I think there is something bizarre going on in the review department of AS. I too am having entire batches of content rejected for not being editorial even though they fit the criteria. Some skyline shots with lots of logos for example. In one batch 50% got rejected for not meeting the guidelines yet 50% got accepted. Go figure. It really makes no sense at all.

The rejections over on the commercial side are as wonky as well.

These are current news editorial images, yet the whole batch have been rejected for not meeting editorial guidelines.

Adobe does not accept current news editorial image, they only accept illustrative editorials or their very own definition of it I don't understand half of the time.

Quote from: Firn on September 14, 2022, 00:04

Quote from: Dhav on September 13, 2022, 16:59

These are current news editorial images, yet the whole batch have been rejected for not meeting editorial guidelines.

Adobe does not accept current news editorial image, they only accept illustrative editorials or their very own definition of it I don't understand half of the time.

.. we don't accept content that sells ....

Don't get me wrong, it would be nice if they did full editorial but they don't. They've made no secrete that they don't accept normal editorial work and it has been pointed out quite often. Why try to force a square peg into a round hole. Just submit them to an agency that accepts that type of work.

Quote from: Firn on September 14, 2022, 00:04

Quote from: Dhav on September 13, 2022, 16:59

These are current news editorial images, yet the whole batch have been rejected for not meeting editorial guidelines.

Adobe does not accept current news editorial image, they only accept illustrative editorials or their very own definition of it I don't understand half of the time.

Me neither. I would say that Illustrative Editorial is defined by content where a brand is the main subject of the shot.

This is confirmed by rejections of architecture which I upload as Editorial, or cityscapes which I upload as editorial due to visible brands and logo's.
Yet, I've had images rejected due to illustrative editorial issues where the brand is the main focus of the shot, e.g. a storefront while some others were accepted.

Same with the definition of recognizable people. Street shots with groups of people in it are often rejected, but I had some accepted too, mainly when shot from the back.

I guess the definition is not clear to all reviewers either.

Yeah, same experience. I have, for example, tried to submit photos of the BASF (largest chemical company in the world) factory complex to Adobe, though not at the same time. 3 images were rejected for not meeting their editorial guidelines, 3 images were accepted. They all show different parts of the factory complex, so the photos are not similar, yet they pretty much have the same content: Factory building of a famous trademarked company, no people. I see absolutely no constancy in the editorial acceptance system.
 I'll never figure out what editorials Adobe accepts and what not and I hardly ever try to submit editorials to them anymore, even though the ones that get accepted often sell. I am too worried this hit and miss game will unnecessarily increase my rejecten rate and cause me some disadvantage.

For those (me included) who were hoping they would open up their "proper" editorial section (from the likes of Reuters etc) to the rest of us, be aware they closed that down a couple of months ago. Here's a report on this from PAN (Photo Archive News).
https://photoarchivenews.com/news/adobe-stock-closes-editorial-photo-feed/

Interesting, I wonder if this may be a precursor to opening up editorial (beyond illustrative) to all contributors?

I don't worry about rejection rates influencing content ranking

I didn't have image ranking in mind.
But having a certain acceptance rate was a condition for the free Adobe creative cloud plan in the past.
Also, at least on Shutterstock, I know contributors were banned for having too many images rejected for the "similar" reason. So who knows what too many rejections can trigger at some point.

"hit and miss" the new review style at AS.

Quote from: Dhav on September 13, 2022, 16:59

I have been having lots of rejections recently of editorial images. I thought nothing of it and have kept shooting other commerical subjects that get accepted. This week I have been in London covering the tributes to Queen Elizabeth in Green Park and Buckingham Palace. These are current news editorial images, yet the whole batch have been rejected for not meeting editorial guidelines. I really cannot work out why these would be rejected.
Anyone got any ideas? have Adobe changed their editorial policy? or know how to contact Mat Hayward to understand a bit more.
Thanks

Nothing has changed regarding our policy of editorial submissions. While these files you've posted about do not have recognizable people in them, they still do not quality as "illustrative editorial" which is all we are currently accepting. Please review the learn and support pages for specific guidelines on what is and what is not acceptable. https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/illustrative-editorial-content.html

thank you,

Mat Hayward

Mat, first of all, thank you for kneeling in here like this and facing the criticism  . Although we are hairstyle twins, now a little criticism of your statement.

Quite a few people here describe problems with the definition of "illustrative editorial" and you only refer to all well known Adobe guidelines, which obviously have a lot of room for interpretation.

Last week I submitted about 50 city views of Cologne as editorial, all rejected in the first round. On the second try, about 30 were accepted. Mat, this sucks and maybe you could address this issue and take it seriously. This is very much in need of improvement.

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on September 14, 2022, 14:42

Quote from: MatHayward on September 14, 2022, 11:46

Quote from: Dhav on September 13, 2022, 16:59

I have been having lots of rejections recently of editorial images. I thought nothing of it and have kept shooting other commerical subjects that get accepted. This week I have been in London covering the tributes to Queen Elizabeth in Green Park and Buckingham Palace. These are current news editorial images, yet the whole batch have been rejected for not meeting editorial guidelines. I really cannot work out why these would be rejected.
Anyone got any ideas? have Adobe changed their editorial policy? or know how to contact Mat Hayward to understand a bit more.
Thanks

Nothing has changed regarding our policy of editorial submissions. While these files you've posted about do not have recognizable people in them, they still do not quality as "illustrative editorial" which is all we are currently accepting. Please review the learn and support pages for specific guidelines on what is and what is not acceptable. https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/illustrative-editorial-content.html

thank you,

Mat Hayward

Mat, first of all, thank you for kneeling in here like this and facing the criticism  . Although we are hairstyle twins, now a little criticism of your statement.

Quite a few people here describe problems with the definition of "illustrative editorial" and you only refer to all well known Adobe guidelines, which obviously have a lot of room for interpretation.

Last week I submitted about 50 city views of Cologne as editorial, all rejected in the first round. On the second try, about 30 were accepted. Mat, this sucks and maybe you could address this issue and take it seriously. This is very much in need of improvement.

The Illustrative Editorial collection is designed to be showcasing specific, branded content. A soda bottle in ice with condensation dripping down the bottle comes to mind. While there is some gray area here for sure, what it sounds to me is that you are attempting to submit travel editorial content which if the true intent of the collection were considered, is not acceptable. The content in the OP here is newsworthy and based on a current event, not on a specific brand.

I hope that helps,

Mat Hayward

Mat, I think I've got the general idea - but I don't think your reviewers have.
A close-up of German brand beer goes through, no question.
A front view of a Vodafone store with a clearly visible logo is rejected. Modern protected architecture is usually accepted.
Your presentation here contradicts many experiences of others here in the forum. I can't quite understand why you are fighting this criticism tooth and nail.

Quote from: MatHayward on September 14, 2022, 14:58

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on September 14, 2022, 14:42

Quote from: MatHayward on September 14, 2022, 11:46

Quote from: Dhav on September 13, 2022, 16:59

I have been having lots of rejections recently of editorial images. I thought nothing of it and have kept shooting other commerical subjects that get accepted. This week I have been in London covering the tributes to Queen Elizabeth in Green Park and Buckingham Palace. These are current news editorial images, yet the whole batch have been rejected for not meeting editorial guidelines. I really cannot work out why these would be rejected.
Anyone got any ideas? have Adobe changed their editorial policy? or know how to contact Mat Hayward to understand a bit more.
Thanks

Nothing has changed regarding our policy of editorial submissions. While these files you've posted about do not have recognizable people in them, they still do not quality as "illustrative editorial" which is all we are currently accepting. Please review the learn and support pages for specific guidelines on what is and what is not acceptable. https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/illustrative-editorial-content.html

thank you,

Mat Hayward

Mat, first of all, thank you for kneeling in here like this and facing the criticism  . Although we are hairstyle twins, now a little criticism of your statement.

Quite a few people here describe problems with the definition of "illustrative editorial" and you only refer to all well known Adobe guidelines, which obviously have a lot of room for interpretation.

Last week I submitted about 50 city views of Cologne as editorial, all rejected in the first round. On the second try, about 30 were accepted. Mat, this sucks and maybe you could address this issue and take it seriously. This is very much in need of improvement.

The Illustrative Editorial collection is designed to be showcasing specific, branded content. A soda bottle in ice with condensation dripping down the bottle comes to mind. While there is some gray area here for sure, what it sounds to me is that you are attempting to submit travel editorial content which if the true intent of the collection were considered, is not acceptable. The content in the OP here is newsworthy and based on a current event, not on a specific brand.

I hope that helps,

Mat Hayward

Mat, I think I've got the general idea - but I don't think your reviewers have.
A close-up of German brand beer goes through, no question.
A front view of a Vodafone store with a clearly visible logo is rejected. Modern protected architecture is usually accepted.
Your presentation here contradicts many experiences of others here in the forum. I can't quite understand why you are fighting this criticism tooth and nail.

... Mat, thanks for chiming in on this. There are now two threads on sudden bizarre rejections and you have maintained that nothing has changed. I don't think in all my years on this forum that a 'review' thread on AS has even appeared, and in the last few months 2-3 have appeared. That should be a clue.

I am getting very wonky results in both illustrative editorial and the regular collection. I have had entire batches 100% rejected for "quality standards" and on the second go they all get accepted. I don't re-submit to the illustrative editorial the second time as there is a gray area so I let it be, but with the regular collection something is acting up over on the review side of things. My most common rejection is "quality standards" and most if not all these images are accepted at a handful of other agencies.

As mentioned in an earlier post, this has only been happening for the last few months and it is a stand out anomaly from AS. Right about the time these rejection threads started on this forum. Coincidence?

I can tell you it is incredibly frustrating and a waste of my time and the reviewers who are making some pretty bad call as of late.