MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Adobe Rejections for Possibly not declaring Generative AI  (Read 687 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: January 19, 2024, 14:49 »
+1
Today I received rejection notices from Adobe Stock that stated the following...

Possible reasons:
- Non compliant use of another artists name.
- Undeclared Generative AI Content.
- Content not compliant with overall guidelines

I think I understand what the first two reasons mean. The third one seems pretty nebulous and vague. Could the third reason have nothing to do with generative AI whatsoever and that the photo was rejected for more traditional reasons such as image quality, noise, or whatever? I don't know. Now, regarding the second possible reason above, Adobe stated in a document called, "10 tips for getting your generative AI images approved for sale on Adobe Stock," the following in tip #5...
If you are using generative fill on a photograph only to extend a background or remove distracting objects, people, or intellectual property, then you do not need to label the image as generative AI.
The document can be found here... https://stock.adobe.com/pages/artisthub/pdf/generative-ai-guide.pdf [nofollow]

I shot and processed the photographs in question. I did use generative AI fill tools very sparingly to 1) Add a little non-descript edge content (grass, sky, etc.) where I needed to straighten images via rotation and ended up having some small blank areas to fill in the corners, and 2) remove some small distractions such as sensor spots, bright pixels, or a power line or two going through tree branches, etc.

My intentions when editing are certainly not to deceive or to "pull a fast one." Not so long ago I would have just used spot healing and content aware fill for such purposes (and still do). I used generative AI tools on these photos because I thought they might yield better results than my typical way of dealing with fills and spot healing, and because, after reading the Adobe-published doc cited above, I thought it was perfectly permissible and not a violation for this type of editing. So, I am confused.

I know the rejections reason was not for reason #1 (unless a robot decided that "Cape Hatteras" in the key words was a person's name or some other such robot silliness). I am not sure if the rejections were due to reasons #2 and/or #3 above. If #3 (provided it has nothing to do with generative AI), it is no big deal. I've had a few rejections regarding quality problems now and then. Life goes on. But, if the rejections are due to reason #2, well, I'll stop using generative AI altogether and go back to using only content aware fill when an image calls for that type of correction. I certainly do not want to be banned from submitting to Adobe Stock over something like this and am having trouble reconciling the rejection notice with what is stated in the Adobe doc that clearly states that this type of generative AI usage is permissible. Is some minor generative AI healing or edge fill allowed or not?

Again, I want to follow the rules and not be banned from submitting to Adobe Stock. But, what exactly are the rules?

Any thoughts or comments on similar experiences are greatly appreciated. Thanks!


« Reply #1 on: January 19, 2024, 16:43 »
+2
Quite honestly? I think you are putting too much thought into this.
Adobe's rejection reason are extremely vague and can mean anything or nothing at all and from my experience of the past months, rejections there have become completely random. Submit a batch, get 100% rejections, re-submit it, get 100% approval. There is no consistency. It didn't use to be like this in the past, but seems to be the new normal at Adobe.
The real rejection reason might just as well be "Reviewer is feeling grumpy today".

« Reply #2 on: January 19, 2024, 18:16 »
0
Perhaps they are detecting some metadata in the image that indicates that generative fill was used? Anyway, it sounds like the reviewer made a mistake in this case. According to https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/generative-ai-content.html you shouldn't have to label this as Generative AI:

"Examples when you wouldnt be obligated to label an image as generative AI:
Extending background for any reason
Removing IP or other forms of retouching
Removing distracting objects or people
Recoloring the background of an image"

Not sure what your best option would be. You could open a support ticket. Or join the Adobe Stock Discord community and post the file IDs in the next Rejection Reasons event (which won't be until February). Or just resubmit?

« Reply #3 on: January 20, 2024, 06:13 »
0
Interesting that they are obviously using new reasons for rejection, but again they are written in a very generic way.

How many images have been rejected?
Do you have metadata with keywords in it that could be misinterpreted as generative content?

I would possibly edit the image(s) (increase saturation, etc.) and re-upload again. In the past, I've often had success with images being then accepted.

But it's probably best to ask the question in the Discord community.

« Reply #4 on: January 20, 2024, 08:17 »
0
A few days ago, 100% of my photos accepted. Today, one more time, 100% acceptation...
Really, it's soooo boring.   ;D ;D ;D
I've got no reason to complain for... 18 Years! (since Fotolia of course)
Hem, guess to understand why...  ??? Rejections were the best way for learning. I know, it's Ok Boomer attitude.

I don't submit the 100ks photos that I took, but my best work. Hey!!!!! try-it!!!
Of course, no use of AI, thanks, I want to be the one who has capacities, not the machine!

« Reply #5 on: January 20, 2024, 08:35 »
0
A few days ago, 100% of my photos accepted. Today, one more time, 100% acceptation...
Really, it's soooo boring.   ;D ;D ;D
I've got no reason to complain for... 18 Years! (since Fotolia of course)
Hem, guess to understand why...  ??? Rejections were the best way for learning. I know, it's Ok Boomer attitude.

I don't submit the 100ks photos that I took, but my best work. Hey!!!!! try-it!!!
Of course, no use of AI, thanks, I want to be the one who has capacities, not the machine!

It is rare to see such positive and encouraging posts in this forum. Keep on rockin!!!


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
2458 Views
Last post April 28, 2023, 00:15
by wordplanet
17 Replies
4938 Views
Last post July 20, 2023, 10:35
by spike
18 Replies
2532 Views
Last post July 24, 2023, 12:32
by MxR
185 Replies
20786 Views
Last post October 17, 2023, 02:37
by Deyan Georgiev Photography
23 Replies
3584 Views
Last post December 14, 2023, 22:05
by synthetick

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors