine how much he would have gotten had he WASHED the potato...

Quote from: SuperPhoto on October 24, 2023, 11:26

Thanks... but - what is considered a "good" amount of sales?

Say one had 1000 images, & 1000 videos, relatively all unique/saleable (but no people shots/model releases/etc - so content other than people shots).

Would you... estimate making $10/month? $100/month? $500/month? $1000/month? Just curious what kind of average return there is, and what people consider "a lot" or "a little" in terms of revenue... thanks!

When I started back in 2014 or whenever, I could make a couple hundred a month.  Now a make a couple of ... dollars.  Maybe.

Ah, okay - thanks - that definitely helps.

Yes, was just trying to decide if it was worth it... I.e., a couple years ago I had joined 123rf - and it was time consuming uploading/processing stuff, etc - and in the couple years there - I think 'maybe' I got $100? Thanks. Was wondering how DP fared on that scale...

I realize it is a bit of a subjective question (obviously depends on content/etc) - but if you have a deposit photos port, could you share rough figures, and whether you focus on videos, photos, or both?

I'm considering joining them (haven't yet) - just wondering whether there is some good potential to get additional sales from there, or whether it would just be a time consuming task for a few dollars, etc...

And how would they compare say to your port on AS/SS/etc? (just for reference, like is it (DP) a relatively 'big' agency/customer base?)

Thanks!

No one called anyone a N**i though. It would be more accurate to coin a term for an "SJW" or "Woke" or "Neo-Marxist" Law. Far more likely someone's gonna get called that nowadays.

Anyway, I have nothing against Pete being an SJW or Neo-Marxist with politics of aggrievement for his racial group. Or that he is �woke� to the systemic policies of repression of the white man by the new world order. I make no judgement as to the validity of his aggrievement. I can't speak to the suffering he has suffered under the heel of whoever (though I can't remember anyone bringing up his race on this forum other than him? that could be a lapse in my memory?). But does it have to be forced down everyone�s throat? Can't we live our lives without these woke SJW people and their agendas?

I also don�t care if someone else believes in chem trails, that covid and climate change are a lie. Whatever, it�s just that there�s an off topic section especially for this stuff.

Ah, so you are just trolling? Okay, well - if you want to get back on topic, do so. You are the one who derailed it. Was it fun?

Get back on topic then.

Or... are you just demonstrating the usage of ChatGPT for producing a response, and showing how useless it can be/the gibberish it can produce ? If so, well xribtoks - there's a demonstration for you!

(Haha, just kidding photographer guy - if it actually was a legit response - who knows - you could have used chatgpt for that response - but, if you were just trolling lol, okay - get back on topic then).

Quote from: Her Ugliness on October 23, 2023, 02:22

Quote from: cascoly on October 22, 2023, 12:42

besides the fact that there is no, way to trace which images were used & worse even if your 'easy to do' way of marking were possible, for most images (maybe close to 0%) there is no way to identify who the artist is for the billions of images used - many have no names assoc'd and those that do lack verification and an address to pay to). how would your revised training know who (& how) to make payments

We're talking about Adobe generative fill. Adobe knows very well where to find the artists who's photos were used and how to pay them as they used images from their own database.

yes, it's about AS specifically but i was responding to the comments that were not limited to AS.

again, how does AS know whose images were used for each creation since ML eliminates any way to track that, even if identifiers were attached initially.  each image is translated into thousands of datapoints and millions/billions of operations are performed to generate each new image.

Okay - you aren't quite thinking correctly here.

It requires revising the machine learning algorith to incorporate identifiers and then attribute those identifiers to outputted information.

Keeping things simple.

Lets say you have 3 contributors, named "|A|" and "|B|" and "|C|".
|A| has images of an apple, and a pear
|B| has an image of an apple
|C| has an image of a pear, and an orange

Let's say the "machine" ("AI") version of an apple is "ML-APPLE" and "ML-PEAR".

The "AI" (ML/machine learning algorithm) creates a "representation" of what it believes an "apple" to be by scraping |A| + |B|'s image.
It then does the same for a pear, by scraping |A| + |C|'s image.

In it's internal representation, it would look like:

[ML-APPLE]:{|A|,|B|} (simply meaning what I stated above - the "ai" version of an apple references |A| + |B|'s image
[ML-PEAR]:{|A|,|C|} (simply meaning what I stated above - the "ai" version of a pears references |A| + |C|'s image
[ML-ORANGE]:{|C|} (simply meaning what I stated above - the "ai" version of an orange references |C|'s image

Let's say you then have a customer that generates images. Let's say they pay $1/image (simplicity), & its a 50-50 share between agency (the "ML" image) + the source contributors.

They decide to make a picture of a "pear". Since the "ML-PEAR" references |A|+|C|'s image - |A|+|C| would be compensated for the use of that image generation.
I.e., $1 = $.50 agency, $.50 to contributors. Since two contributors (A+C) made the "pear" image, the revenue for contributors would be issued to them).

Now let's say you made an image of an orange.
Since |C| was the only source document referenced, |C| would get full credit for this image. (I.e., $1 => $0.50 to agency, $.50 to |C|).

That is a super basic illustration of what I am talking about.

Of course, the pseudocode above is an extremely simplistic concept - it is simply designed to illustrate how it would be done on a most basic level, and some of the requirements to revise the agorithm to attribute source images.

Of course, actual code would be much more sophisticated, and one could then decide whether to attach weights to "how much" of the model was used (i.e., was it a "tiny" pear in the image, or a "big" pear in the image, and should they be compensated accordingly?) As well as how "much" of the "pear" was attributed to a specific contributor. (I.e., did |C| say have 50 images of pears, and |A| only 1 image of pear, that was used in the model/representation of what a 'pear' was - such that |C| should get 50x the 'credit' for the pear image?) Of course - that is a little more in depth, and this example was simply used for illustration purposes.

Fact is - it IS super easy to properly attribute source images, AND - it is ALSO super easy to properly CREDIT source images - on a PERPETUAL RECURRING BASIS.

It is simply a matter of taken the time to revise the algorithm to do so.

you know NOTHING about my computer experience.

you don't address the biggest problem - how do you identify who made the image & how to contact & pay them?  that information isnt available in most cases

and now you've changed the goal posts, saying funds should be distributed to everyone, not based on where their images were used -  you know little/nothing about ML it seems and that is relevant as  the major fallacy in your proposal assumes you can track where an image is used

You are correct, I don't know your computer experience, which is why I was asking. Likewise, you know absolutely nothing about my experience, and are quite arrogant and accusatory in your statements, which would lead me to believe you know very little, if anything related to computer science/computer engineering/programming/etc - and especially - actual "AI" versus "ML" algorithms. Fact is, I actually do know what I am talking about. Have you EVER dealt with large datasets, scraped data, creating actual databases from scratch, written image algorithms, ANY of that? Have you actually ever even created your own "AI" algorithm? If you had - you'd probably know what I am talking about is very feasible, and simply a matter of doing it. It does require "work", and it does seem agencies are trying to figure out how to cut out artists while appearing to be noble (in many ways from a purely greedy standpoint). when fact is, they should be held fully accountable for any theft of artist assets, and compensate accordingly - in the same perpetual/recurring revenue model they so desperately desire.

Answering your questions:

a) For compensation - depends on where/how the data/images/etc were scraped. It would make most sense to simply begin with the major agencies whose data was scraped (i.e., DT/SS/AS/P5/etc). Super easy to figure out who to issue payments to. For other agencies, would be a matter of writing more sophisticated algorithms...

And - as a "tongue in cheek" statement - since "everyone" seems to think actual thinking "AI" exists (most people don't actually understand what actual "ai", and believe it is "thinking", versus the sophisticated theft & pattern re-arrangement being called "ai") - but if "ai" actually existed - it would be super simple - just ask the "ai" to figure out who to issue payments to.

b) it is SUPER easy to track/source image usage. If you don't realize this, it seems you've never scraped data before?