MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Adobe Stock generative AI reminders  (Read 25128 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.



« Reply #1 on: August 19, 2023, 16:04 »
+6
Mat, that's really nice of you to get in touch with us on behalf of Adobe.


Very important:

But when will Adobe find a solution for the ridiculously long and annoying review times for non AI images?

Mir

« Reply #2 on: August 19, 2023, 16:17 »
+6
People are doing the first two and the site is flooded with images with three hands etc.
Isn't the review process supposed to control this...

« Reply #3 on: August 19, 2023, 16:17 »
0
Hello Mat,

-Only check the box People and Property are fictional if the asset includes people or property. For example, if you generated a landscape or food DO NOT check this box.
I just looked to check if I could see if I had mistakenly enabled this on some images here, but you can't seem to see that on the submitted images anymore - or did i miss something there?

Thanks,
Michael

« Reply #4 on: August 19, 2023, 18:47 »
+3
I wonder if this is connected to a large drop in the size of the genAI collection at Adobe Stock between Friday evening and Saturday morning. On Friday evening the collection was over 14.7 million and on Saturday morning 14.19 million - were a number of infringing images removed?

Edited 23 Aug to note that the numbers had climbed back to about 14.5 million by Tuesday evening but were at 14.04 million Wednesday morning. Another large chunk of content gone

Late afternoon 23 Aug - 13,799,741. More removals (although there are new items at the beginning of the most recent sort order, so new content is still getting approved
« Last Edit: August 23, 2023, 15:22 by Jo Ann Snover »

« Reply #5 on: August 20, 2023, 05:20 »
+1
Based on posts I've read on the Adobe Stock Discord, when a contributor is found to have AI images that go against the terms of service, their account has a temporary block put on it while they are given the opportunity to clean up their account and delete all the problematic images. So it may be that Adobe has temporarily blocked a lot of accounts rather than culling 100's of thousands of images themselves.

« Reply #6 on: August 20, 2023, 05:44 »
+1
I'm considering using AI-generated images as a reference for colors and composition, and then redrawing them using Adobe Illustrator with additional elements. Will upload it as Vector illustration. Do I still need to show that it is AI generated? Thanks

« Reply #7 on: August 20, 2023, 07:19 »
0
I'm considering using AI-generated images as a reference for colors and composition, and then redrawing them using Adobe Illustrator with additional elements. Will upload it as Vector illustration. Do I still need to show that it is AI generated? Thanks

Someone asked Matt a the question "if the AI generated image is used as a sketch and heavily processed after, must we always write made with generative AI?" and the answer was yes.
Though, it's not like Adobe really has a way to know that you used an AI or even care, seeing as how many obvious AI images that are not labaled as AI are their database.....

Justanotherphotographer

« Reply #8 on: August 20, 2023, 08:50 »
+1
Could be something to do with Midjourney slapping an Apple logo on almost every computer in an image. Given the sloppy attitude by both a large number of contributors and reviewers I can imagine a few hundred thousand made it through! (not just AS on this one, found another blatantly AI port on SS today, where AI isn't even allowed)

« Reply #9 on: August 20, 2023, 09:30 »
0
So basically "painting in the style of Leonardo da Vinci" is fine, but "In the style of Banksy" is not, right?


« Reply #10 on: August 20, 2023, 10:26 »
+4
Hi everyone,

We want to remind you that any generative AI assets submitted to Adobe Stock must adhere to the Generative AI Guidelines. Violations to these guidelines lead to content rejections or account termination.

I hope a similar reminder went out to reviewers. Too many assets that fail Adobe's own guidelines somehow pass inspection, and this is not solely the contributors fault. Maybe there should be a popup when a contributor logs in where they have to acknowledge these rules/guidelines and then if they still violate guidelines, just ban them after a few transgressions.

Here's a few examples for the search "wes anderson" in genAI:

https://stock.adobe.com/images/surreal-girl-sits-on-sofa-among-bright-pumpkins-halloween-of-bright-colors-in-the-style-of-wes-anderson-films-festive-background-in-cinematic-style-generative-ai-content/605807641?prev_url=detail

https://stock.adobe.com/images/blonde-elegance-amidst-floral-splendor-wes-anderson-inspired-photography-with-a-touch-of-fanciful-dreaminess-generative-ai/603435603?prev_url=detail

https://stock.adobe.com/images/beautiful-vintage-interior-in-pastel-colors-having-a-strong-wes-anderson-aesthetic-high-end-materials-beautiful-textures-and-lighting-generative-ai/575738076?prev_url=detail

Ansel Adams:

https://stock.adobe.com/images/nature-s-symphony-ansel-adams-style-landscape-photography-ai-generated/616912725?prev_url=detail

https://stock.adobe.com/images/monochrome-mountain-scenery-reminiscent-of-ansel-adams-generative-ai/597227285?prev_url=detail

etc.

There's also a huge issue of a bunch of genAI stuff with weird faces, deformed hands and objects appearing out of thin air. Many assets are also just upscaled from Midjourney's 1024*1024, making them plastic looking and deficient in detail, especially for people. IMO these should not pass inspection as well, if they are submitted as photos. There are other ways of upscaling which generate detail (not Topaz or stuff like that) which are time and processing-power intensive, but spammers just download the 1mp image from Midjourney, upsize it on bigjpg and call it a day. Until Adobe puts a stop on this kind of spam, the producers actually making high quality imagery willl get buried because for every 1 genAI asset they make, spammers can just overwhelm the database with hundreds of their own, which look superficially similar as a thumbnail, but are nowhere near the same level of quality in full size 1:1.

« Reply #11 on: August 20, 2023, 11:03 »
+3
Could be something to do with Midjourney slapping an Apple logo on almost every computer in an image. Given the sloppy attitude by both a large number of contributors and reviewers I can imagine a few hundred thousand made it through! (not just AS on this one, found another blatantly AI port on SS today, where AI isn't even allowed)

Someone mentioned Apple logos on approved genAI images??

From recently approved, page 4:


« Reply #12 on: August 20, 2023, 11:45 »
+1
Someone mentioned Apple logos on approved genAI images??

From recently approved, page 4:



And what's with the black border on the image?

There's another in their portfolio: https://stock.adobe.com/images/man-in-suit-black/611734148?prev_url=detail

How does this pass inspection?

wds

« Reply #13 on: August 20, 2023, 12:36 »
+1
Mat, that's really nice of you to get in touch with us on behalf of Adobe.


Very important:

But when will Adobe find a solution for the ridiculously long and annoying review times for non AI images?

This may (is likely?) to be a fluke, but I submitted an editorial image about a week ago and it was reviewed and approved overnight! I was shocked as most reviews were taking weeks.

« Reply #14 on: August 20, 2023, 13:31 »
+5
Hi everyone,

We want to remind you that any generative AI assets submitted to Adobe Stock must adhere to the Generative AI Guidelines. Violations to these guidelines lead to content rejections or account termination.

Very important:

-Do not submit any assets created with prompts in the style of other artists or referring to famous people or brands.

-Content created by prompts that refer to artists, styles, or works that no longer have copyright protection may be acceptable so long as you verify that no other rights apply to the prompt (e.g., publicity rights, cultural heritage rights, etc.).  If you are unsure if you have the necessary rights, do not submit content made using that prompt.

-All generative AI images should be identified by checking the box Created using generative AI tools.

-Only check the box People and Property are fictional if the asset includes people or property. For example, if you generated a landscape or food DO NOT check this box.

-If you used a real person or property to generate your AI image, you need to submit a model release or property release with your image.

Thank you!

Mat Hayward

I thought longer about whether I should write this or not.

But if I am to be completely honest, I would like to judge your lines as follows:

The agencies are absolutely aware that the AI software of the different manufacturers searches for "inspiration" in the pool of all photographers and microstockers on the Internet worldwide. Without the legal basis for this being even remotely clarified and defined. I have seen them en masse, the AI images in Romolo Tavani or Leonid Tit style - just to name two examples.

It is absolutely clear to the agencies that the companies producing AI generated images are faster than the legislation and jurisprudence on the subject.

And this is now resulting in the shifting of copyright concerns to the contributors uploading AI-generated images. In case of doubt, these companies and the agencies that accept the images want to hold themselves harmless from claims for damages. I find this cowardly and immoral in the highest degree!

The agencies know very well that the AI generates an infinite number of "similars" and now they stand up and say: finding out and filtering this is not our problem, but the problem of those who generate and upload these images.

This is for me an absolute absurdity!!! The manufacturers of AI software and the agencies that accept these images have a single goal: maximum profit skimming.

« Reply #15 on: August 20, 2023, 14:14 »
+1
I'm considering using AI-generated images as a reference for colors and composition, and then redrawing them using Adobe Illustrator with additional elements. Will upload it as Vector illustration. Do I still need to show that it is AI generated? Thanks

This is a good question and i think yes,i think it can be done,I don't think you need to check the AI ​​content box in this case,because in the end there are no AI generated elements in the final content,but surely Mat will be able to give a definitive answer.

And this also makes me think about how those nice vectors were made on Shutterstock,a while ago someone showed these really well done vectors,I think they did just that to create them.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2023, 15:23 by Injustice for all »

« Reply #16 on: August 20, 2023, 16:47 »
0
...
Very important:

-Do not submit any assets created with prompts in the style of other artists or referring to famous people or brands.

...

what about historical people with no reference image supplied? I recently created images of Charles Darwin writing in his garden for a blog post on creationist fallacies.  the result was a reasonable portrait (although it showed the industrious Chuck writing on opposing pages with a pen in each hand)

would this type of image qualify?

« Reply #17 on: August 21, 2023, 01:24 »
+1
Mat, that's really nice of you to get in touch with us on behalf of Adobe.


Very important:

But when will Adobe find a solution for the ridiculously long and annoying review times for non AI images?


I also asked them about this problem but it seems they don't even want to answer with a classic email like " we are sorry but..."...

 :-\

« Reply #18 on: August 22, 2023, 11:58 »
0
I get a message at times that flashes: not all of your images can be submitted for a review. How can I find the images that cant be submitted and delete them? Nothing been accepted since July 26 and before that I was getting acceptance emails every 3 days on average. I didnt get any emails what images cant be accepted and there is no explanation or red flag or rejection on any of the images in queue. I have 3 pages of submissions waiting for review. My account is not blocked and Im still getting sales daily.

Only 1 of my hand drawn illustrations wasnt accepted for quality and about dozen of actual photos from my Sony α7 III . I mostly create png with transparency and submit them one by one. (I have BFA and been a working artist for 25+ years in CA) I also started to submit AI jpg. No vectors. Ive been previously featured as a top seller

I read all of the requirements for AI and correct file submissions and try very hard to follow them. I emailed for answers with no reply.  How can I solve this puzzle of what files cant be accepted?

« Reply #19 on: August 22, 2023, 13:01 »
+8
Reminders for Adobe Stock about its generative AI

It shouldn't be news to Adobe Stock that its review process for generative AI content is largely useless.

I'm so tempted to just forward the Apple logo fails directly to Apple, but in the hope that Adobe can turn this train wreck of rubbish content around at some point, here's a recent approval with two clearer-than-daylight logos in it (and I can't post in the discord QA forum because I'm not of a high enough level for them to be interested in what I have to say) (yes, I'm angry with Adobe)



How the #$%* do you miss those????

Suggestions:

1) remove the above image Edited 25 Aug - it's now gone, although the one I posted about Aug 20 is still there...
2) get new reviewers/better software to clean up future genAI submissions
3) spend the money to clean up all the "oops" images, not just the logos, already littering the 14+million items.
3.5) Leave last place in the genAI content quality race to Shutterstock
« Last Edit: August 25, 2023, 12:02 by Jo Ann Snover »

« Reply #20 on: August 22, 2023, 13:22 »
+3
I'm not a fan of the (by now very large) collection of genAI images that claim to be of specific places - they aren't and shouldn't be labeled as if they are (as Adobe's rules say)

One set of images I saw today seemed especially heinous - images supposedly of the Maui wildfires and evacuation. They are marked as genAI, but should have no reference to a specific place - they can just be generic forest fire/wildfire content.

It's one thing to have news gatherers collect images from a devastating event like this, but turning out fake images of the fires seems more wrong than all the other touristy-wrong content supposedly of a specific place

https://stock.adobe.com/images/maui-forest-fire/633907384
https://stock.adobe.com/images/maui-fire-drone-shot/633907380
https://stock.adobe.com/images/hawaii-on-fire/633907373
https://stock.adobe.com/images/maui-coast-on-fire/633907372
https://stock.adobe.com/images/maui-in-flames/633907379
https://stock.adobe.com/images/island-of-maui-on-fire/633907381
https://stock.adobe.com/images/maui-evacuation/633907374


« Reply #22 on: August 23, 2023, 10:21 »
+2
Maybe there should be a popup when a contributor logs in where they have to acknowledge these rules/guidelines and then if they still violate guidelines, just ban them after a few transgressions.

I just noticed this new popup today, thanks Mat and Adobe for listening and incorporating this

I still hope the reviewers got the memo as well, since I believe that a bunch of poeople who submit AI-generated stuff don't actually care about this popup - they just want easy money, and if you block them, they'll make another account. The reviewers should be the barrier. And upload limits, maybe even stricter.

« Reply #23 on: August 23, 2023, 15:58 »
0
All these images are keyworded with christmas and show up in a search for christmas even though nothing about them is christmassy

https://stock.adobe.com/de/images/beautiful-girl-laying-in-the-flowers-she-is-wearing-transparent-blouse-and-has-perfect-pastel-make-up-natural-face-care-concept-generative-ai/600470423?prev_url=detail

https://stock.adobe.com/de/images/beautiful-brunette-woman-female-girl-model-with-retro-clothing-posing-with-the-bubbles-summer-time-vacaion-relax-mode-la-60s-generated-ai/610671295?prev_url=detail

https://stock.adobe.com/de/images/two-adults-a-man-and-woman-stand-together-smiling-joyfully-while-embracing-in-love-colorful-clothing-under-the-sky-filled-with-flowers-and-bubbles-retro-60s-pastel-style-and-colors-generated-ai/601367502?prev_url=detail

https://stock.adobe.com/de/images/illustration-of-beautiful-women-surrounded-by-swirling-fabric-generative-ai/589368829?prev_url=detail

https://stock.adobe.com/de/images/pretty-young-woman-in-casual-clothes-inside-trade-centre-background/601209516?prev_url=detail

https://stock.adobe.com/de/images/an-italian-senior-old-lady-wearing-trendy-clothes-with-colored-sunglasses-and-posing-against-a-solid-background-copy-space-generative-ai/595228290?prev_url=detail

https://stock.adobe.com/de/images/a-tuscan-winemaker-tending-to-vines-ai-generative/574231679?prev_url=detail

https://stock.adobe.com/de/images/young-handsome-caucasian-man-holding-pizza-and-isolated-background-generative-ai/622398513?prev_url=detail

https://stock.adobe.com/de/images/sweet-girl-with-green-eyes-and-strawberry-hat-place-for-your-text-green-background-generative-ai/622401249?prev_url=detail

« Reply #24 on: August 23, 2023, 16:35 »
+1
In general, what I've seen in looking at the genAI collection is that descriptions and keywords are very, very poor. I know that Christmas has for decades been a problem keyword - remember all the battles at iStock over what exactly had to be in an image for it to qualify for the Christmas keyword?

I just did a search and found tons of 100% inappropriate images - here's just a few. I suspect that part of the problem is many of these contributors are brand new, drawn in by the AI gold rush, and with no concern about rules.

It's not better with the "Relevance" sort - the pink doll's house and "sweet world" are right up there on the first page

https://stock.adobe.com/images/easter-poster-background-template-with-easter-eggs-in-the-nest-on-light-blue-background/621781626
https://stock.adobe.com/images/popcorn-at-the-movies/617125948
https://stock.adobe.com/images/different-types-of-necklaces-from-around-the-world-collection-photorealistic-isolated-on-transparent-background-generative-ai/618867157?asset_id=618867157
https://stock.adobe.com/images/unicorn-style-of-disney-pixar-movie-pets-movie-cute-character-frting-rainbowfunny-white-background-high-quality-cute/613335371
https://stock.adobe.com/images/sweet-world-illustration-generative-ai/600355601
https://stock.adobe.com/de/images/toy-villa/625172609
https://stock.adobe.com/images/squirrel-in-the-park/631229331
https://stock.adobe.com/images/splatter-art-a-captivating-splatter-art-composition-featuring-a-majestic-dog-surrounded-by-colorful-splashes-of-paint-the-splatters-form-musical-notes-and-symbols-representing-the-harmonious/631351443
https://stock.adobe.com/images/living-room-with-fireplace/631542104
https://stock.adobe.com/images/living-room-interior-room-night-home-table-light-lights-architecture-chair-house-design/631386494
https://stock.adobe.com/images/a-group-of-monks-in-deep-prayer/631336090
https://stock.adobe.com/images/flowers-in-the-forest/626328020
https://stock.adobe.com/images/young-brunette-woman-pink-ribbon-held-in-hand-on-pink-background-reference-to-breast-cancer-women-s-health-female-care/631308757

Edited to add one more item - willow-pattern donuts with both Christmas and Easter as keywords!!!

Just so we'll have the picture if/when they take these down...



I don't know how these could be used - and if you put these in an ad for a donut shop and then couldn't produce donuts like this for customers, there'd be a riot!

There's also some odd numbers on the front top - perhaps a remnant from wherever the generating tool scraped the image from?
« Last Edit: August 23, 2023, 19:47 by Jo Ann Snover »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
234 Replies
37921 Views
Last post May 27, 2023, 12:12
by cobalt
10 Replies
3066 Views
Last post April 28, 2023, 00:15
by wordplanet
52 Replies
8391 Views
Last post July 13, 2023, 06:15
by Justanotherphotographer
18 Replies
3036 Views
Last post July 24, 2023, 12:32
by MxR
23 Replies
4408 Views
Last post December 14, 2023, 22:05
by synthetick

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors