MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Adobe Stock => Topic started by: Adobe Stock Contributor Relations on May 20, 2025, 09:24
-
Hello!
We’re introducing updated submission limits for Adobe Stock Contributors to help maintain the strength and quality of our growing collection. These updates support the continued success of both our Contributor community and customers alike.
When you reach your weekly submission limit or the maximum amount of allowed content pending moderation, you will experience a temporary pause before you can submit additional content.
-
Not very clear "When you reach your weekly submission limit " which is what number 1s, 10s, 100s ?
-
When you reach your weekly submission limit or the maximum amount of allowed content pending moderation, you will experience a temporary pause before you can submit additional content.
I have many videos that have been waiting for verification for almost a year. Check these videos already or delete them if they are not suitable for you. Otherwise, these stuck videos will eat up all my limits.
-
Keep them guessing!
Clarity please. We are adults in this room and clear concise communication is key. What exactly are the upload limits imposed? Or is it the same style as the Adobe roulette inspection policy? This week you have 3 upload limits, the next week 0 upload limits, and the third week 25 upload limit.
The insanity continues!
-
@Adobe Stock Contributor Relations...
https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/adobe-roulette-rejections-raul-ceron/ (https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/adobe-roulette-rejections-raul-ceron/)
Can you please shed some light on this post please.
Adobe really has a lot of heads spinning with what is going on as of late.
It's crazy making to say the least.
Thanks.
-
Could be the percentage of portfolio. Or number of rainy days on New Zealand east coast. Vague and similar to "Quality Issue".
-
@Adobe Stock Contributor Relations...
https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/adobe-roulette-rejections-raul-ceron/ (https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/adobe-roulette-rejections-raul-ceron/)
Can you please shed some light on this post please.
Adobe really has a lot of heads spinning with what is going on as of late.
It's crazy making to say the least.
Thanks.
sadly they wont say ANYTHING.. nowadays its just 'post and run'
-
As a supporter of upload limits,or in this case submission limits since 2023,I can only say 2 things:
"finally!" and "well done!" :D
then as for what these limits are,it seems to me from the email that i read,that depends.
these limits are not the same for everyone,It depends on various factors,including rejections and overall performance.
-
To solve the problem, why not apply these criteria:
Is it an east indian/arabic spammer? Doesn't reside in the USA/Canada (sadly though a good portion of both east india & saudia arabia has been relocated to canada & the usa the last couple years, so perhaps also do it based on whether or not they are east indian).? Account created on or after January 2023 when "ai" was announced? Mmkay. Limit 10 items.
Problem solved.
I'd say (very educated guess based on actually having seen certain stats), 90% of the "problems" are from those two specific groups, esp. after 2023.
(Not to mention of course, them finding other ways to spam by making 10 accounts each w/10 family members, 10 friends, etc, or just stealing complete portfolios from other places and trying to pass it off as their own).
Simply because:
a) They (in general) don't care about quality, so you get the 6-7 fingers, 2 eiffel towers, etc, etc. They just want MONEY MONEY and spam as fast as they can.
b) Not just for photos/videos, etc - doing the same thing on amazon. I'm part of several author groups and you wouldn't believe the amount of crap in general they post - because they want to get rich quick with amazon stuff. Titles like "How to masturb___e better, step by step techniques", or "History of The Florida Eiffel Tower", or just chatgpt spam using prompts like "Write me a 200 page book, complete with pictures, title page, and table of contents, on __subject__". Amazon for the most part seems to be accepting the garbage (they don't care, as long as they get paid) - but if the east indian/arabic spammer gets too extreme, then they deacivate the acct - and usually the east indian/arabic spammers come in crying wondering 'what happened'. Some of them even completely rip of well known company titles say like Disney titles, and try and makei it "Snow White and the Eight Dwarfs" or "Alice in Wonderland Part II", and act all confused why amazon has an issue with blatant copyright violations.
THAT is the group causing the most problems - so - simply limit it to 10 submissions from them. IF they prove they don't steal, take time to make sure there's not 7 fingers, etc - gradually increase it. But right now that's a lot more work than its worth - and most don't usually improve - they just look at a new way to 'spam/scam/steal' in the system.
Thanks.
-
@SuperPhoto
your speech sounds a little racist.
let's just say that those who upload a lot get a lot of rejections,especially these days with the new review.
so those who upload a lot start to lower their submission limit.
this is another good move against spam.
-
this is another good move against spam.
Yes it is. And absolutely no room for racism of any sort.
But it lacks clarity. Why not just explain what's going on. Individually Pro-rated based on rejections, port quality (?), number of downloads, date when Everest was first climbed, ... Adobe is great agency and very successful, but would be even better with bit more transparency
-
this is another good move against spam.
Yes it is. And absolutely no room for racism of any sort.
But it lacks clarity. Why not just explain what's going on. Individually Pro-rated based on rejections, port quality (?), number of downloads, date when Everest was first climbed, ... Adobe is great agency and very successful, but would be even better with bit more transparency
in my opinion it is not specified because the discussion is very broad,because the limit depends on many factors and Adobe wants to have freedom of movement without specifying "limits".
then as for the new approach with which Adobe relates to contributors,it sounds a little colder(at least as far as this context,this forum,is concerned) and yes,it makes me a little sad too.
but,we were asking for it too,because every official announcement was always followed by countless complaints about everything,so in my opinion,we were asking for it too! :D
-
@SuperPhoto
your speech sounds a little racist.
let's just say that those who upload a lot get a lot of rejections,especially these days with the new review.
so those who upload a lot start to lower their submission limit.
this is another good move against spam.
Lol, not racist, its the truth.
Sad though you feel the need to "label" something instead of observing the simple truth that is right in your face... BUT... that's what 20 years of "schooling" is for, not to "educate" you nor to get you to think for your self - but - for your masters to tell you how to respond and train you like a pavlovian dog. But... you don't seem to see that. Again. something staring you right in front of your face.
-
this is another good move against spam.
Yes it is. And absolutely no room for racism of any sort.
But it lacks clarity. Why not just explain what's going on. Individually Pro-rated based on rejections, port quality (?), number of downloads, date when Everest was first climbed, ... Adobe is great agency and very successful, but would be even better with bit more transparency
Lol, definitely not 'racist'. See above comment.
And why you don't join some east indian forums to SEE what they are doing. OR. Learn to speak the language. OR. If you are too lazy to do that - use an equivalent google translate to see what they are doing. Lol - its EXACTLY what they are doing. And the SUPER funny thing is - pretty much every culture except 'european/caucasian' cultures have NO issues of being what you define as "racist" whatsoever. Unfortunatley - schooling, and "edjookashun" have taught you to be that way... and you don't even realize that.
Anyways. Simple solution.
a) Look @ country of registration.
b) Look @ date of registration.
c) Look @ how much spam is produced.
And... while it is more work to reference "family" accounts (more work) - look @ the "race" aka "culture" there.
The east indian CULTURE (in general) is basically to see how much you can scam&spam all at once. The arabic CULTURE is a little different - but in many ways similar - if you can scam someone - its just considered you are a 'good businessman' and the person you 'scammed' was too dumb to know the difference. BTW - do you know just how many arabic people LOVE to bully people in business (i.e., real estate as an example) - and then cry the "OMFG! RACIST!" card if someone calls them out on their bullying tactics?
Anyways. It's a cultural thing. It's just what they do.
So if one wants to stop the spam/scam/stealing of entire portfolios, dont' accept registrations from those cultures. And fun fact - its pretty much only "western" cultures that have been "trained" to act that way. "They" would have no issues whatsoever taking stuff from you - and its part of the reason why so many people 'cry' in this forum that 'OMFG! ANOTHER PERSON STEALING A PORTFOLIO!"... look @ the account holder name - they are so lazy many times they don't even bother disguising it.
Anyways. It's just a fact.
-
[/quote]
. Learn to speak the language. OR. If you are too lazy to do that - use an equivalent google translate to see what they are doing.
[/quote]
Exactly which of the 22 official languages in "East" India are you referring to?
Your rant is racist and shows your complete lack of education as well.
-
. Learn to speak the language. OR. If you are too lazy to do that - use an equivalent google translate to see what they are doing.
Exactly which of the 22 official languages in "East" India are you referring to?
Your rant is racist and shows your complete lack of education as well.
To lack of education I would also add below average IQ level. But it's better to stay away from such topics and focus on positive discussion instead
-
man just started three days ago to upload since several years, I have a huge backlog so I certainly will get problems. Really annoying but I have other eggs in the basket so I guess it's your loss not mine.
-
it's always better now with submission limits.
a few days ago i was reading about someone who uploads 100 contents a day,sometimes getting rejections of 90% but other times rejections of 50% or less,so in the end he gets approvals for more than a thousand contents per month,which in my opinion is too much.
it's too much because sending 100 contents a day means that these contents are poorly made,from every point of view,even from the indexing point of view,because there simply isn't enough time to create and send 100 contents a day.
Even if you use an AI for indexing,the results should be checked,because there are many errors in the generated results,and so,whoever uploads 100 contents a day only creates a big mess in the library and sends contents without actually creating anything,imo.
these limits are necessary,so I'm happy that they have finally been implemented.
-
You may be right Injustice, hopefully it is just a solution to excessive spamming, I guess we'll see how it all works out.
-
Exactly which of the 22 official languages in "East" India are you referring to?
Your rant is racist and shows your complete lack of education as well.
Sigh. Quite an ad hominem response from an unedjoocated delerict. You & others who simply pretend to be moral grandstanders screaming 'racism', when logic fails for you. An empty accusation to avoid thinking. Did you even BOTHER to think, & look into it? Why do you get so 'triggered' instead of thinking? Is it because the t.v. didn't give you permission to do so?
Anyways, start with Hindi & Punjabi. Punjabs tend to do more of the theft & stealing, but certain parts of Gujarat aren't much better. (In fairness I should add pakistanis tend to have the same kind of 'business ethics', or lack thereof).
-
To lack of education I would also add below average IQ level. But it's better to stay away from such topics and focus on positive discussion instead
Personal attacks? Sounds like you are lacking in IQ, not I, just a way for you to avoid thinking because you are throwing a childish tantrum. When you are ready to think like an adult, let me know. Name calling is such a waste of time, and just shows your lack of intellect.
Did you even BOTHER to investigate any of the statements? (Rhetorical question based on your response).
You really should try thinking. It's good for you.
-
The ignore button, so useful…
Please Adobe,
treat us like professionell business partners.
On the upload page a simple
Welcome Jasmin,
you have another 637 upload slots left this week.
Happy creating, let‘s make money together!
Here is the link to the latest trends and client requests
etc…
Adobe is a software giant fortune 500 company.
Make it shine!
-
The ignore button, so useful…
Where do I find that button? I can see it could come in handy.
-
endless hordes uploading, working for nothing and train their competitor (ai).
why shold adobe treat them like professionell business partners, come on
-
The ignore button, so useful…
Where do I find that button? I can see it could come in handy.
Lower right of a post. next to report to moderator.
You can reverse it anytime. Sometimes I do, then I usually put trolls back on ignore.
Makes life a lot easier.
-
The ignore button, so useful…
Where do I find that button? I can see it could come in handy.
Lower right of a post. next to report to moderator.
You can reverse it anytime. Sometimes I do, then I usually put trolls back on ignore.
Makes life a lot easier.
Magic. Thanks.
-
Hello!
We’re introducing updated submission limits for Adobe Stock Contributors to help maintain the strength and quality of our growing collection. These updates support the continued success of both our Contributor community and customers alike.
When you reach your weekly submission limit or the maximum amount of allowed content pending moderation, you will experience a temporary pause before you can submit additional content.
From what I read in the email it contradicts what Adobe has said in the past, it said that your rejections did not affect you as a contributor. Now I have a collection of around 4100 images and videos. More than half of what I submit is rejected for image quality reasons and such. I always felt that if there was a little more info I would know what I can do better next time but its a very aleatory rejection process. I have had apologies from Adobe about that saying they are only human and I accept that and just went along with the process.
But now if rejections are going to affect what I can submit, then this becomes a form of punishment but for what? No one says what I can do to do it better or tries to help. I don’t go on forums showing my work because it’s non of other people’s business. This is Adobe criteria I try to adhere to. So wish for a little more partnership and less blame sort of thing.
Thanks.
-
Hello!
We’re introducing updated submission limits for Adobe Stock Contributors to help maintain the strength and quality of our growing collection. These updates support the continued success of both our Contributor community and customers alike.
When you reach your weekly submission limit or the maximum amount of allowed content pending moderation, you will experience a temporary pause before you can submit additional content.
From what I read in the email it contradicts what Adobe has said in the past, it said that your rejections did not affect you as a contributor. Now I have a collection of around 4100 images and videos. More than half of what I submit is rejected for image quality reasons and such. I always felt that if there was a little more info I would know what I can do better next time but its a very aleatory rejection process. I have had apologies from Adobe about that saying they are only human and I accept that and just went along with the process.
But now if rejections are going to affect what I can submit, then this becomes a form of punishment but for what? No one says what I can do to do it better or tries to help. I don’t go on forums showing my work because it’s non of other people’s business. This is Adobe criteria I try to adhere to. So wish for a little more partnership and less blame sort of thing.
Thanks.
To be fair, I have no clue what is going on at Adobe. Everything is incredibly vague to a fault. It's not the same Adobe of a few years ago that is for sure, not even close. The crazy part is I think winning the roulette wheel in Vegas has better odds and I don't even know how to play.
-
I'm noticing video review times have improved. I'm only submitting a couple of videos at a time as I don't create as much content for stock but its good to see reviews being done within good time, sometimes within hours of submitting.
-
This whole Roulette / Lack of transparency is making an impact. I am slowly uploading backlog from trip to Spain last winter. I started skipping Adobe; why bother? Will not be reviewed for months/years, then rejected with ambiguous reason that just makes you feel disrespected.
I honestly hope they will realize this is only hurting them as agency, and come to terms honest contributors are biggest assets of their business. But I probably live in Fantasy world.
-
dear Adobe...yesterday you were a bit mean,because you reject 8 people images,but then I looked at the pictures again and noticed that the people in the pictures looked a little sad and disappointed,because they were slightly underexposed,and they also had a slightly red and unnatural tone,especially the girl's cheeks...
...so i opened Photoshop again,and used the new tool to adjust the colors(cool tool by the way)and all the people in the pictures found a new tone and brightness and they were all happier,especially the girl who had red cheeks and who you have now accepted and she is very happy now....
...but his friends are still sad,because they were rejected again,maybe because the description indicates the subject that should not be the subject and I have to specify better what instead at first sight,so I'll try one last time by modifying the description so it can't be said that the subject is not in focus and of quality....
...and since you're around there,could you take a look at my videos?Even just with one eye,but only if you've already had lunch,because if you haven't had lunch you're a little disappointed and nervous,and then you reject all my videos...
....and if you reject all my videos i can't have my lunch,and then I will have to start eating my shoes,and if I eat my shoes,then I feel a little heavy,and I can't walk to facilitate digestion,because I don't have shoes anymore...
...and then I feel a little heavy,and I can't walk,so then I feel sick,and if I feel sick then I end up in hospital,and if I end up in hospital then they'll give me anesthesia,and if they give me anesthesia,then I can't produce videos anymore...
...and if I don't produce videos anymore,then the whole world will be sad about it,and we don't want all of this,right Adobe? :D
-
The rejection things is annoying especially when you can't work out what it actually got rejected for. Totally understand fair rejections that are my fault.
I usually just brush rejections off unless I'm getting a lot and it's something I'm doing wrong.
Feeling more anxious about rejections now in case I get blocked from uploading because either I made a mistake (humans make mistakes) or because of a review process mistake.
Let's hope it plays out fairly and doesn't turn into Adobe Gestapo.
My biggest fear is that they will prefer AI images and this is a way of discouraging images made by humans.
Injustice for all - well said and LOL. :D
-
:D
probably now more than ever real content is more than desired,given the increased influx of AI content.
the truth,imo,is that they have been quite soft in the past on reviews,and now instead they have become more selective,as is right in my opinion,because the market has become more selective and the customers more demanding,then other factors also came into play,with AI.
anyway,at least as far as I'm concerned,I always see that the review are concrete and well done,the best content is always accepted,and there is always a reason why a content is rejected,this is my opinion.
then surely there will be some errors,in this chaos of uploads,some errors I think could even be normal,but from what I see in my review,the errors are really very few,almost non-existent I would say.
-
Stuff I uploaded last week - including some AI Christmas stuff I figured I had better add now or it wouldn't be available until Christmas 2026 - was all reviewed yesterday and most were accepted. I was shocked but something has definitely improved!
I upload small batches - I think the most I've ever added in an entire month is about 35 images, so the new upload limits are welcome and whatever they are set at, I know I won't hit the limit - I just hope that they keep the spammers at bay and mean we start to see normal review times again.
I'd felt discouraged from uploading because my content was sitting for weeks on end with part of a batch being approved and the rest never getting seen. I've been really sick and unable to get out most days but I happened to take a few iPhone images a couple of weeks ago when I was well enough to get out to see some friends and they were accepted right away - (they were mostly illustrative editorial - always a faster review). Anyway, one of them was licensed the day after it was online, so I figured I'd add some more. I guess my timing was fortuitous.
I think Jasmin's suggestion that our welcome screen tell us how many uploads we have available is a great idea. For those of you with big portfolios who are super productive, it would only seem fair. I've been playing with AI since I rarely get out to shoot these days and kudos to Jasmin's suggestions - I researched Christmas trends for the year, couldn't face rooting around in my very hot attic to find props - so I made some AI "photos" instead. I spent ages fixing their flaws, so was happy that most were accepted. Now I'll see how good my research was.
-
and I agree on this.
of course if it was possible to know what limits you have it would be better,who knows maybe this will be done too,but I don't know if it's possible,since limits depend on different factors,such as account,approval rate and general performance.
anyway yes,these limits are necessary and welcome.
I produce AI content practically every day,and so I know that AI content needs to be worked on a lot with generative fill,color adjusted,blurs...are full of imperfections and needs to be improved carefully.
that's why I don't understand how someone can upload 100 AI contents per day,from my point of view it's practically impossible.
From what I see,there is not a single AI content that is perfect as it is generated.
when the AI content is generated,at the moment I download it,it looks good,but then when I open Photoshop and look at it carefully I never stop finding imperfections and things that can be improved.
and with these new limits,in my opinion,we can all work better,and give ourselves the time we need.
-
The rejection things is annoying especially when you can't work out what it actually got rejected for. Totally understand fair rejections that are my fault.
I usually just brush rejections off unless I'm getting a lot and it's something I'm doing wrong.
Feeling more anxious about rejections now in case I get blocked from uploading because either I made a mistake (humans make mistakes) or because of a review process mistake.
Let's hope it plays out fairly and doesn't turn into Adobe Gestapo.
My biggest fear is that they will prefer AI images and this is a way of discouraging images made by humans.
Injustice for all - well said and LOL. :D
I do not think Adobe is proffered AI images at this moment, yesterday I upload 10 images around 9 years old an it was approved. I believe it was still more important what is on the images and quality.
-
The ignore button, so useful…
Where do I find that button? I can see it could come in handy.
Lower right of a post. next to report to moderator.
You can reverse it anytime. Sometimes I do, then I usually put trolls back on ignore.
Makes life a lot easier.
lol trolls are people like f8/zeljok/and sometimes you too cobalt, who ... instead of thinking, have conditinoed like pavlovian dogs and acting 'morally righteous' to ignore the obvious. stating a fact, the fact being that east indians/pakistanis in general are stealing your portfolios, is not 'trolling'.
but - ALL of you should stop whining like little children then when your content DOES get stolen, because... it seems - you think by pretending it doesn't happen and being 'morally outraged' that somehow magically that fixes things. it doesn't.
stop accepting people who don't have ethics, and in general - yes, east indians/pakistanis, and many of the arab states. that's just how they "do business". its their "culture". get educated on it. it will help you.
-
it's always better now with submission limits.
a few days ago i was reading about someone who uploads 100 contents a day,sometimes getting rejections of 90% but other times rejections of 50% or less,so in the end he gets approvals for more than a thousand contents per month,which in my opinion is too much.
it's too much because sending 100 contents a day means that these contents are poorly made,from every point of view,even from the indexing point of view,because there simply isn't enough time to create and send 100 contents a day.
Even if you use an AI for indexing,the results should be checked,because there are many errors in the generated results,and so,whoever uploads 100 contents a day only creates a big mess in the library and sends contents without actually creating anything,imo.
these limits are necessary,so I'm happy that they have finally been implemented.
Unfortunately - submission limits don't really 'hurt' anyone except for 'honest' people...
The east indian/arabic spammers/scammers find different ways - and in fact - I think it was actually ON this forum (or maybe it was in discord) that one east indian BRAGGED about how he was simply getting CHILDREN to give them his "id" (he paid them I think $5) - so he could create MULTIPLE accounts (at that time I think he bragged about having 10 accounts) - and submit that way.
Look @ country of registration. Pakistani/East Indian? Reject - or put severe limits on the account until it has been 'proven'.
Do the same thing CREDIT card companies do. They don't blindly accept ANY transaction for fear of being accused of being "racist". They care about $$$.
And they KNOW its a poor risk to accept certain transactions from certain countries, and/or certain nationalities.
That being said - sadly now a lot have been 'imported' into Canada & the US to run the same types of spam/scam operations... so not 'as' easy - but still doable.
SUPER easy way of stopping the spam/scamming - and yes, it is primarily east indians/pakistanis + several of the arab nations. Of course OTHER people do it too - but in general significantly much less than these particular cultures seeking 'get rich quick' schemes...
-
yes but stop pointing the finger at any specific culture,spam is done in any part of the world,as you said too.
It depends,there are people who prefer to upload en masse,without thinking about much,and the problem is that this behavior apparently also bears fruit.
a spammer surely earns more than me who tries to dedicate time to the things I do.
just a little while ago I was reading on discord,about a guy who today produced 1000 AI images,already indexed and ready to send.
then the funny thing is that he was complaining because he has a 50% rejection rate! :D
but did you look at these contents at 100% magnification?you're lucky you have 50% approval!
However,I am completely sure that he earns much more than me,so good for him!
It's still possible that he says 1000 when in fact it's 500,but even 100 in one day is too many imo.
the most I can understand is 50,if someone can produce 50 high quality and saleable contents in a day,in my opinion is a superhero! :D
luckily there are these limits now!
-
yes but stop pointing the finger at any specific culture,spam is done in any part of the world,as you said too.
Why? You seem to be missing the point. If 95% of your problems are caused by a specific region/culture/etc, why wouldn't you do something about it?
It's like saying 'omfg! bank robbers are people too! Don't call them bank robbers! Call them financially challenged!'
While yes - other people do it as WELL... The MAJORITY is caused by east indian/pakinstani/arabic spammers/scammers.
That's why you have 'nigerian phone scams', and you say dont hear of... 'ukranian phone scams'... Or why people get phone calls from east indians posing as collection agencies/'tax authorities'/credit card companies/etc... and its not usually say... associated with people from barbados... because in general, people from those cultures do those things. there is a reason its called 'culture' - because its a set of habits people associated with it tend to do.
Like if I say "Samurai Warrior" you probably don't think of a black midget samurai, you probably think of a Japanese samurai warrior...
Or if I say "NBA basketball player" (lol while not technically a culture, more of a stereotype) - you probably don't think of 'omfg, those awesome east indian basketball players', but rather black (or sometimes white) basketball players...
Anyways. Yes.
The "ai" makes it SUPER easy for people with absolutely (or virtually) no creative/artistic skills, but with amazing stealing/theft/spam skills, to "compete" with people who do have skills.
-
It's not by accident that SS has a "high fraud risk" list of countries where new contributors from those IPs must wait at last 90 days until they can receive a payout as well as further checks.
Is this a racist practice? No.
Where there is smoke there is fire.
-
It's not by accident that SS has a "high fraud risk" list of countries where new contributors from those IPs must wait at last 90 days until they can receive a payout as well as further checks.
Is this a racist practice? No.
Where there is smoke there is fire.
Unfortunately they dont subject those same accounts to human detailed reviews to check for IP theft, spam, AI and so on.
If they did that for Pakistan/Bangladesh they could likely eliminate 85% of IP theft immediately.
-
"I do not think Adobe is proffered AI images at this moment, yesterday I upload 10 images around 9 years old an it was approved. I believe it was still more important what is on the images and quality. "
thanks fotoroad - do feel a little reassured.
-
Didn't know about SS "high fraud risk" list. Will share something to a point similar.
I am mod for outdoors Forum in Canada; pretty much like MSG, just for hiking, camping etc.
Last winter someone started posting daily spam, promoting some Microsoft Certification Program. I'd delete post and ban the account, but next day he/she would just create new one and do the same thing. I tracked IP address - always same region of Pakistan. Eventually had to ban range of IP addresses, which solved the problem.
People in that part of the world have very poor living conditions, with little hope of improvement so they resort to Internet which is widely available everywhere. Of course this does not justify the behaviour, but is (one of) underlying reason.
-
It's not by accident that SS has a "high fraud risk" list of countries where new contributors from those IPs must wait at last 90 days until they can receive a payout as well as further checks.
Is this a racist practice? No.
Where there is smoke there is fire.
In my opinion,yes,it is racism,and as long as some cultures are treated as such,we will not move forward.
Imo,there are other factors at play here,such as the population size for example.
let's take the case of India,how many are there? I yes...only 1.5 billion!
and of course that the concentration of spammers is higher there,just as the concentration of cooks and plumbers is higher! :D
there are simply so many!
In my opinion,these limits could have been put in place immediately with AI,It hasn't been done before perhaps for certain reasons.
However,imo,the limits must be low,only in this way does it matter what you produce and not how much you produce,in this way we aim for quality and not quantity.
-
I am more than okay with limits. But it would be so professional and courteous to send an email saying dear so and so... you have been capped at 50 images a week so choose wisely, reset at the end of the week. I am not a fan of spamming just for the sake of spamming. I also understand rejections. That all said the current situation at Adobe is disrespectful to those of us who actually submit quality. The rejections make no sense at all. In fact nothing lately at Adobe makes any sense at all.
Quite frankly it has become a joke. It is very disheartening to see a once wonderful platform go this direction. My work sells very well on Adobe (and other platforms) and if Adobe wants to roulette reject my work or limit it then that is how the cards fall, not a lot I can do about it. I will make the business decision to focus my effort on platforms that still want my work and platforms that I can benefit from as a business.
-
But it would be so professional and courteous to send an email saying dear so and so... you have been capped at 50 images a week so choose wisely, reset at the end of the week.
+100. Exactly right. Even if limit is contributor specific. It is calculated by AI; email or post somewhere in your profile, whatever. This can also be automated. But they won't do it. It is inline with their communication style. This is our house, take it or leave it.
-
If the limits were the same for everyone,it would be easier to know what they are,but since the limits are not the same for everyone and can also change over time,I think it is more difficult to make them known.
the limits change,it depends I believe a lot from the rejections,so if today for example I have a limit of 500 per week (I don't know it's just an example)
in 6 months maybe it's 1000,and then maybe 500 again.
I've had a lot of content rejected lately,then when I go back and look at it calmly and when I'm not tired,I always find something wrong,and I say to myself: "that's why!"😄
then for the OT discussion let me say that there are 2 sides to every coin,everything is like that in life,and in this case,if on one hand a business must protect itself,on the other hand there is discrimination.
this is why having a "high fraud risk" list of countries remains a discriminatory attitude.
for you does the end justify the means?for me no.
The sooner we understand it the sooner we can evolve into something that apparently we don't know yet.
-
What upsets me about the limit is not only that we do not know it, but that a factor that plays into it is the rejection rate. This was never a problem for me in the past, my acceptance rate on Adobe was - apart from editorial content where I could never figure out what they accept - 99%.
But now it's over 50% because every second image gets rejected for being "too similar" - and since the similar rule does not apply to our OWN portfolio, but all of the database, I have zero control over it. Just not submitting images that are similar to the ones in my port isn't helping. I cannot check every image I want to submit with 17 million images in their database. So I feel like that's very unfair, because it is nothing that I have control over or nothing that has anything to do with the quality of my content.
The same goes for the free Adobe plan by the way - I factor for qualifying for it is also your rejection rate.
-
yeah,the "similar" thing is a bit heavy and annoying,hard times for images!
maybe in this case,the end justifies the means! :D
My rejection rate is about 50%,I suppose the tendency is to approve the best content and also try to reject content that is less marketable in itself,or that is already present in the library.
I'm sure that Adobe is doing it mainly for us,I don't think they're there drinking vodka and laughing at our rejections.
It's obvious to me that if they've applied limits,and if they reject a lot,even for the "similar" ones,they do it because it's necessary.
I don't believe in the theory of "roulette rejection".
-
As fascinating as it is to see how quickly people start turning on each other during adversity, and convoluting a vague announcement into a cultural discussion guided by race-based assumptions...
May I suggest we try to use this forum thread for something useful and pertinent to the topic at hand, as in, comparing notes? Like, has anyone actually hit any limits yet? I haven't.
-
people are people,not bots!
and then you didn't find anything useful in all this talk?that's very sad! :(
anyway come on..I'll satisfy your curiosity...
This is the message that appears in your account when you reach your limit:
I haven't reached the limit yet,but I've seen several of these messages already,so it looks like a lot of people have already reached the limit,probably all people who upload at least above average.
-
Herugliness - good point. Like most people, I guess, I shoot series of things so may get 5 to 20 photos and/or videos. So a whole shoot could be rejected because someone else did something similar and I didn't spend hours searching adobe stock site. That's props, electric, petrol (if I visit somewhere) and obviously time. I enjoy stock but I'm not gonna work for peanuts per hour either because whole shoots are rejected.
-
...if they reject a lot,even for the "similar" ones,they do it because it's necessary.
Of course since you consider it's necessary to flood AI, and that a photographer is a human staying all days in front of a screen, by despising hard working traditional has-been and skilled photographers.
-
...if they reject a lot,even for the "similar" ones,they do it because it's necessary.
Of course since you consider it's necessary to flood AI, and that a photographer is a human staying all days in front of a screen, by despising hard working traditional has-been and skilled photographers.
In my opinion you underestimate the work of those who produce AI content.
Even with AI as in real photography and videography there are different ways of working.
There are those who,for example,take and produce real snapshots,in order to obtain a certain quantity without worries,and there are those who try to take real unique,well-curated and noteworthy shots.
with AI things don't change,what changes is the means by which the product is obtained.
as far as I'm concerned my port is still mostly real,but soon it probably won't be anymore,let's say that I've become more serious with AIs for a year,but I still intend to continue with the illustrative editorials as soon as I've "finished" the current project,and then resume it later.
but all of this clearly also depends on how it goes.
I hope that the work I'm doing now will change something soon,so in the future I can afford better photography equipment and get back to taking real photos and videos too,pay my travel expenses and everything else,things that are science fiction for me at the moment!
-
I'm sure that Adobe is doing it mainly for us
My dear friend, Adobe -or any other company for that matter- is NOT doing it for us. It is doing it only for money, or for themselves. We are just necessary nuisance, puny ants they couldn't care less about
-
Although communication is lacking, I think this is overall a step in the right direction for Adobe Stock. Adobe was one of the only agencies that leaned into the AI trend instead of against it. This lead to a lot of drawbacks (e.g. problems with the algorithm, more recently the "similar images" acceptance wall), but I'm hoping they continue to make improvements like these for the future.
-
I'm sure that Adobe is doing it mainly for us
My dear friend, Adobe -or any other company for that matter- is NOT doing it for us. It is doing it only for money, or for themselves. We are just necessary nuisance, puny ants they couldn't care less about
This reminds me of many many years ago when Getty Images was a public company and during one of the AGM's Jonathan Klein reported that there were record profits and the biggest liability was paying content creators. Long story short, Adobe is not your friend.
-
Thank you for sharing that screen shot of the "limit reached", it still concerns me that it is very vague and lacking in detail. If they can use AI to address you personally in an email message then I am sure they can get AI to let you know the exact reason, or let you know ahead of time what your limits are. Use AI for something useful that actually helps the contributors.
-
message deleted at request of zeljkok! :D
-
... snip ...
(In)Justice for all: Too much Metallica. Try ACDC: "Back in Black" (a.k.a Adobe Reviews) or "Highway to Hell" (Direction of microstock industry)
-
... snip ...
(In)Justice for all: Too much Metallica. Try ACDC: "Back in Black" (a.k.a Adobe Reviews) or "Highway to Hell" (Direction of microstock industry)
Metallica,Faith No More,Rage Against the Machine,Green Day,Smashing Pumpkins,Alan Parsons.....and of course,always Pink Floyd! :D
-
My rejection rate in the last 1-2 weeks is 100% due to similarity. I usually upload content, which is better quality than let's say 95% of similar content by other contributors. This strategy still generates a lot of sales for me. Now Adobe rejects higher quality content, because they already got similar content in lower quality - that's surely great for their customers :D
-
My rejection rate in the last 1-2 weeks is 100% due to similarity. I usually upload content, which is better quality than let's say 95% of similar content by other contributors. This strategy still generates a lot of sales for me. Now Adobe rejects higher quality content, because they already got similar content in lower quality - that's surely great for their customers :D
Mike - right on. I have now stopped uploading high end content to AS; why bother and feel disrespected. This whole nonsense will mark beginning of AS downfall; You simply can not turn against contributors how they are doing right now.
Injustice for all might want to start singing "The rise and Fall of Adobe Stock and Firefly from Mars"
-
They are actively driving creators to istock getty.
This is the Shutterstock strategy - look down on the creative community and turn away from them and somehow make yourself believe pissing off creators is good for business.
But they did FINALLY see the light and implemented upload limits.
Let us hope they also discard the roulette algo and go back to quality reviews from 9 weeks ago.
Otherwise, this is a make getty great again plan.
They have normal reviews, with the merger they will have a lot more sales and they do take up suggestions on their forums and have a nice community.
9 weeks ago I was happy at Adobe. It is amazing how fast things can change.
What else is drastically going wrong inside the company?
-
but look,I have no problems with anything or anyone,but this has to end,enough,I can't take it anymore.
I hope May is the end of this crap.
last year I was doing better,then I don't sell any of the new content I created since March.
before,every now and then I sold something immediately after approval,it hasn't happened since the beginning of March,and so far I have not sold any of the content approved in April and May.
here,this has to end,I mean....I can't see 6 sales in a week anymore,I hope that May is the end of this.
and I add:I want to believe that the problem is me,I really want to believe it,but for example I uploaded at the beginning of March a batch on business concept of 18 real images,real contents.
None of these 18 contents have been sold so far,while on SS I have already sold many.
so yes,the problem is me,I still have to delete a lot of content and fix my port,but I'm definitely not the problem 100%
Maybe let's say that my portfolio represents 50% of the problem,but it's still not a port that can only make 6 sales in a week,
or this chain of weeks:
8-12-8-6-10-6
which are my last 6 weeks.
-
with my last message I froze everyone! :D
@Cobalt,I agree with you.
first of all FINALLY is definitely the right word,the limits should have been set since 2023,since we proposed it.
then the rejections,roulette or not roulette,the rejections can be a palliative but not the cure.
reject,to temporarily plug a problem that needs to be solved,ok,but here we need a definitive,long-term solution.
It's obvious that something isn't working as it should,so if they want to patch things up for now,that's fine,but they have to find a definitive solution,and they know it too.
rejections cannot be a definitive and long-term solution.
-
"9 weeks ago I was happy at Adobe. It is amazing how fast things can change." me too Cobalt, they seemed very fair to contributors. The free software licenses are great shows they care about contributors.
I've over analyzing all my shoots this weekend trying to spot any tiny error or mistake. I should step up my game I'll be the first to admit, been very busy and getting sloppy recently (my fault). Taking a professional photography course at the moment to improve. But the idea of rejections preventing uploads is a bit nerve wracking. Shooting stock has always been really good for my state of mind - this is not. Hope it passes soon.
-
"9 weeks ago I was happy at Adobe. It is amazing how fast things can change." me too Cobalt, they seemed very fair to contributors. The free software licenses are great shows they care about contributors.
I've over analyzing all my shoots this weekend trying to spot any tiny error or mistake. I should step up my game I'll be the first to admit, been very busy and getting sloppy recently (my fault). Taking a professional photography course at the moment to improve. But the idea of rejections preventing uploads is a bit nerve wracking. Shooting stock has always been really good for my state of mind - this is not. Hope it passes soon.
It's so funny how these people (Cobalt, who I blocked but you talk about it) who were singing Adobe's praises are now facing reality. Understanding takes a long time for some mediocre people who were so happy to jump into AI generation.
-
As you know DiscreetDuck I'm very much against AI (the theft of people's work). Maybe as more and more people's works are taken along with their earnings the backlash will grow. I don't consider myself very talented btw but I enjoy stock and my modest earnings. I'm finding Twitter is a good place to go, a lot of smaller artists and musicians disccuss it on there.
-
Petapixel article on Adobe recent upload limits.
https://petapixel.com/2025/05/22/almost-half-of-the-images-on-adobe-stock-are-ai-generated/
-
the solution to give everyone the opportunity to sell,lies in the creation of a more dynamic algorithm,which highlights the best content of each portfolio,for an hour or two or half a day,so that everyone can have their best content highlighted in rotation,a very dynamic rotation.
the old system of displaying best-selling content no longer works,it's outdated.
Adobe knows this,and I'm sure they will fix it,because it's clearly in their interest,since the more creators are satisfied,the more creators will continue not only to produce,on which Adobe gets a percentage upon sales,but also to use their products.
It's a common problem and will be fixed,i just hope it won't take too long.
Rejections are just a temporary band-aid to stem the real problem.
Limits are certainly a great remedy,which will have positive effects in the long term,but a new,more dynamic algorithm is also needed.
Adobe is a little sick and needs to get better! 😄
-
Petapixel article on Adobe recent upload limits.
https://petapixel.com/2025/05/22/almost-half-of-the-images-on-adobe-stock-are-ai-generated/
Thank you for sharing this. One thing that sticks out the most to me is that apparently in 2023 there was 3% of AI generated content; now it's around 50%. They have nobody to blame but themselves.
And then classic corporate blah-blah response at the end that says absolutely nothing
At Adobe, we are committed to maintaining a high-quality, diverse, and valuable collection of content for our customers — while also supporting the continued success of our global Contributor community. Our submission policies are designed to ensure that unique, high-impact work is surfaced more effectively and that customers can more easily discover the best, most relevant assets,” a spokesperson says.
“Our goal is to foster a creative ecosystem where standout content thrives, creators are rewarded for originality, and customers find exactly what they need, faster. We remain deeply committed to listening to our contributor community and evolving our approach in a way that supports their growth and long-term success.
Quality Reasons !!
-
the solution to give everyone the opportunity to sell,lies in the creation of a more dynamic algorithm,which highlights the best content of each portfolio,for an hour or two or half a day,so that everyone can have their best content highlighted in rotation,a very dynamic rotation.
the old system of displaying best-selling content no longer works,it's outdated.
Adobe knows this,and I'm sure they will fix it,because it's clearly in their interest,since the more creators are satisfied,the more creators will continue not only to produce,on which Adobe gets a percentage upon sales,but also to use their products.
It's a common problem and will be fixed,i just hope it won't take too long.
Rejections are just a temporary band-aid to stem the real problem.
Limits are certainly a great remedy,which will have positive effects in the long term,but a new,more dynamic algorithm is also needed.
Adobe is a little sick and needs to get better! 😄
Get upset about Adobe, get really depressed about it, forgive Adobe, praise Adobe, repeat.
Why is that?
-
the solution to give everyone the opportunity to sell,lies in the creation of a more dynamic algorithm,which highlights the best content of each portfolio,for an hour or two or half a day,so that everyone can have their best content highlighted in rotation,a very dynamic rotation.
the old system of displaying best-selling content no longer works,it's outdated.
Adobe knows this,and I'm sure they will fix it,because it's clearly in their interest,since the more creators are satisfied,the more creators will continue not only to produce,on which Adobe gets a percentage upon sales,but also to use their products.
It's a common problem and will be fixed,i just hope it won't take too long.
Rejections are just a temporary band-aid to stem the real problem.
Limits are certainly a great remedy,which will have positive effects in the long term,but a new,more dynamic algorithm is also needed.
Adobe is a little sick and needs to get better! 😄
Get upset about Adobe, get really depressed about it, forgive Adobe, praise Adobe, repeat.
Why is that?
Because Simon Said so.
I think this is simply a precursor to wear us down for the next game, Musical Chairs where Adobe controls the music and eventually will have the only chair.
-
I'm just going to mention in earlier related news:
If you had between 350 and 6,999 downloads during the 2024 calendar year, you qualified to receive a complimentary code for a one-year plan for Creative Cloud Photography (20GB), Illustrator, InDesign, Premiere Pro, or After Effects.
If you had 7,000 or more downloads in 2024, you qualified to receive a complimentary code for a one-year plan for an Adobe Creative Cloud All Apps.
Only Contributors active in 2024 are eligible for the opportunity. To be considered active, you must have uploaded and had approved a minimum of 150 new assets.
350 DLs isn't that terrible, but with the reduced uploads allowed, the review roulette, the mystery similar rejections and whatever else, for some people who are careful and only upload quality images/photos, this will make the CC code, more difficult to achieve.
For you Adobe haters, it's still the site that pays best and makes the most for me. If the fans of dimes and 15% are going to keep cheering, just pay attention to best percentages and most pay, which of the three, SS, IS and AS, Adobe still wins.
ps If reviews are your thing, I have found that aside from some technical bs rejections, for legal reasons, IS is now the most consistent. SS is wacky, but for 10¢ they seem to be taking anything, anyone throws up at them. Yes ago when reviews were actually looked at, IS was possibly the toughest, but at the same time, the most consistent for what they took and what they refused.
-
I'm just going to mention in earlier related news:
If you had between 350 and 6,999 downloads during the 2024 calendar year, you qualified to receive a complimentary code for a one-year plan for Creative Cloud Photography (20GB), Illustrator, InDesign, Premiere Pro, or After Effects.
If you had 7,000 or more downloads in 2024, you qualified to receive a complimentary code for a one-year plan for an Adobe Creative Cloud All Apps.
Only Contributors active in 2024 are eligible for the opportunity. To be considered active, you must have uploaded and had approved a minimum of 150 new assets.
350 DLs isn't that terrible, but with the reduced uploads allowed, the review roulette, the mystery similar rejections and whatever else, for some people who are careful and only upload quality images/photos, this will make the CC code, more difficult to achieve.
For you Adobe haters, it's still the site that pays best and makes the most for me. If the fans of dimes and 15% are going to keep cheering, just pay attention to best percentages and most pay, which of the three, SS, IS and AS, Adobe still wins.
ps If reviews are your thing, I have found that aside from some technical bs rejections, for legal reasons, IS is now the most consistent. SS is wacky, but for 10¢ they seem to be taking anything, anyone throws up at them. Yes ago when reviews were actually looked at, IS was possibly the toughest, but at the same time, the most consistent for what they took and what they refused.
Actually no Peter,
Adobe used to be the best seller with the highest payout per month. But, for me, that changed the last eight months or so. It is Istock or Shutterstock that it is winning in $ amount and they were already winning in numbers a long time. Adobe is sliding, for me at least.
-
For you Adobe haters, it's still the site that pays best and makes the most for me. If the fans of dimes and 15% are going to keep cheering, just pay attention to best percentages and most pay, which of the three, SS, IS and AS, Adobe still wins.
Wins perhaps at the moment, but for how long? Even now, it doesn't win Alamy - at least not for me.
Everyone will always have their preferred agency, as well as agency they "hate", and that is ok. This discussion is really about how honest contributors are being treated by current AS review process. This is a fact, not personal preference.
-
I think that Uncle Pete went over to the dark side with his appraisal of Adobe :)
We can't save everyone. Let's take a minute and mourn for him.
-
Remember our friend Mat Hayward? He was off doing something at Adobe fixing submissions on the background, right?
All I found on internet is that he has worked for Adobe and that is it. He just went away quitely, that is what I think.
Maybe he got fed up with Adobe also and he was their chearleader over here!
If he is still working for Adobe, he is not bragging about it on social media. He only states he worked there, past tense.
-
I think that Uncle Pete went over to the dark side with his appraisal of Adobe :)
We can't save everyone. Let's take a minute and mourn for him.
Uncle Vader!
-
Looking further, I think all of the AI joy or pain is thanks to Matthew Smith at Adobe.
I might be mistaking but I think he is the godfather of all this AI crap.
-
Mat Hayward was great. I don‘t think anything of the recent drama would have happened under his watch.
Perhaps that is the real reason he left. He saw changes coming that would hurt the creator community and he would not be able to defend that, so he moved on.
If that is what happened, I would expect a lot more pain to come.
It is very clear that whoever now makes such radical changes against the creative community has no understanding of the relationship between creative community and buyers.
Driving us away to istock, is not a clever business strategy.
Especially not if the merger happens, it will make istock/getty very attractive, for both creators and clients.
eta
According to linkedin he still works for Adobe
-
Where does it say that for 2024 we need 7k downloads for the full creative suite?
-
@SimonSays
I think you misunderstood,I am still angry and disappointed with my sales.
then the discussion about rejections and limits is another story.
see,this is the difference between me and some of you here,you tar everything with the same brush I don't.
there is a distinction between things.
I am happy with most of the things Adobe does,and I understand many of the decisions,but I am not happy at all with my sales,and this fact remains for the moment,and if this fact does not change,as much as I can understand Adobe and its choices,I certainly will not continue this work for long.
as I already said I am following my last path in microstock,with AI videos,if I don't have a positive feedback as soon as possible with the work I'm doing,as far as I'm concerned it's over,also because it's not acceptable to make 6 sales in a week with my current port.
In June things have to start changing for me at least a little bit,and go even better in the next months,otherwise it's over,I certainly can't tolerate 6 sales in a week anymore,with my current portfolio.
-
Mat Hayward was great. I don‘t think anything of the recent drama would have happened under his watch.
eta
According to linkedin he still works for Adobe
My thoughts have always been that Mat was moved on to his current role at Adobe, not that he chose to move on. (Disclaimer: I have no insider knowledge though.) But nevertheless the current drama could just as easily have taken place while he was still in his previous role. Contributor Relations have never had any say over moderation.
-
So to summarize the collective information given so far:
One anonymous person posted a screenshot of generic text without any clear connection to Adobe, showing that a submission limit was reached. This was supposedly a screenshot of some kind of posts by "several" other anonymous people, not first hand, and with zero context as to who made the claim and what their methods are (AI, etc.). No one else here has indicated that they have hit any limits or has offered any guesses/hints at what these limits might be, unless I missed it between all the off-topic musings.
I've been submitting hundreds of videos over the past weeks, and I have had no restrictions. Getting the impression that the consensus is over-reacting to this change in their policy.
-
It is normal and positive for Adobe to do something radical to stop the unlimited massive influx of junk disguised as AI from third world countries, the problem was getting bigger and bigger. For example, I know of one individual in India who employs nearly 100 teenagers creating images on Midjourney, keywording them and uploading them by the thousands daily on Adobe using over 40 different accounts in the names of friends and family. This individual pays the kids who work for him with cigarettes, sodas and candy. It is good news that this type of abuse is being stopped
-
of course I totally agree,but not just from the third world,everywhere.
This is why it is important to change the system by which sales work,because the current system is too easily subject to fraud.
too many from all over the world,inflate sales,and since the best-selling content gets more exposure,this remains a problem they must try to solve.
It's too easy,I upload 100 contents on Adobe,I make a couple of calls to friends in Europe or Asia,so they can't trace them back to me who is in Italy,and voilà,it's done!
then I send a few euros to these friends,and I have 100 contents that,as soon as they are accepted,already have 3-4 sales each.
then clearly it can also be done on a large scale.
This is fraud,and the current system is too vulnerable,we need a new system and a more dynamic algorithm.
These limits are really the right choice,and a first step towards a more efficient and honest system.
-
Re: Mat
Fact: He was an employee for Adobe while posting on this forum. He was a contributor service agent and not your friend. It was his job to mollycoddle you. Adobe changed his position an now he is gone. Get over it. Adobe sort of attempted to put in Raul and that seems to have been pulled. You have all been gamed if you think Mat was your friend. Was he good at his job? Yes. Was he personable as far as one can be on a forum? Yes. But he was also a paid employee.
Re: Limits and Rejections
I am a seasoned pro full stop. My rejections as of late are pathetic. I don't spam at all. I take my profession very seriously. What is going on currently at Adobe makes no sense to me at all. As of yesterday I simply give up and have ceased to upload to Adobe. My work has always until recently had very high acceptance rate and my work sells very good at Adobe and continues to do so. A majority of my work has been rejected over the last 2-3 months if it even gets inspected at all sitting in queue for up to 4 months now. I am reading into this as an internal issue or policy that I don't want to input my effort in. I don't do AI at all, yet I am being punished for the sheer volume of similar content being submitted. I make equally good coin at each agency of SS, IS, and AD with Alamy being a very close third. All agencies give me well over 3 digits a month.
My suggestion to Adobe: Have a few different inspection queues similar at Istock does. Tick a box for submission and send the content to editors trained for each submission. For example AI, Photo, Video, and Illustration. Limit the content as per a trained inspector in each area. Don't lump good quality photos in with AI or whatever you are doing now. Its not working. Also make a tick box for the same in search. Your search now is horrible. I search for a subject and get spammed to death with AI when all I wanted was a good descriptive photo.
Adobe really needs to get their crap together!
-
My suggestion to Adobe: Have a few different inspection queues similar at Istock does. Tick a box for submission and send the content to editors trained for each submission. For example AI, Photo, Video, and Illustration.
That might be a good idea, but is never going to happen. Adobe inspections are done by AI which is "trained" at looking at binary footprint, and nothing else. We might complain, rightfully so, as much as we want - but AI is direction they decided to take, both for content creation and inspection. Even Mat Hayward was replaced by Raul.AiBot - that should explain everything.
Whether Mat was our friend, and what happened to him after he moved on is separate discussion. But things were infinitely better while he was here. Most will probably agree with this.
-
they can't trace them back to me who is in Italy
At least Inter is in UCL Final. Forza Nerazzurri!
-
Mat was very good at his job. I like people that are good at their job.
He is also a good person, not a company robot.
Adobe should have implemented upload limits as soon as the grift became visible. Thousands of people employing extended and fake family, churning out ai 24/7, even selling the surplus.
The biggest problem IMO
- they are not regular creators and don't use Adobe software.
Most of us have some kind of Adobe subscription, or registered Adobe software all our working lives.
These guys don't.
So personally, if this was my agency I would add a new rule - you need to be an adobe subscriber to become a contributor.
Maybe introduce a new 5 dollar firefly subscription as a base suggestion that also allows you to upload to the stock market.
I am usually against getting people to pay, but an up front 5 dollar payment, plus immediate ID verification could have made the grift a lot harder.
The Adobe business is renting software.
Most ai only uploaders don't use Adobe products or services.
So giving them preferrential treatment with 10k upload limits and pissing of the loyal creator community with crazy reviews is simply not a wise business decision.
-
In case anyone else, like myself, reads these forums to share/read relevant information about specifics topics and would like to get right to the point, rather than read though dozens of irrelevant posts:
So far, over the last 9 days since this topic was created, no one in this thread has reported having any restrictions or limits on their submissions. Unless Adobe adjusts the limits in the future, the current limits appear high enough that they are not going to affect most "normal" contributors. They likely target fraudulent and AI spam accounts. Limiting those kinds of accounts should actually be a benefit for most of us, when it comes to the submission queue.
-
I think that Uncle Pete went over to the dark side with his appraisal of Adobe :)
We can't save everyone. Let's take a minute and mourn for him.
Thank you for the condolences. ;D
Funny how I can write an entire message, about how Adobe has raised the requirements for the free, made it harder to get accepted and then mentioned they still earn the most FOR ME, 33% (yes I know some SS fans, love the dimes and annual reset, and others are so happy with 15%) which brings out the negative people to attack the earnings part and not the point that Adobe is making it harder to get the free subscription, especially with the review roulette.
Where does it say that for 2024 we need 7k downloads for the full creative suite?
Here: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/royalty-details.html
Whether Mat was our friend, and what happened to him after he moved on is separate discussion. But things were infinitely better while he was here. Most will probably agree with this.
Agree. I think from Mat's perspective, he was promoted. Adobe paid him to be the contributor advocate, now he's on the review team.
As for Alamy, yes, it's becoming the best for earnings, because the Microstock earnings, based on low pay and volume, has become low pay and low downloads. Alamy, one DL can equal a year of DT and IS combined. One DL can equal months of SS or Adobe. And I'm not saying just that one a year, big one, there are still $12, $24 and $48 commissions for single sales.
I'm waiting for the merger of SS and Getty, which will bring more change.
-
I read people are uploading 200-300 a day, so I am not sure what’s the point of this limit - so they won’t upload 600 a day. Does it make a difference at all…
-
I read people are uploading 200-300 a day, so I am not sure what’s the point of this limit - so they won’t upload 600 a day. Does it make a difference at all…
The difference is that the ‘image factories’ (i.e. bots and scripts) can no longer upload 10,000 images a day - the last limit was up to 10,000 images.
With the current 200, 500, 1000 submissions per week (I haven't heard of any other figures so far), there can be significantly fewer ‘image flood’ uploads of endlessly identical motifs that automatically copy and upload the top images again and again.
I myself am currently at around 1,300 accepted uploads per month (photos, videos, AI images mixed with an actual acceptance rate of 70%) - so around 320 per week and I'm probably already high in the uploads of the ‘non-bots’ :-)
-
I upload 150 - 200 / year, so not likely it will break any limit, lol
Here's something interesting for the community, related to similars policy. Yesterday I cycled to world famous Moraine Lake in Banff National Park (Road is closed to vehicles, so it's perfect for cycling - 11km each way). Lake was once on Canadian 20 dollar bill, and photographed to death. Search on Adobe stock for term "Moraine Lake" yields 28,666 (!!!) results. https://stock.adobe.com/search?k=moraine+lake&search_type=usertyped
I took few shots, for myself really. Good light, turned quite well. So last night I upload to AS; 100% certain it will end up rejected as "This content already exists on Adobe Stock". But
(https://as1.ftcdn.net/v2/jpg/15/09/83/18/1000_F_1509831882_uQD2URkfJOYG3GkwXNCiEM1sYRTf5N9v.jpg)
(https://as1.ftcdn.net/v2/jpg/15/09/79/74/1000_F_1509797431_Uk3EJZ89GN5SROuaIDkyOgZ7ldUlfU6n.jpg)
Accepted overnight. Yes, they are good shots, but definitely content that has abundant supply. Will I get any download? Not likely, but here they are
-
I read people are uploading 200-300 a day, so I am not sure what’s the point of this limit - so they won’t upload 600 a day. Does it make a difference at all…
from what I see several contributors have estimated their limit between 500 and 1000 contents per week.
imo a good generous limit would be 50 contents per day,50 per day is really a lot and it's a fair limit imo.
18,000 contents per year more or less,I think it's enough,if instead the limit is 100 per day it is clearly 36,000 in a year,which seems a bit excessive to me.
but counting the rejections maybe even 100 a day can be acceptable.
-
Cobalt: "Maybe introduce a new 5 dollar firefly subscription as a base suggestion that also allows you to upload to the stock market."
Don't agree I don't use Firefly, or any AI, don't see why I should be forced to pay to pay for technology I don't support or use.
I don't use Adobe Premier Pro for video even though I qualify for a free license.
I do use Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop because I have qualified for the free license.
Cat
-
The free license is a license, so you would not need to pay the 5 dollars under my plan.
I am against agencies charging us, but the ai situation is special. And I think Adobe should look into people that use Adobe software.
Perhaps give them an extra 100 uploads a week and openly say that this is a promotion for Adobe software users.
But the best are strict upload limits and I think they should be done selectively by media type.
Perhaps keep traditional images, illustrations, camera video with high uploads, lower limits for image ai drastically, but keep ai video with a high limit because it is still very new and also expensive to produce.
I am very glad they finally listened and added limits.
It will make inspections much faster once they have cleared the backlog.