Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Pro_RazE t1_j5zaaly wrote

"If you can't beat them, join them"

41

HillaryPutin t1_j5zc9ab wrote

>Shutterstock claims it will pay artists whose work is included in its Al generation. Shutterstock will do this through a "Contributor Fund. The fund will "directly compensate Shutterstock contributors" if their IP is used to develop Al-generative models, such as the OpenAl model, through licensing data from Shutterstock's database.

This is good in concept, but did they ask all contributors for permission? I could see this being a disaster financially for independent photographers/artists. Imagine going from selling several hundred images a day to you "contributing to an AI" several hundred times a day and making pennies. I predict this will end poorly.

10

nbren_ t1_j5zl417 wrote

It’s literally just Dall-e 2 with a new stock model, kicks out really mediocre generations and they still come out 1024x1024. Also every generation you make goes into the public market for purchase by someone else which defeats the purpose. Hope they upgrade it quickly before Adobe eats their lunch.

32

Sleepyposeidon t1_j60o51m wrote

Didn’t they reject all the AI generated submissions unlike Adobe or pond5?

6

blueSGL t1_j61tx2e wrote

Replying to symphonic_dolphin (#1,513,318)

Even in cases where you are not uploading to a site to sell photos/art a lot of websites where you submit any sort of image needs to have it in their T+Cs that they can do a shitload of things with the image just so they have permission to share it to other people, move it between servers, process the image (compress it to save space) etc...

those all were ok until generative AI came on the scene and now those same terms is like giving cart blanche to the site if they want to create or fine tune a model.

1

kinetsu_hayabusa t1_j6gsv1j wrote

Shutterstock going bankrupt 10 times faster than Blockbuster

1