Strange, this is the third time, I left a comment that disappeared. What I said was, "Great video, nice hair cut. I have been doing AI since January, using 4 programs, Mid-Journey, artspace, Leonardo, and stockdreams. Each is different in results. I also use my photos to seed the photos to make variations of my photos." or something like this.
Started uploading almost a month ago. I want to get better It gets me out of the house and into the world. I have almost 10 years worth of photos I am going thru. Thanks for all the info you share to help us out. And you are adorable. I love your sense of humor! Thanks for sharing your experiences with us.
I’m 78 and started photography to make walking more interesting. When I heard about stock I thought why not? I don’t make much money but it’s a buzz every time someone chooses one of my pictures. And fascinating when Shutterstock reveals one of my local photos has been used on the other side of the world
Some photos I've sent to Shutterstock have gone into their 'data catalogue' and not visible on the Shutterstock site. If i read it right, it means that those photos can help create AI images. BTW, lovely hair cut! 👍😊 Very handsome 😊
Shutterstock will not touch a photo if AI has been used in any part of the processing of that photo, including sharpening, noise removal and will threaten to remove you from the site if try to post more images that have used ai in any part of the image processing. I had a few rejected (i had used topaz sharpening and denoise software) and told them the images were my own and that i had the originals photos and that i had used some ai sharpening and denoise software. i was told ai could not be used in any part of the processing. I had thought the t&c had meant creating images using ai, not using ai for touching up the images i.e. sharpening and removing noise, so lesson learned. The quality of ai images will improve so we just have to be more creative and push ourselves, and following advice from you and others by getting out there and doing it. Thats the only way to improve and create unique images people will want. For people like myself that will take time but it will be worth it.
🤔 Ill have to look into that, I haven't used topaz in ages, since before AI, but I do use lightroom de-noise and sometimes upscale, and they seem to get accepted. I'll look into that a bit more. And you are absolutely correct, the only way to get better is do it! Bes of luck!
@@wollertz it happened back in October or November if i remember correctly. They said I would be kicked off the site if I submitted more using ai and AI could not be used in any part of the process. I'm only using Shutterstock so i don't know if other sites are doing the same. It may depend on the algorithm used for upscaling and denoising if it uses standard mathematical functions or if it uses functions based on AI. I use corel and was using the topaz suite depending if the photo needed it or not. I think if I sell photos online I'll use topaz for that but not for stock. Information may be held in the meta data of the image file maybe that's why they said AI had been used in the processing but I'm only guessing. I messaged Shutterstock as I had created the image and was surprised about the AI comment, that's when they mentioned using it in any part of the process.
I got banned forever from Shutterstock for not reading the fine print and uploaded 1 image. They're happy to keep my account and allow me to purchase images if I want to. Which I will never do.
@@dashingbooks3436 Sorry to hear that I always believe there should be warnings first. They gave me a warning and I created a query about it to find out exactly I had done wrong. As I said for me it wasn't an AI generated imaged but using AI to sharpen and denoise my own image.
Nothing beats a real photo by a good photographer. AI is similar to CG and digital art: it does best in things that aren't possible in reality. Not to mention the people willing to pay for stock images of people will have a very keen eye due to the sheer amount of images, and will recognize what looks authentic. However if a digital artist includes AI in their workflow they have a big advantage.
"I believe the main issue with AI is its overuse, not only in stock photography but also on every social media platform. It can be quite bothersome and ostentatious. Even though it will never disappear, I hope that, like fashion, "real" photographs will become more desirable again, both in editorial and commercial contexts."
Charlie your haircut looks great! Thanks to your videos I sold my first stock image within days of uploading! I was thinking I would love to know how you land photography clients and what the whole process looks like. I’m guessing others who frequent your channel would be interested too. Thanks for your ongoing help! 📷
Thanks! I'll come up with something, its really boring tho 😅, networking and putting yourself out there. getting to know the right people and putting yourself int he right situations 🤷♂️
I've seen some neat uses of stable diffusion lately, from professionals incorporating it into their workflow. In other words, they don't just auto-generate but rather turn a sketch they drew, or a 3D landscape they made in Blender, into an image, for instance. That's a middle ground we'll all have to accept, like it or not, because it increases productivity - less time, more output, greater profit margin. So that's happening. In every business. Period. As it is today, though, stable diffusion leaves something to be desired, whether it be when it comes to language comprehension, render accuracy, control over the composition, or the overall output often coming out overly plasticy, etc. There are plenty of issues with it and, on the other hand, it can create otherworldly pictures, things that would take hours of editing, in a flash. There's definitely a use case for it, although, as usual, the less skill involved the less it'll pay, because then anyone and everyone can do it, and do it they will. There's plenty of hunger and ambition in the world.
While I do not have to designate my nature photography as editorial, it is most used in that context. In other words, most of my images of flora, fauna, and landscapes seem to be used by those who want to represent the actual species, habitat, or location. At this time, I don't think AI can realistically duplicate these. People who protect natural places usually want to depict the natural beauty of the surroundings, not some computerized version of it. People who want pictures of a specific plant or animal for identification or educational use certainly don't want to risk the AI version being not quite right, as others will call them out on it. I find most parks want to promote the beauty of the natural (realistic) vision of the environment, what people will really see when they get there. Travel agencies and the chamber of commerce may use an AI-enhanced image to entice visitors, but somewhere they will also use the "real" photograph. While you might not have the background or interest in shooting and identifying flora and fauna images by common and scientific names, if you shoot any kind of nature photography, shoot state and local parks and landmarks specific to those areas, find a champion tree, a specific hiking trailhead, or habitat. Just for example, one of my best selling images is of a mangrove habitat. Another is a state park hiking trail that is ADA-compliant. Don't let Ai keep you from shooting what you love.
AI is fine. To a point. It depends on context. It's great for people that are not design/creative savvie. It's great to have a bit of fun with it. But AI, will never be photography. It cannot go out and take a photo of a particular location or event or person. It can create something that looks incredible, it will - one day - be indistinguishable from true life. But it is still not a photo. It is a computer that is creating an image that it has no awareness of what or why it is doing it. And for me, that is key, that is a problem, we take photos to remember an event and place. No matter how clever it becomes, it is not human. We create art, we take photos from our soul, from an experience we're having. AI can never do that. Ever.
This hairstyle suits you perfectly! I have tried a little AI to e.g. add a seal, owl and sea eagle on three Stockholm photos that I have taken. I used Adobe Firefly. The pictures are in a post about AI, which I published a month ago, on my LinkedIn page. Regards Göran Sjöström
Charlie, have you done a video about why stock videos sell for various prices? If you have, please point me to it. If not, I'd definitely be interested to learn about that.
I have not, but it is simple, the prices depend on the usage of the photo, and if the buyer has a subscription to the agencies (lower price) or just buys one and done (higher price)
@@wollertz I was just telling my wife that I can always count on a response from you! That explanation makes sense, thank you. I’ve sold a small number of images on both Shutterstock and Adobe Stock and the prices have been very low. That explains the reasoning behind it.
We never know and thats the issue and why so many quit. This morning I woke up to 3 sales of $15 each, no idea why 🤷♂️. Someone bough 3images form a series at max resolution. It doesn't happen often but when it does its uplifting and motivating. Best of luck to you!
One thing I’m not clear on with AI. If I generate an image of a person and AI uses a photo f a real person and the result is used in a way the model objects to, ca I be sued? Purely hypothetical as I think AI is cheating
technically yes, If you use a real person to model an AI image there could be some legal implications. I don't know enough about AI, I have a feeling that the rules are going to be changing soon, specially with implications to deep fakes and fake news 🤷♂️
Good info 👍 have you noticed a drop in your sales since AI started to flood the marketplace ? BTW has anybody told you that you have a laugh like Mel Gibson 😂😂
😂 thanks! I have not noticed a decrease in sales because of AI, I had stopped uploading because life got too busy, and that slowed down sales, over the past few months I’ve been uploading regularly and sales are on the rise again
If you think it's OK to 'embrace' this tech to make our job easier. That's incredibly sad. You're basically giving in already. Use your own skills. If you you're not that good, then get better! Otherwise you will lose the creative spark, you will get lazy, you will lose the skill-set you have. It may take longer to do it yourself, but it will be worth it. Personally, I will never buy anything that is AI generated, no matter how good it gets. There's zero skill in using it.
There is so much more to AI than image creation. It can help you keyword and write captions and titles. If you use content-aware fill or replace skies, you are using AI. You don't have to like AI-created images (I don't), but you should accept they are here to stay, embrace change to move forward, or, if you choose, consciously go in a different direction. Many artists have been successful in nixing the norms.
Hence photographers losing out on money. Why hire a photographer or designer, when for nothing, someone, anyone, can create wonderful pieces of art with a few clicks.
