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

Getty Images and Shutterstock to Merge

newsroom.gettyimages.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 152 posts

Re: Getty Images and Shutterstock to Merge

#101

Post by Gud »

denysvitali wrote: post #98
righthand wrote: post #32

Shutterstock and Getty do not make money from their stock photography catalog, most of their revenue comes from maintaining exclusive contracts for editorial content (news photos, videos, etc) and selling licenses to those assets. Someone could easily displace them as they haven’t done anything with their companies but shrink contributor earnings and buy out smaller stock asset companies in the last decade. Shutterst…

They also make money by chasing down people who use their images without paying a license (fair) by "extortion". Once my co-founder used an image downloaded from Google (bad!) for the company website, GettyImages noticed that and threatened our company to legal actions (C&D) unless we pay the price of the license for the stock image, which magically became "premium" (or whatever their top tier is) for the occasion. T…

Sorry I don’t understand, how are they the bad guy in your scenario?

Presumably an online business should follow copyright law?

Re: Getty Images and Shutterstock to Merge

#102

Post by blahyawnblah »

Gud wrote: post #101
denysvitali wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also make money by chasing down people who use their images without paying a license (fair) by "extortion". Once my co-founder used an image downloaded from Google (bad!) for the company website, GettyImages noticed that and threatened our company to legal actions (C&D) unless we pay the price of the license for the stock image, which magically became "premium" (or whatever their top tier is) for the occasion. T…

Sorry I don’t understand, how are they the bad guy in your scenario? Presumably an online business should follow copyright law?

They're not saying they're the bad guys

Re: Getty Images and Shutterstock to Merge

#103

Post by rad_gruchalski »

denysvitali wrote: post #98
righthand wrote: post #32

Shutterstock and Getty do not make money from their stock photography catalog, most of their revenue comes from maintaining exclusive contracts for editorial content (news photos, videos, etc) and selling licenses to those assets. Someone could easily displace them as they haven’t done anything with their companies but shrink contributor earnings and buy out smaller stock asset companies in the last decade. Shutterst…

They also make money by chasing down people who use their images without paying a license (fair) by "extortion". Once my co-founder used an image downloaded from Google (bad!) for the company website, GettyImages noticed that and threatened our company to legal actions (C&D) unless we pay the price of the license for the stock image, which magically became "premium" (or whatever their top tier is) for the occasion. T…

How are they suppose to do that without coming across shady?

Re: Getty Images and Shutterstock to Merge

#105

Post by _DeadFred_ »

Aachen wrote: post #35
muhehe wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Whenever I wanted to buy stock images, I was shocked how expensive they were. It's funny, because authors of those images (at least on Shutterstock) get basically nothing (like ten cents for photo, iirc).

So how do we fix it? Better search/aggregator engine and unified payment scheme, but photographers get the money directly and simply pay 1 cent per purchase that came via the aggregator, rather than having to sign away their rights and getting pennies from a centralized platform? Wondering if photographers can't already do this with regular search engine's image search, which (speaking for myself) is what I use when…

It's crazy after all this time we still don't have low friction small transaction capability on the western world's web. When I was in China way back in 2014 it seemed like they had an ability to this person to person from your phone, so why can't we get it for the web?

Maybe there's enough out of work developers someone can go after this seemingly low value but wished for since forever payment space.

Re: Getty Images and Shutterstock to Merge

#106

Post by devin »

tokioyoyo wrote: post #100
devin wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, please. I've generated many, many images. They are not hard to spot.

Much respect, but nowadays, unless the person put basically zero effort to make it look realistic, there's no way you can detect whether an image is AI or not while quick scrolling. Obviously, if you look at every image as "let me examine every part of it to see if it's AI or not" mindset, you can still spot them. But anyone who spent a few days playing with the latest gen models, can create images that pass the 90%…

Do you have a test you like? I just took one at https://sightengine.com/ai-or-not?version=2024Q3 and got 18/20 correct, and I'm not zooming in on details or anything, I'm just using some basic discrimination based on what I've generated and seen generated in the past.

I would do even better at this if we limited it to pictures of "realistic" settings.

Re: Getty Images and Shutterstock to Merge

#109

Post by harrall »

righthand wrote: post #32

Shutterstock and Getty do not make money from their stock photography catalog, most of their revenue comes from maintaining exclusive contracts for editorial content (news photos, videos, etc) and selling licenses to those assets. Someone could easily displace them as they haven’t done anything with their companies but shrink contributor earnings and buy out smaller stock asset companies in the last decade. Shutterst…

Why do they need innovation? They just have a product that works, like a company that makes nails. Is there much for a nail company to innovate all the time?

It’s a boring job that has been long figured out.

Sure, they can diversify by adding other services, just like how a nail company could start making screws, but that’s not really innovation… that’s just doing something else altogether. Should Getty diversify? Maybe, but it would be more for their own survival than actually making their core product better.

If you are looking for a job that has innovation, you apply in an industry that still has places to go. You can’t work for a nail-making company and then complain that they aren’t re-inventing the world.

Re: Getty Images and Shutterstock to Merge

#110

Post by tokioyoyo »

devin wrote: post #106
tokioyoyo wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much respect, but nowadays, unless the person put basically zero effort to make it look realistic, there's no way you can detect whether an image is AI or not while quick scrolling. Obviously, if you look at every image as "let me examine every part of it to see if it's AI or not" mindset, you can still spot them. But anyone who spent a few days playing with the latest gen models, can create images that pass the 90%…

Do you have a test you like? I just took one at https://sightengine.com/ai-or-not?version=2024Q3 and got 18/20 correct, and I'm not zooming in on details or anything, I'm just using some basic discrimination based on what I've generated and seen generated in the past. I would do even better at this if we limited it to pictures of "realistic" settings.

I think we might be talking about two distinct cases. If you're actively thinking whether an image is AI or not, you're already biased to it potentially being AI-generated. That improves your recognition of slop-finding. As I mentioned, I definitely agree how it's fairly straightforward to spot the slop if you're looking for it.

I'm not even sure how we could implement a real-life test without bias. Maybe if there was a complete feed of your internet browsing, where it asks you at the end of the day "ballpark the % of media that you think was AI?". Then go through the entire feed, and scrutinize it one by one.

Post reply on HN