pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Adobe Stock generative AI submission updates  (Read 2719 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.



« Reply #1 on: July 21, 2023, 02:02 »
+2
Hi Everyone,

I would like to share two updates regarding the submission of generative AI images to Adobe Stock. We have updated the contributor portal and added an additional checkbox that eliminates the need for you to attach a property release for generative AI images featuring people or property that are fictional.

In addition, you can now submit photo-realistic generative AI images as asset type photos, i.e., content that looks as though it could have been created by a camera, as long as you check the box that it was created with generative AI tools. All other generative AI content should continue to be submitted as asset type illustrations.

You can read the details on all the updates in our learn and support page here:
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/generative-ai-content.html

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Mat Hayward
Thank you very much Mat!
Clear and easier now, and (crossing my fingers) quicker  ;)

« Reply #2 on: July 21, 2023, 03:20 »
+1
Mat, what about the picture that are already in the pending queue and uploaded as illustrations ?

« Reply #3 on: July 21, 2023, 05:19 »
+1
Mat, are AI generated images submitted as photos (The ones that are made to look like photos, of course) reviewed by the same quality standart as AI images submitted as illustrations or are they reviewed by the same strict standarts of real human generated photos?

I really do not want to start submitting AI images as photos now only to find out in 40 days that they will all be rejected and have to resubmit them and wait another 40 days.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2023, 05:21 by Her Ugliness »

« Reply #4 on: July 21, 2023, 06:03 »
+5
To be fair to all contributors, please allow 3D artists to also submit their photorealistic renders as Photos.

« Reply #5 on: July 21, 2023, 06:15 »
0
That is very, very helpful Mat!

Thank you!!


« Reply #6 on: July 21, 2023, 12:43 »
0
Hi Everyone,
...
I would like to share two updates regarding the submission of generative AI images to Adobe Stock. We have updated the contributor portal and added an additional checkbox that eliminates the need for you to attach a property release for generative AI images featuring people or property that are fictional.
...

great - that's been an ongoing problem - does that include images already in queue? or will they still face rejection?

« Reply #7 on: July 21, 2023, 18:37 »
0
Hi Everyone,
...
I would like to share two updates regarding the submission of generative AI images to Adobe Stock. We have updated the contributor portal and added an additional checkbox that eliminates the need for you to attach a property release for generative AI images featuring people or property that are fictional.
...

great - that's been an ongoing problem - does that include images already in queue? or will they still face rejection?

If you submitted a file before the new checkbox was added, then a release is still required. The checkbox is the replacement for the release.

Thanks,

Mat

« Reply #8 on: July 21, 2023, 23:28 »
+2
In addition, you can now submit photo-realistic generative AI images as asset type photos, i.e., content that looks as though it could have been created by a camera, as long as you check the box that it was created with generative AI tools.

What security checks do you have in place to prevent people simply uploading photo-realistic AI and NOT ticking that box?  Anecdotally from various FB groups, a lot of people are already doing this.
Some agencies are catching some of the images.

Im not sure AS fully understand the scale and future scale of the issue here.  Relying on outright honesty of contributors isnt going to work.

« Reply #9 on: July 22, 2023, 00:57 »
+1
Just had some of the fastest reviews (and acceptance) of editorial photos on Adobe this morning. Still hungry for editorial images which is good to see.     

« Reply #10 on: July 22, 2023, 05:43 »
0
Illustrative editorial or actual?

(Has the policy changed?)

« Reply #11 on: July 22, 2023, 07:21 »
0
If I upload an image as photo in the category humans, I still get a warning that I should provide a release, even though I clicked the fake people tag.

File no 626231046, 626250294

If I upload as illustration under category human, and click the fake people tag, I get no warning.

Example: 626180643

Is this a glitch that will be solved or, or should I just ignore? Did I make a mistake?

« Last Edit: July 22, 2023, 07:35 by cobalt »

« Reply #12 on: July 22, 2023, 13:04 »
+1
Hi Everyone,
...
I would like to share two updates regarding the submission of generative AI images to Adobe Stock. We have updated the contributor portal and added an additional checkbox that eliminates the need for you to attach a property release for generative AI images featuring people or property that are fictional.
...

great - that's been an ongoing problem - does that include images already in queue? or will they still face rejection?

If you submitted a file before the new checkbox was added, then a release is still required. The checkbox is the replacement for the release.

Thanks,

Mat

it would be useful if AS finally gave us the ability to delete waiting images in bulk - one by one deletion is a pain for dozens of images

« Reply #13 on: July 22, 2023, 14:26 »
+2
If I upload an image as photo in the category humans, I still get a warning that I should provide a release, even though I clicked the fake people tag.

File no 626231046, 626250294

If I upload as illustration under category human, and click the fake people tag, I get no warning.

Example: 626180643

Is this a glitch that will be solved or, or should I just ignore? Did I make a mistake?

Its OK to ignore that pop up as long as you have clicked the two checkboxes.

Thanks for the question,

Mat

« Reply #14 on: July 22, 2023, 22:01 »
0
Ok, thank you.

f8

« Reply #15 on: July 23, 2023, 12:42 »
0
Illustrative editorial or actual?

(Has the policy changed?)

I am not sure the inspectors even know the answer. Just sent in a submission and half got accepted and half rejected because it was not editorial??? Everything seems hit and miss lately with Adobe.

« Reply #16 on: July 24, 2023, 00:47 »
+1
Illustrative editorial or actual?

(Has the policy changed?)

I am not sure the inspectors even know the answer. Just sent in a submission and half got accepted and half rejected because it was not editorial??? Everything seems hit and miss lately with Adobe.

Editorial content on Adobe was always hit and miss for me and I am pretty sure it's not me, but the reviewers. I rarely submit images from the same batch at once, because I think they would compete with each other. If I send an image of some subject to Adobe as editorial one might get ccepted and later a different one from the same batch - so for example an image of the same subject, but maybe from a different angle - will be rejected, because suddenly it wasn't "editorial".  And I have read their editorial rules carefully and never submitted anything that was not meeting the requirement. But the reviewers don't seem to be clear on what the reqquirements are.

f8

« Reply #17 on: July 24, 2023, 10:58 »
+3
Illustrative editorial or actual?

(Has the policy changed?)

I am not sure the inspectors even know the answer. Just sent in a submission and half got accepted and half rejected because it was not editorial??? Everything seems hit and miss lately with Adobe.

Editorial content on Adobe was always hit and miss for me and I am pretty sure it's not me, but the reviewers. I rarely submit images from the same batch at once, because I think they would compete with each other. If I send an image of some subject to Adobe as editorial one might get ccepted and later a different one from the same batch - so for example an image of the same subject, but maybe from a different angle - will be rejected, because suddenly it wasn't "editorial".  And I have read their editorial rules carefully and never submitted anything that was not meeting the requirement. But the reviewers don't seem to be clear on what the reqquirements are.

Same same. I don't take it personally and just move on. I have been an editorial photographer for 25+ years and have been assigned by many noted magazines so I think I have a handle of what editorial photography is. I too have read and re-read their guidelines and it's hit and miss.

Same goes for submitting to regular content, hit and miss, I just move on. I actually think Adobe is putting their priority into AI these days and randomly accepts photo content for AI training purposes only.



MxR

« Reply #18 on: July 24, 2023, 12:32 »
0
We are going to go crazy with so much change... but thanks for letting us know


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
234 Replies
34332 Views
Last post May 27, 2023, 12:12
by cobalt
10 Replies
2660 Views
Last post April 28, 2023, 00:15
by wordplanet
52 Replies
7372 Views
Last post July 13, 2023, 06:15
by Justanotherphotographer
185 Replies
22240 Views
Last post October 17, 2023, 02:37
by Deyan Georgiev Photography
23 Replies
3887 Views
Last post December 14, 2023, 22:05
by synthetick

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors