Starting with Shutterstock- AI influence now

[J_Allen]

I am a hobbyist photographer of a few years. I consider myself to have some skill, though I see people here daily who blow me out of the water.

Recently I have seen some videos of people who upload their photos for the public to use on websites such as Shutterstock. I do no professional work, but this is something I would enjoy. I am fully aware of the work that goes into it and the abysmal return per photo. If one was to make any money it would have to be in large volume.

My question is, with AI now taking a front seat in many areas, is there still a market for this? I had more of an interest in creating more macro/textured images which is a little more niche. However, isn't it possible that virtually any photo that is needed it can now be computer generated? The technology is getting better every year, heck every month. Would this be a waste of my time?

 

[Klaus dk]

The way I see it, if you enjoy shooting what you shoot, you don't lose much by uploading to Shutterstock, and may get a modest return from it.

If you shoot only beacuse you think it could earn you money, there hopefully are better paying jobs around.

 

[Redhenry]

I’ve had a few hundred images with Shutterstock for about five years. They generally bring in a few dollars a month - I very rarely make the minimum payment in a month, so $25 usually take me two or even three months, but there’s an occasional good sale, two or three times a year, of $20-50. Most of the time, though I make 10 cents each time a picture is used. I don’t generally add to my stock any more, as I’ve come to view it as something which provides an occasional bottle of whisky. However, I submitted five images recently. Four were accepted in the normal way but one was accepted as an image which might be used by an AI program as a source or as learning material.

 

[J_Allen]

I’ve had a few hundred images with Shutterstock for about five years. They generally bring in a few dollars a month - I very rarely make the minimum payment in a month, so $25 usually take me two or even three months, but there’s an occasional good sale, two or three times a year, of $20-50. Most of the time, though I make 10 cents each time a picture is used. I don’t generally add to my stock any more, as I’ve come to view it as something which provides an occasional bottle of whisky. However, I submitted five images recently. Four were accepted in the normal way but one was accepted as an image which might be used by an AI program as a source or as learning material.

That is interesting that they made that distinction about AI for one particular photo. This is new. How do you feel about that?

I have no allusions about making any kind of real profit, but I think that it is cool that others can use your work for something professional. If I get "an occasional bottle of whiskey," then that is a bonus. I would not mind a little bit of passive income as I am a hobbyist and have not made.

I have been offered small jobs but I respectfully declined. I really do not have the time and nor do I want the obligation. I'm not THAT confident, but apparently others thought my work was good enough for a paycheck.

 

[ishwanu]

My question is, with AI now taking a front seat in many areas, is there still a market for this?

Only a dwindling one, it would seem.

However, isn't it possible that virtually any photo that is needed it can now be computer generated?

That's probably incorrect. If a photo is actually needed, only a photo will do. However, I'm sure plenty of buyers of stock images can in many cases make do with AI generated images.

Would this be a waste of my time?

That's your decision, but it's something I don't spend any time doing.

 

[Redhenry]

I’ve had a few hundred images with Shutterstock for about five years. They generally bring in a few dollars a month - I very rarely make the minimum payment in a month, so $25 usually take me two or even three months, but there’s an occasional good sale, two or three times a year, of $20-50. Most of the time, though I make 10 cents each time a picture is used. I don’t generally add to my stock any more, as I’ve come to view it as something which provides an occasional bottle of whisky. However, I submitted five images recently. Four were accepted in the normal way but one was accepted as an image which might be used by an AI program as a source or as learning material.

That is interesting that they made that distinction about AI for one particular photo. This is new. How do you feel about that?

I have no allusions about making any kind of real profit, but I think that it is cool that others can use your work for something professional. If I get "an occasional bottle of whiskey," then that is a bonus. I would not mind a little bit of passive income as I am a hobbyist and have not made.

I have been offered small jobs but I respectfully declined. I really do not have the time and nor do I want the obligation. I'm not THAT confident, but apparently others thought my work was good enough for a paycheck.

I think it was simply that one of my pictures didn’t quite meet their acceptance criteria but would be OK to go in the ‘AI’ bin! Doesn’t bother me. I’ve always seen my Shutterstock pictures as practical, useful material to illustrate gardening magazines or websites. They aren’t ‘art’!