Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective

stockperformer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 230 posts

Re: Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective

#111

Post by dragonwriter »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #50
wnkrshm wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that now only the owner of a machine profits where before lots of individuals profited. More power to the owners, I guess.

The trajectory of ML appears to point towards massive transfer of wealth to capital owners and impoverishment of the working classes. We need to find a way to distribute the benefits of such developments.

> The trajectory of ML appears to point towards massive transfer of wealth to capital owners and impoverishment of the working classes.

That’s the natural end of capitalism, as has been noted literally since the word “capitalism” waa coined for it (largely, for that reason.)

It is end to which every tool and technology is put under that system, and has nothing to do with the particular technology and everything to do with the system.

Re: Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective

#112

Post by veave »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #50
wnkrshm wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that now only the owner of a machine profits where before lots of individuals profited. More power to the owners, I guess.

The trajectory of ML appears to point towards massive transfer of wealth to capital owners and impoverishment of the working classes. We need to find a way to distribute the benefits of such developments.

[flagged]

Re: Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective

#113

Post by Auracle »

emrah wrote: post #32

Since AI is mixing to create images and not being truly creative, I reckon it will be a worthy business to be able to detect where the pieces in an AI- generated image comes from.

With respect, I don't think you understand how it works. They aren't making a collage.

Re: Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective

#114

Post by mym1990 »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #101
two_in_one wrote: post #15

Like it or not, it's here like CGI in movies bestsellers. I don't envy artists, most of them will have to rethink their plans and switch to graphics or web designers, or something similar. Not sure who will be next. Probably GPT will take over virtual bookshelves on Amazon. Mandatory "AI generated" mark may help a bit. I will not waste my time reading it. I think we should expect a flood of "masterpieces" in differen…

> Mandatory "AI generated" mark may help a bit This will never happen, promise you that a major CGI sequence will ship completely AI generated in a Marvel movie within 3 years. This tech will be so integrated into workflows of Disney and the like that the idea of an "AI Generated" watermark will be as ridiculous to them as a "3D Rendered" watermark and if any legislation comes about they'll be against it.

Already on the docket in the EU: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20230505IP...

Re: Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective

#115

Post by indymike »

mmcconnell1618 wrote: post #108

If you haven't tried to purchase a stock photo recently, it is incredibly difficult. I can order same day delivery of physical goods from Amazon much faster than trying to buy a single stock photo. All of the services are subscriptions now and they have dark UX patterns to convince you the only way to get the images is to sign up for an annual plan that will auto-renew. In comparison, typing a prompt into a generativ…

I'm not sure that is the case... I've used Shutterstock and Adobe Stock in the past two weeks and both times, it took about 3-4 minutes to find something I liked, and 10 sec (subscription) to 1 minute (non subscription) go through the license/payment cycle.

> All of the services are subscriptions now and they have dark UX patterns

They do. I have a subscription to one of the services, and it's just super easy and I use it enough it's worth the monthly. I'm not sure there's a huge market for licensing an image occasionally... It would be interesting to see the breakdown there. Also, Adobe has a huge advantage because Adobe Stock is highly integrated into Adobe's design software.

Re: Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective

#116

Post by mym1990 »

torginus wrote: post #17
two_in_one wrote: post #15

Like it or not, it's here like CGI in movies bestsellers. I don't envy artists, most of them will have to rethink their plans and switch to graphics or web designers, or something similar. Not sure who will be next. Probably GPT will take over virtual bookshelves on Amazon. Mandatory "AI generated" mark may help a bit. I will not waste my time reading it. I think we should expect a flood of "masterpieces" in differen…

Dunno, 'brand name' writers of airport novels have been forever accused of having ghost-written their novels, I think AI will allow writers of lesser budgets to also get help in writing their novels. Or who knows, even the 'King'-s of the world will use AI to fill out their chapters.

Lots of musicians have their songs written by someone else…is this in a similar vein?

Re: Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective

#117

Post by mym1990 »

The_Colonel wrote: post #23
senko wrote: post #20

There is a lot of potential for aspiring photographers in creating (and licensing) photo libraries for the specific purpose of AI training. Where previously you'd take 100 photos to choose the perfect one, now you'd include all of them, with labels that describe their quality or deficiences (which you do anyway as you curate the photos you took). This makes almost every shot the money shot. Less glamorous for sure, a…

Where is the photographer's skill necessary in the process? Eventually, all the "photographer" will need to do is to take a 8K video recording of the subject and AI will generate a set of great looking pictures (it already knows what people like).

Good/great photographers have an eye for things like composition and color balance, which can help in refining training data to a place where AI can produce indistinguishable products from actual photographs.

Re: Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective

#118

Post by indymike »

guax wrote: post #25
ksaj wrote: post #2

I had to put together a presentation that was somewhat graphic-heavy. I used Dall-e 2, and the ability to get things so tailored to what I needed, so quickly, was absolutely worth it. I don't know if AI will replace stock photography, but I wouldn't bet against it. The ability to charge a high price for stock photography is over though.

There are so many photographers out there putting so many images on platforms that you get paid almost nothing for them. Unless you get a great image and have a proper agent or contact passing them along you don't get much. Payout for some of my images ranged from under 5 USD to at most 40 USD for one image one time. Some photographers just spam TONS of images on the platforms to get some cash by betting on the long…

The smarter producers will focus on building sets of images that feature common thematic elements. For example, using the same models in business situations. Or using the same style backgrounds with different subjects (people or vehicles). Sometimes it's a lot of shots of the same city with the same style. Other times it's different sets of illustrations (i.e. "corporate memphis meetings" or "ultra realistic athletes) that are the same style. This makes buyers more likely to select multiples of their work.

> Someone, somewhere with a shutterstock subscription might need your image for a local magazine/paper and you get 2 dollars for it.

Yep, that's how a lot of it works.

> Actual premium stock or for hire photography will not.

I kind of wonder about that. When I can upload a picture of my product and prompt, Photo of a scene with my product as the subject on 10 N Main street in Wherever, usa. I'm going to be a lot less likely to ship product (and get it lost or broken), commission a photographer in Wherever USA to go take the picture, wait 2 weeks for the right weather, only to find that some unreleased person's face in the reflection on the side of the product.

Re: Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective

#119

Post by pessimizer »

prepend wrote: post #91
wnkrshm wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that now only the owner of a machine profits where before lots of individuals profited. More power to the owners, I guess.

All the users of that machine profit. And I guess there are orders of magnitude greater users.

All the users are that machine are renting time from the machine's owner.

Re: Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective

#120

Post by snapcaster »

wilimitis wrote: post #67
ksaj wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Today's AI has taught us that everything people show us they think is unique, isn't really. Everything comes from somewhere, including the things that add up to what we call creativity.

That's actually untrue to me as a professional artist. A.I. art has shown me that cheap permutations (which have been done in art even before A.I.) can still capture the untrained eye. I don't think that's anything particularly new. And absolutely, however creativity is the tip of the spear which pushes beyond constraints to develop novel AND meaningful style (like Beksinski, Kopera, Kostetsky, Moebius, etc). Nice tr…

AI art has won multiple competitions for photography and art. Is your claim that all the judges of these competitions were "untrained eyes"?
Post reply on HN