Author Topic: Adobe Acceptance Rates (Read 1227 times)

Big Money · « **on:** June 04, 2025, 06:43 »

Hey Folks,

My acceptance rates are still only around 70% which is much lower than the other 15 companies I submit to. Maybe they have the highest standards in the industry now?

cobalt · « **Reply #1 on:** June 04, 2025, 08:24 »

No, they have rejectiongate. Apparently a large part of reviews are now done by an algo and since 10 weeks the review is unpredictable and often random.

With 70% you are still doing very well.

They refuse to communicate about the problem and we are left alone to figure out what works and what doesn't.

The only good thing they did was to add upload limits.

So inspections are now getting faster.

f8 · « **Reply #2 on:** June 04, 2025, 09:03 »

I think "rejectiongate" is nearing an end. My last few submissions the majority are getting accepted. I am not sure how I suddenly improved my "quality issues" but I did.

cobalt · « **Reply #3 on:** June 04, 2025, 09:12 »

I hope so. I still upload very little and I still get quality and similar declines.

Used to have 90% acceptance rate, not anymore.

But the speed of inspections has improved.

wds · « **Reply #4 on:** June 04, 2025, 09:15 »

Regarding rejection rates. Is it the same for AI vs. non-AI?

MotionDesign · « **Reply #5 on:** June 04, 2025, 10:06 »

Acceptance rate at about 96%
But I don't submit photos o real videos, maybe for illustrations and motion graphics is easier to get accepted.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #6 on:** June 04, 2025, 19:15 »

I haven't uploaded to Adobe Stock in months. Today I thought I'd try a small upload of 5 photos to see how long it took and whether they had recovered their senses.

The good news is that the reviews took only a few hours.

The bad news is that they accepted 2 and rejected 3 for "quality issues".

Sales are reasonable with the portfolio I have, but I won't upload any more.

The collection continues to get genAI content accepted with wonky hands, maps, piano keys, insects, sheet music, bathroom faucets, calculators missing keys and on and on. These oops images aren't creative; it's lazy AI slop and doesn't belong in any self respecting collection

Look at some examples from just the last week or so (click for larger version):

zeljkok · « **Reply #7 on:** June 04, 2025, 23:14 »

That collage is quite telling Jo Ann. My situation is quite similar to yours, although I keep my rather modest submission rate (5 - 10/week)

I have a question if someone can please enlighten me. The following image was rejected as RF, only to be accepted as Illustrative Editorial

Why??? Aerial view of Malaga, Spain. Yes in the centre is Corrida (Bullfight Arena), so what? There are several examples at Adobe Stock library that are not Illustrative Editorial where Corrida is much better seen:

https://as2.ftcdn.net/v2/jpg/11/84/02/33/1000_F_1184023369_K4DCbs3kn6MqpYUXWkHPIOgrf7zi5pvG.jpg

https://as1.ftcdn.net/v2/jpg/00/51/79/08/1000_F_51790812_VwiOapK6j66qFQ43uEojh0bxXqv5m328.jpg

... and many more ...

Any comments?

angelacat · « **Reply #8 on:** June 05, 2025, 04:08 »

Few rejections one for one of my cats "too similar to existing". I mostly do video so maybe that's why my acceptance rate is around 90%.

1 shot was rejected, trademark issues, even though I removed the trademark. The second shot which was exactly the same only this time a zoom in shot, again trademark removed (closer up) accepted.

Jo Ann Snover - thanks for sharing. Some are obvious AI flaws but some are not immediately apparent. If customers don't notice them at first but after publish - I'm guessing they will not be happy.

I still don't get if AI images can't be copyrighted how are these been sold. Nobody can answer this - if images are not copyrighted then are they not in the public domain and free to use.

mike123 · « **Reply #9 on:** June 05, 2025, 07:02 »

Quote from: zeljkok on June 04, 2025, 23:14

That collage is quite telling Jo Ann. My situation is quite similar to yours, although I keep my rather modest submission rate (5 - 10/week)

I have a question if someone can please enlighten me. The following image was rejected as RF, only to be accepted as Illustrative Editorial

Why??? Aerial view of Malaga, Spain. Yes in the centre is Corrida (Bullfight Arena), so what? There are several examples at Adobe Stock library that are not Illustrative Editorial where Corrida is much better seen:

https://as2.ftcdn.net/v2/jpg/11/84/02/33/1000_F_1184023369_K4DCbs3kn6MqpYUXWkHPIOgrf7zi5pvG.jpg

https://as1.ftcdn.net/v2/jpg/00/51/79/08/1000_F_51790812_VwiOapK6j66qFQ43uEojh0bxXqv5m328.jpg

... and many more ...

Any comments?

Did you remove all hotel logos (there are a lot of hotels in this view)?

Yola · « **Reply #10 on:** June 05, 2025, 07:34 »

Quote from: zeljkok on June 04, 2025, 23:14

That collage is quite telling Jo Ann. My situation is quite similar to yours, although I keep my rather modest submission rate (5 - 10/week)

I have a question if someone can please enlighten me. The following image was rejected as RF, only to be accepted as Illustrative Editorial

Why??? Aerial view of Malaga, Spain. Yes in the centre is Corrida (Bullfight Arena), so what? There are several examples at Adobe Stock library that are not Illustrative Editorial where Corrida is much better seen:

https://as2.ftcdn.net/v2/jpg/11/84/02/33/1000_F_1184023369_K4DCbs3kn6MqpYUXWkHPIOgrf7zi5pvG.jpg [nofollow]

https://as1.ftcdn.net/v2/jpg/00/51/79/08/1000_F_51790812_VwiOapK6j66qFQ43uEojh0bxXqv5m328.jpg [nofollow]

... and many more ...

Any comments?

I think that the problem could be the little colourful cube on the right - it is Centre Pompidou building and its design might be copyrighted (as it is the case of eg. Guggenheim museum in Bilbao by Frank Gehry). But it is just my guess.. Or the illumination of the Arena (as the one of Eiffel tower), although this one does not look spectacular. Hard to say.. $:-\$

50% · « **Reply #11 on:** June 05, 2025, 08:36 »

Hilarious examples lol, the best one is the girl with the big old male hand!

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #12 on:** June 05, 2025, 09:54 »

For me, it just seems to be a generic 'quality issues'. I far as I can tell, it is good quality (I do pre-edit, inspect, etc) - so I suspect it is just a 'quota' thing.

click.baty · « **Reply #13 on:** June 05, 2025, 11:15 »

Wow. I'm quite shocked at the images Jo Ann shared. No wonder buyers are complaining if this is the quality they get in search results.

As a primarily editorial photographer, I feel Adobe really need to move AI images to a separate category rather than mixing them in with real photos. That said, I don't have a good buyer's perspective, but it seems like a chore to find real images when I search for "similar images".

I have had much better acceptance rates in the last few weeks for editorial photos. I've decided not to bother with commercial images on Adobe going forward. It seems the market is diluted and clients can easily make their own AI images cheaply online, plus Adobe clearly do not want them. It's a shame, as the talent on this forum can easily outclass anything AI has to offer.

zeljkok · « **Reply #14 on:** June 05, 2025, 12:31 »

Quote from: Yola on June 05, 2025, 07:34

I think that the problem could be the little colourful cube on the right - it is Centre Pompidou building and its design might be copyrighted (as it is the case of eg. Guggenheim museum in Bilbao by Frank Gehry). But it is just my guess.. Or the illumination of the Arena (as the one of Eiffel tower), although this one does not look spectacular. Hard to say.. $:-\$

Yes, only possible explanation is Pompidou Cube. (No hotel logos at all). Other examples in the Adobe library don't the cube. I am surprised they accepted it as illustrative editorial though. Interesting enough, SS took it just fine non-editorial, and SS is very anal specially lately about such things.

(I have several shots of Pompidou Cube itself, but always with recognizable people so can't upload to Adobe)

Could cut these 2 in Photoshop of course, but don't want to - in my opinion they add something to the scene.

Thank you!

Chicago · « **Reply #15 on:** June 06, 2025, 09:18 »

I like that i get more per sale from Adobe than other places, but i can't seem to get many approvals at Adobe. I get stuff approved elsewhere that Adobe just says no. I know i need to get better work uploaded, but you'd think there's some consistency amongst the agencies as to what qualifies as a good image nope

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Adobe Acceptance Rates (Read 1227 times)

Big Money

cobalt

f8

cobalt

wds

MotionDesign

Jo Ann Snover

zeljkok

angelacat

mike123

Yola

50%

SuperPhoto

click.baty

zeljkok

Chicago

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors