Aside from the sycophants in here who keep downvoting me, there is a clear and distinct difference between the examples you provide and what you are actually doing.
If you take a picture of a painting in a museum (provided you can not get caught doing so and they don't seize your phone/camera) then they will either force you to delete it and/or take you to court for copyright infringement if you attempt to repost it anywhere online. I don't know what museums you've been to but the ones here in the DC Metro Area (https://www.si.edu/museums) are SUPER strict when it comes to that. They will call US Federal Police on you if you were to do something like that. Prominent signs warn against it (constantly) so anyone caught doing so is treated as a guilty party.
GameFAQs provided one of the earliest internet sources for video game box art in a small resolution that would count as 'fair use'. Most importantly though they did so in a non-commercial way (not even adverts on the website back then, to my knowledge).
Modding games is 'copyright infringement' in a way. Absolutely. However, again (under fair use) they are always done non-commercially. Zero profit. Anyone attempting otherwise gets VERY quickly dismantled by lawyers.
Do you see the pattern here? Just compiling these is not much of an issue but charging money for stuff you didn't create (at all) in violation of the ACTUAL copyrights of others just makes you a terrible person.
No amount of downvoting sycophants will stop me from calling it like it is. This isn't bloody Reddit.