pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Adobe Stock generative AI reminders  (Read 24345 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #75 on: August 29, 2023, 12:17 »
0

The stool legs are missing parts of their supports; the cabinet handles are all over the place; stovetop knobs are mashed pixels; the stool on the far side of the island has mangled legs; there's a light cord on the left but no light; the fridge doors are missing handles - and that's just what I can see in the preview image. This is useless and should not have been approved.

No faucets on the sink? Maybe it's magic Temp. control and motion activated?


« Reply #76 on: August 29, 2023, 12:41 »
+1
AI knows how to take steal photos
AI prompters know how to control obei AI

« Reply #77 on: August 29, 2023, 12:48 »
+4
The verification rules have become very strange. When I send illustrative editorial photos, obviously not generated by AI, I have to accept the conditions, among others: the photo does not contain logos and trademarks. After all, this is the essence of illustrative editorial photos. And Adobe is threatening to suspend my account.

« Reply #78 on: August 29, 2023, 13:13 »
0


The Apple logos just keep on getting accepted

Fix the review process

At this point, just email Apple. They don't take kindly for having their intellectual property violated.

« Reply #79 on: August 29, 2023, 14:35 »
+1
...




No worries.  Buyers will fix them to make them make sense.  At least these are not copyright/trademark violations.  Reviewer AI clearly cant distinguish 6 fingers, 3 arms, 3 legs and other weird images.

and, nitpicking, but this unsupported staircase, is possible - while scary i've used such in Turkey & India

« Reply #80 on: August 29, 2023, 14:43 »
+2
...




No worries.  Buyers will fix them to make them make sense.  At least these are not copyright/trademark violations.  Reviewer AI clearly cant distinguish 6 fingers, 3 arms, 3 legs and other weird images.

and, nitpicking, but this unsupported staircase, is possible - while scary i've used such in Turkey & India

An unsupported staircase may be possible, however, in this case, the transition between the lower part and the higher part does not seem right.

The devil is in the details.

« Reply #81 on: August 29, 2023, 15:22 »
+2
The verification rules have become very strange. When I send illustrative editorial photos, obviously not generated by AI, I have to accept the conditions, among others: the photo does not contain logos and trademarks. After all, this is the essence of illustrative editorial photos. And Adobe is threatening to suspend my account.

We are aware of this issue and will update the language ASAP to call out the exception for Illustrative Editorial photographs. For now, if you are submitting Illustrative Editorial, it's OK to click the box and you can know with confidence you're account won't be blocked because of it. If you have any issues with this (you won't), you may contact me directly and I'll take care of it.

Thanks,

Mat Hayward

« Reply #82 on: August 29, 2023, 15:51 »
+6

.... and you can know with confidence you're account won't be blocked because of it.

Thanks,

Mat Hayward


Mat, is this really the new tone with the contributors? If you do everything the way we want (and keep changing it every day), we love you?

But if you make one mistake, we'll block you? Great  ::)

Mat, we are all adults here, with experience in the stock business or other training and decent Jobs, have families, raised children and Adobe is just treating us like a bunch of toddlers at the whim of our teachers.

You are the only agency here that creates an atmosphere of fear, although everyone here in the forum is trying to help Adobe.

I submitted images today (no AI) and felt bad about it because of your new threatening disclaimer. But I don't want to feel threatened when I send pictures, not to mention the fact that I won't know the outcome of my threatening experience for weeks  ;)

This is a real new experience in stock photography  :o

As far as interpersonal issues are concerned, Adobe is really screwing things up here.

Thanks

« Last Edit: August 29, 2023, 16:34 by RalfLiebhold »

« Reply #83 on: August 29, 2023, 17:27 »
0
Found another Apple logo.

https://stock.adobe.com/images/a-young-dark-skinned-man-wearing-on-ear-headphones-and-watching-or-reading-some-content-on-a-laptop-indoors-modern-sleek-interior/631181138?prev_url=detail

https://stock.adobe.com/contributor/208063215/romana?load_type=author&prev_url=detail

Adobe should pay me doing their job.  lol


I see Adobe Stock removed the photos with Apple logo, but didn't block the entire portfolio of contributors.  Is this the new approach by Adobe Stock?  If so, I can upload photos again.

« Reply #84 on: August 29, 2023, 17:41 »
0

.... and you can know with confidence you're account won't be blocked because of it.

Thanks,

Mat Hayward


Mat, is this really the new tone with the contributors? If you do everything the way we want (and keep changing it every day), we love you?

But if you make one mistake, we'll block you? Great  ::)

Mat, we are all adults here, with experience in the stock business or other training and decent Jobs, have families, raised children and Adobe is just treating us like a bunch of toddlers at the whim of our teachers.

You are the only agency here that creates an atmosphere of fear, although everyone here in the forum is trying to help Adobe.

I submitted images today (no AI) and felt bad about it because of your new threatening disclaimer. But I don't want to feel threatened when I send pictures, not to mention the fact that I won't know the outcome of my threatening experience for weeks  ;)

This is a real new experience in stock photography  :o

As far as interpersonal issues are concerned, Adobe is really screwing things up here.

Thanks

Hi Ralf. I'm actually communicating the opposite of what you wrote. The concern I was addressing is regarding the new checkbox that appears before you can complete the submission process. The checkbox states the following:

-I added a model release for each recognizable person
-My content has no logos, trademarks, or other intellectual property issues
-If my content is AI generated, I have checked the box declaring so
-If my content is AI generated, I have not generated it with reference to other artists(s) in the prompt.
-I understand my account can be suspended if I breach the guidelines.

The issue that was called out earlier in this thread, is that these checkboxes appear even when you are submitting content for the illustrative editorial collection. Clearly, you cannot submit to the illustrative editorial collection and affirm your content has no logos or trademarked elements.

My response was to confirm that we recognize the language needs to be updated to address this. Until that language is updated, it is OK to submit to to the collection and check the boxes. You will not be blocked if you do so.

thanks,

Mat Hayward

« Reply #85 on: August 29, 2023, 18:01 »
0
...and, nitpicking, but this unsupported staircase, is possible - while scary i've used such in Turkey & India

If you look at this staircase, it's impossible to walk up it - that's what I was calling out, not the fact that it's cantilevered, which is fine (if you have a good builder and strict building codes :) ). There's no landing and mangled steps at the turn.

In AI world, don't sit down, don't climb or descend the stairs, and never go to a cat party!


« Reply #86 on: August 30, 2023, 01:07 »
+1
and never go to a cat party!



Looks more like a cat burning party.

« Reply #87 on: August 30, 2023, 02:59 »
+1
With all this going on, I am not submitting any images containing AI content ... so far.  However, I do enjoy using Midjourney and other AI programs, and I do have several images containing AI generated parts.  I just don't submit them.


What about this situation :
A normal photograph, shot with a camera, containing fully model released people on a fully released background.  BUT, I did not like the cleavage of one of the models, and I made it more modest using AI software.
According to Mat, I think I should submit this image as "AI generated" + add the model and property releases of the real people and background.
Correct ?
Seems not correct to me, as I do have the raw file of the photo, just not the lady's cleavage ...
This is just a non-existing example, but for me, it is the reason why I don't submit these images to Adobe.

« Reply #88 on: August 30, 2023, 09:55 »
0
On istock they have a clear reminder that even if a small part is changed with ai, it is ai generated and cannot be sent to istock.

On Adobe it would have to be marked as generated with ai tools.


« Reply #89 on: August 30, 2023, 11:29 »
+3
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.....


Mat, We need a clear answer.

We do not accept generative AI vector images. I strongly advise against what you are suggesting. Using the tool as inspiration is one thing, auto-trace or something similar I would avoid at all cost.

Thanks for the question,

Mat Hayward

I hear the policy statement, and I see that the number of vectors marked as genAI has dropped a little over the last several weeks, but new genAI vectors keep appearing - this is currently the most recent and look at the image number.

https://stock.adobe.com/images/crm-management-filled-colorful-logo-business-automation-gears-meshing-design-element-created-with-artificial-intelligence-ai-art-for-corporate-branding-software-company-cloud-computing-service/639157535

Edtied Sep 1 to add that new vectors have been approved. Overall numbers are going up again too

https://stock.adobe.com/images/catering-service-filled-colorful-logo-meal-prep-carrot-symbol-design-element-created-with-artificial-intelligence-friendly-ai-art-for-corporate-branding-salad-bar-retail-store-food-market/640542184

The most recent JPEG (I just searched) is image number 633609083 (now 636012633) - older than the vector (639157535 now 640542184).

There is a huge gap between what the written rules for contributors say - for genAI, no specific places, no vectors, no logos - and what's actually happening in approvals. All of those rules are still being broken. A lot

If the rules and the inspection process lined up, it would make taming the lawless wild west of the AI content a lot easier IMO.

Theree are still 113,080 (now 113,752) genAI vectors live in the collection (that are marked as "Generated with AI")
« Last Edit: September 01, 2023, 13:44 by Jo Ann Snover »

« Reply #90 on: August 30, 2023, 12:51 »
+1
To illustrate my point, from new approvals

Logos - Midjourney loves Apple

.

Specific places - Persepolis was first up



Furious cobra logo (vector)



Warhol, Mondrian and Hockney (same images show up for both search terms), Jackson Pollock, Matisse
« Last Edit: August 30, 2023, 14:27 by Jo Ann Snover »

« Reply #91 on: August 30, 2023, 13:59 »
+2
On istock they have a clear reminder that even if a small part is changed with ai, it is ai generated and cannot be sent to istock.

On Adobe it would have to be marked as generated with ai tools.

including AI features in PS? content aware fill, upcoming generative fill to extend backgrounds, and especially neural filters?

these effects are not traceable, and have never been considered ai generated in the past

« Reply #92 on: August 30, 2023, 14:20 »
0
On istock they have a clear reminder that even if a small part is changed with ai, it is ai generated and cannot be sent to istock.

On Adobe it would have to be marked as generated with ai tools.

including AI features in PS? content aware fill, upcoming generative fill to extend backgrounds, and especially neural filters?

these effects are not traceable, and have never been considered ai generated in the past

Totally agree there's a gray line here.  Using AI tools like content aware fill, background extension etc. is not the same as generating an image in Midjourney.

« Reply #93 on: August 30, 2023, 14:36 »
0
Have a look yourself in the istock forums. Last time I read there they said generative ai tools were not allowed.

They quote Adobes terms that generative fill is not allowed for commercial use.

"4. No Commercial Use
While generative AI features are in beta, all generated output is for personal use only and cannot be used commercially.
"

Or write to their support and ask them if you can use ai tools.

I wouldn't upload anything ai related to istock/Getty without their explicit approval.

« Last Edit: August 30, 2023, 14:44 by cobalt »

« Reply #94 on: August 30, 2023, 15:14 »
+1
To illustrate my point, from new approvals

Logos - Midjourney loves Apple

.

Specific places - Persepolis was first up



Furious cobra logo (vector)



Warhol, Mondrian and Hockney (same images show up for both search terms), Jackson Pollock, Matisse

Jo Ann, I appreciate your hard work finding these. But putting these on a small forum like this one may not be the best course of action. It's obvious Adobe won't care unless they get hit financially because of this. Have you considered contacting the companies whose rights have been violated directly? How about some tech websites like petapixel?

« Reply #95 on: August 30, 2023, 15:35 »
0
...
« Last Edit: August 30, 2023, 15:38 by RalfLiebhold »

« Reply #96 on: August 30, 2023, 15:37 »
+3

Jo Ann, I appreciate your hard work finding these. But putting these on a small forum like this one may not be the best course of action. It's obvious Adobe won't care unless they get hit financially because of this. Have you considered contacting the companies whose rights have been violated directly? How about some tech websites like petapixel?

Jo Ann persistently puts her finger on Adobe's sore spot here. I find that good and also somehow entertaining.

This is not a small forum here either, as we know Adobe reads along here.

And maybe Jo Ann has already achieved something through her commitment, that's hard to judge.

But I find the demand that an Adobe contributor should report violations to the companies very strange. There are certainly better and more amicable solutions.

Why don't you do that?  ;)


« Reply #97 on: August 30, 2023, 16:20 »
+3
Jo Ann is doing a fantastic job! And certainly making me a better contributordont want to be caught with weird content on her watch ;)

« Reply #98 on: August 30, 2023, 18:12 »
+1
Theree are still 113,080 genAI vectors live in the collection (that are marked as "Generated with AI")

Agreed there are a lot of auto-traced AI vectors. However there may also be a significant number of mislabelled vectors amongst that 113,080 files. Adobe's AI detection mislabelled a bunch of my non-AI vectors as "Generated with AI." It took me a while to notice, then I wrote to support with the file numbers and they removed the label. I reckon a lot of contributors wouldn't notice when their files get mislabelled as there's no way to filter your portfolio to check for AI. It has happened to around 5% of my raster illustrations too (all non-AI) so now I check every file as soon as it's approved.

« Reply #99 on: August 30, 2023, 19:04 »
0
What I find so strange - doesn't Adobe have interns, students, trainees?

If they just set up a few people to monitor the fresh ai content coming in and to flag everything with logos, wrong titles...why would they even need the contributors to point out the very obvious logos?

I am sure many people would love to have a job like that, especially if they can do it online.
« Last Edit: August 30, 2023, 20:18 by cobalt »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
234 Replies
36880 Views
Last post May 27, 2023, 12:12
by cobalt
10 Replies
2960 Views
Last post April 28, 2023, 00:15
by wordplanet
52 Replies
8143 Views
Last post July 13, 2023, 06:15
by Justanotherphotographer
18 Replies
2960 Views
Last post July 24, 2023, 12:32
by MxR
23 Replies
4247 Views
Last post December 14, 2023, 22:05
by synthetick

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors