Agency Based Discussion > Shutterstock.com
So they do use AI to review then...
Uncle Pete:
--- Quote from: trabuco on August 19, 2020, 12:34 ---If they pay 0.05 for each picture to the reviewer, then there are no humans involved when the program runs. Seems to be automatic.
--- End quote ---
And your evidence or proof of this being true is?
trabuco:
Our royalties.
YadaYadaYada:
--- Quote from: trabuco on August 19, 2020, 12:34 ---If they pay 0.05 for each picture to the reviewer, then there are no humans involved when the program runs. Seems to be automatic.
--- End quote ---
Ask Laurin Rinder he worked 3 years for Bigstock researching his best selling book.
cascoly:
--- Quote from: Uncle Pete on August 19, 2020, 11:24 ---
--- Quote from: gnirtS on August 16, 2020, 17:15 ---Just worth noting that an AI isnt guaranteed to give the same output every time its run.
It learns and adapts to inputs meaning you'd expect output to change the more its run. Also a lot use stochastic techniques which introduce a bit of deliberate randomness.
Not saying its the case here but the "if its AI you'd get consistency" argument isnt true.
--- End quote ---
Worth mentioning that AI doesn't train itself and doesn't change by day of the week, or one hour files are accepted, next they are rejected. AI doesn't accept half of a set one day and reject the rest of the set, the next day. AI changes slowly. AI is more consistent because it's determined by unemotional computer logic.
AI won't reject the same files twice and third time, suddenly change to accepting them. ;D
Nope I disagree with you.
--- End quote ---
ok, AI or human? SS reviews today (minutes after submitting)
1. a shoot of closeups or orange and yellow nasturtiums: several orange rejected for lack of editorial caption, all other oranges and all yellows accepted
2. macro of a yellowjacket and of a fern both rejected for lack of property release
Uncle Pete:
--- Quote from: cascoly on August 19, 2020, 18:41 ---
--- Quote from: Uncle Pete on August 19, 2020, 11:24 ---
--- Quote from: gnirtS on August 16, 2020, 17:15 ---Just worth noting that an AI isnt guaranteed to give the same output every time its run.
It learns and adapts to inputs meaning you'd expect output to change the more its run. Also a lot use stochastic techniques which introduce a bit of deliberate randomness.
Not saying its the case here but the "if its AI you'd get consistency" argument isnt true.
--- End quote ---
Worth mentioning that AI doesn't train itself and doesn't change by day of the week, or one hour files are accepted, next they are rejected. AI doesn't accept half of a set one day and reject the rest of the set, the next day. AI changes slowly. AI is more consistent because it's determined by unemotional computer logic.
AI won't reject the same files twice and third time, suddenly change to accepting them. ;D
Nope I disagree with you.
--- End quote ---
ok, AI or human? SS reviews today (minutes after submitting)
1. a shoot of closeups or orange and yellow nasturtiums: several orange rejected for lack of editorial caption, all other oranges and all yellows accepted
2. macro of a yellowjacket and of a fern both rejected for lack of property release
--- End quote ---
Sounds like computer reviews, missing the intelligence part. :) Makes me wonder why a flower, or wasp, tells the computer, it looks like something that needs a release?
So far the only artificial intelligence part that seems to be working, is too arbitrary and restrictive. That's the similar, that detects colors and patterns and shapes. I think if I tried, I could get a frog image and a green pepper (hypothetical) to be rejected as similar, if the colors are close enough and somewhat similar setting.
But anyway, the less similar images, is a good thing. Remember when we could find inch by inch sets, or hundreds of the same basic setup, re-positioned? Sure there are going to be less accepted new images, SS doesn't want more of the spam and slop. Buyers don't want more of the same, they want more variety.
What ever happened to the marijuana bud guy? Or the guy driving down the city street, with a GoPro on his dashboard? Terrible!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version