Author Topic: Rejections on adobe (Read 42499 times)

cascoly · « **Reply #150 on:** June 16, 2023, 15:18 »

Quote from: Her Ugliness on June 15, 2023, 12:33

...

Meanwhile I got 95% of a whole AI batch rejected earlier today, while usually 99% of my AI images get accepted. And since I am always using the same AI engine and the same post-procession tools, I know for sure that the "quality" of the submitted images is consistant - But the reviewing is not. It's all over the place.

yes, join the crowd -- entire batches of quality images has been happening for some time now with no response from AS

cobalt · « **Reply #151 on:** June 16, 2023, 17:05 »

And 2 more declines for photos that are already online elsewhere.

Well, I got lucky with 3 ai files. Need to be grateful for what luck you have.

But this is no fun. I was always uploading to Adobe first, maybe to cheer myself up I should change that. Upload everywhere else and only to Adobe after the files are live?

Are we supposed to resubmit everything that is being declined now in autumn? or whenever they sort themselves out?

Eta:

Looks like the dogs with bad isolations are still there.

https://stock.adobe.com/de/images/close-up-of-a-cute-puppy-dog-sitting-looking-forward-on-a-transparent-background-generative-ai/610396712?prev_url=detail&asset_id=610396712

f8 · « **Reply #152 on:** June 16, 2023, 18:37 »

Quote from: Reimar on June 16, 2023, 13:27

I'm going to watch this space to see if AS stops rejecting batches of photography for "Quality" that would have passed before and consistently pass at other sites. Until then I'll pause uploads, as it is now a waste of time.

It is a complete waste of time. I am having a hard time taking Adobe Stock seriously these last few weeks, especially with that "dog poop" new Adobe standard of quality we are supposed to lower ourselves down to.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #153 on:** June 16, 2023, 19:55 »

I've been looking at the genAI new approvals, and a huge percentage of them just make a mockery of any notion of (a) following the rules that Adobe has said contributors should follow when submitting AI content; and (b) that there is any consistent standard of "quality" being applied there.

In the light of all the "quality" rejections so many have seen in the non-AI content, it just seems madness to be filling the collection with so much substandard stuff. It doesn't help Adobe in any way I can fathom to have a lot of unusable, poor quality genAI images. Can you imagine using these in an ad about all the great new AI content available at Adobe Stock??

I've been keeping a folder of examples but here are just a few examples of AI mistakes that shouldn't be in the collection from this evening's review:

cobalt · « **Reply #154 on:** June 17, 2023, 00:13 »

While I am a big fan of artful mistakes like the lobster, this does not make sense.

What happened to consistent, reliable inspections Adobe?

Have they hired cheap, but unprofessional reviewers that just click accept, decline without looking at anything and with no oversight?

But it looks like if you use ai to create „photos“ anything goes.

Reimar · « **Reply #155 on:** June 17, 2023, 07:45 »

Jo Anne, I get the
disappearing furniture
Father spelled wrong
Mislabeled food
fantasy USA map
Onions on apple pie
Roti?
Nonsense lamps

but what exactly is wrong with the Roti?

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #156 on:** June 17, 2023, 08:08 »

Quote from: Reimar on June 17, 2023, 07:45

...but what exactly is wrong with the Roti?

The back of the plate is completely missing - if you look at the PNG view on Adobe Stock it's easier to see the "hole"

And it's not just nonsense lamps, look at the legs of the chairs - one has only three legs and the lengths are such that you couldn't possibly sit in them

And have a "burger with egg" for breakfast while you're here

cobalt · « **Reply #157 on:** June 17, 2023, 09:53 »

This sandwich is weird, but that would not be as bad for me, because the customer can clearly see what he is getting.

But many of the others have more subtle problems, I didn‘t immediately see the onions or the missing part of the plate only after looking more closely.

The problem remains that normal photos are being randomly declined, but ai is apparently accepted without any human inspection. As long as the ai looks like a photo.

They decline plenty of other ai files.

cascoly · « **Reply #158 on:** June 17, 2023, 12:35 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on June 17, 2023, 08:08

...

And have a "burger with egg" for breakfast while you're here
...

burgerw egg is not uncommon, but it's usually under the bun. more curious is the dripping egg yolk when the yolk is unbroken

Jaggy · « **Reply #159 on:** June 17, 2023, 12:57 »

Quote from: cascoly on June 17, 2023, 12:35

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on June 17, 2023, 08:08
...

And have a "burger with egg" for breakfast while you're here
...

burgerw egg is not uncommon, but it's usually under the bun. more curious is the dripping egg yolk when the yolk is unbroken

Good spot on the yolk

Still, I'm sure it meets Adobe's stringent quality standards (no sniggering at the back).

PigsInSpace · « **Reply #160 on:** June 17, 2023, 13:42 »

I’m a big fan of the M.C Escher table and chairs.

kubeslaw · « **Reply #161 on:** June 18, 2023, 20:05 »

So how is it going guys? Is there anyone still trying to submit real photos and can share some insights? I already have another batch of several hundred photos to be added, but I am afraid of getting all of them rejected and wasting my time. Is it still the same as in last couple of weeks?

[email protected] · « **Reply #162 on:** June 18, 2023, 23:40 »

please adobe solve this rejection issue.

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #163 on:** June 19, 2023, 05:12 »

Quote from: kubeslaw on June 18, 2023, 20:05

So how is it going guys? Is there anyone still trying to submit real photos and can share some insights? I already have another batch of several hundred photos to be added, but I am afraid of getting all of them rejected and wasting my time. Is it still the same as in last couple of weeks?

I do real photogaphy, and I am not used to submit snapshots. So, I stopped submitting my best selected work to Adobe stock for now. Because of the last rejections that prove disrespect and contemp form Adobe.

Jaggy · « **Reply #164 on:** June 19, 2023, 05:15 »

Quote from: kubeslaw on June 18, 2023, 20:05

So how is it going guys? Is there anyone still trying to submit real photos and can share some insights? I already have another batch of several hundred photos to be added, but I am afraid of getting all of them rejected and wasting my time. Is it still the same as in last couple of weeks?

I just had another batch rejected by Adobe for "quality issues" having been accepted by Shutterstock. It's beyond a joke now. I'm done uploading to Adobe.

Shuttershock · « **Reply #165 on:** June 19, 2023, 05:18 »

Avoid HDR if you want less rejections

cobalt · « **Reply #166 on:** June 19, 2023, 06:47 »

fwiw my acceptance/declines today were fine. one ai file accepted, 3 photos accepted and one file declined but that one is ok

I did treat them with Topaz for better clarity close up.

ETA

Another 5 ai files accepted.

I feel a lot better now, because trying to figure out what could have gone wrong 30 days later is frustrating.

Hope it stays this way.

I don't mind updating my workflow, like adding the Topaz treatment, but I need some kind of predictability.

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #167 on:** June 19, 2023, 12:26 »

Quote from: Shuttershock on June 19, 2023, 05:18

Avoid HDR if you want less rejections

Avoid non AI if you want less rejections

HalfFull · « **Reply #168 on:** June 19, 2023, 12:33 »

Yeah, I’m seeing high numbers of rejections after 10+ years of near 100% approvals. They need to get a grip as they’re becoming impossible to submit to.

Edit, just to clarify… it’s straight photographs they’re declining, illustrations and composite imagery seems ok. I think I’ll just take that as Adobe are no longer looking for photographs and just send that work to other agencies and illustrations etc to Adobe. I’m don’t want to wreck an excellent acceptance rate.

Just_to_inform_people2 · « **Reply #169 on:** June 19, 2023, 12:40 »

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on June 19, 2023, 12:26

Quote from: Shuttershock on June 19, 2023, 05:18
Avoid HDR if you want less rejections
Avoid non AI if you want less rejections

Exactly. Either Adobe thinks they have an oversaturated real image portfolio and nothing passes unless it has some real value or they have hired incompetent idiots do the job for reviewing these real photos. Both reasons are more then eligible to avoid submitting any new content. And no counter argument from Adobe here, except they work as usual and it must be your submission that is not the "quality" that Adobe thinks is good enough while other companies have not shown any divergent behaviour on reviewing your submissions.

HalfFull · « **Reply #170 on:** June 19, 2023, 12:46 »

Mine haven’t been declined on quality. For instance, if I submit 2 images of mountains, two completely different ones and keyworded and captioned detailing all visible mountains etc so they can be used in relevant magazine articles, they’re been declined as similar… because everyone knows all mountains are the same. Writing an article about K2, don’t worry, Everest summit will do… they look similar!

Just_to_inform_people2 · « **Reply #171 on:** June 19, 2023, 13:14 »

Quote from: HalfFull on June 19, 2023, 12:46

Mine haven’t been declined on quality. For instance, if I submit 2 images of mountains, two completely different ones and keyworded and captioned detailing all visible mountains etc so they can be used in relevant magazine articles, they’re been declined as similar… because everyone knows all mountains are the same. Writing an article about K2, don’t worry, Everest summit will do… they look similar!

Then it must be the morons they hired. Or maybe Mat is doing the reviews these days of real photos while all others are doing the AI submissions? He understands perfectly why (part) of your submissions are being rejected

HalfFull · « **Reply #172 on:** June 19, 2023, 13:20 »

Quote from: SVH on June 19, 2023, 13:14

Quote from: HalfFull on June 19, 2023, 12:46
Mine haven’t been declined on quality. For instance, if I submit 2 images of mountains, two completely different ones and keyworded and captioned detailing all visible mountains etc so they can be used in relevant magazine articles, they’re been declined as similar… because everyone knows all mountains are the same. Writing an article about K2, don’t worry, Everest summit will do… they look similar!
Then it must be the morons they hired. Or maybe Mat is doing the reviews these days of real photos while all others are doing the AI submissions? He understands prefectly why your submissions are being rejected

I've fired a question over to support. If it's a case of no longer wanting this particular content then I'm ok with that, I can just direct it to the other agencies. I just don't want to waste my time submitting stuff to them if they're never going to accept it. That's just wasting my time and theirs.

Usually Mat is very proactive with supporting contributors so I would have thought he'd chime in with an explanation.

f8 · « **Reply #173 on:** June 19, 2023, 13:27 »

Mat...

Can you please chime in on this. It is now 7 8 pages of concern from several contributors and not a peep from Adobe. In the meantime I will cease to submit my work as it has become a complete waste of my time. These sudden rejections for quality issues en masse is nonsensical and confusing.

I will reach out on a limb and suggest I am not the only one who would like an explanation.

Thanks in advance.

Just_to_inform_people2 · « **Reply #174 on:** June 19, 2023, 13:50 »

Quote from: HalfFull on June 19, 2023, 13:20

Quote from: SVH on June 19, 2023, 13:14
Quote from: HalfFull on June 19, 2023, 12:46
Mine haven’t been declined on quality. For instance, if I submit 2 images of mountains, two completely different ones and keyworded and captioned detailing all visible mountains etc so they can be used in relevant magazine articles, they’re been declined as similar… because everyone knows all mountains are the same. Writing an article about K2, don’t worry, Everest summit will do… they look similar!
Then it must be the morons they hired. Or maybe Mat is doing the reviews these days of real photos while all others are doing the AI submissions? He understands prefectly why your submissions are being rejected

I've fired a question over to support. If it's a case of no longer wanting this particular content then I'm ok with that, I can just direct it to the other agencies. I just don't want to waste my time submitting stuff to them if they're never going to accept it. That's just wasting my time and theirs.

Usually Mat is very proactive with supporting contributors so I would have thought he'd chime in with an explanation.

And I do understand the mountain problem. "The moderator needs to make a decision within a second or two and move on to the next image or video" (quote Mat).

So obviously within those two seconds of watching your photo or video and reading your title, those mountains must look the same

It's like ultra fast scanning with collateral damage.

Thanks Adobe for taking your time on our curated submissions!

Edit:
Maybe Adobe can get some classes from Getty's which (unlikable as they might be to some) do a thorough review, give you the abillity to revise stuff, if possible, and otherwise explain very clearly why your submission is rejected. And they do it within a week.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Rejections on adobe (Read 42499 times)

cascoly

cobalt

f8

Jo Ann Snover

cobalt

Reimar

Jo Ann Snover

cobalt

cascoly

Jaggy

PigsInSpace

kubeslaw

[email protected]

DiscreetDuck

Jaggy

Shuttershock

cobalt

DiscreetDuck

HalfFull

Just_to_inform_people2

HalfFull

Just_to_inform_people2

HalfFull

f8

Just_to_inform_people2

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors