Author Topic: New submission limits for Adobe Stock Contributors (Read 5404 times)

Atomazul · « **Reply #50 on:** May 24, 2025, 07:35 »

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.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #51 on:** May 24, 2025, 07:59 »

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.

angelacat · « **Reply #52 on:** May 24, 2025, 09:30 »

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.

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #53 on:** May 24, 2025, 10:18 »

Quote from: Injustice for all on May 24, 2025, 05:29

...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.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #54 on:** May 24, 2025, 11:28 »

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on May 24, 2025, 10:18

Quote from: Injustice for all on May 24, 2025, 05:29
...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!

zeljkok · « **Reply #55 on:** May 24, 2025, 11:48 »

Quote from: Injustice for all on May 24, 2025, 05:29

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

Dami · « **Reply #56 on:** May 24, 2025, 16:49 »

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.

f8 · « **Reply #57 on:** May 24, 2025, 18:23 »

Quote from: zeljkok on May 24, 2025, 11:48

Quote from: Injustice for all on May 24, 2025, 05:29

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.

WendyT · « **Reply #58 on:** May 24, 2025, 20:10 »

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.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #59 on:** May 24, 2025, 21:15 »

message deleted at request of zeljkok!

zeljkok · « **Reply #60 on:** May 25, 2025, 00:13 »

Quote from: Injustice for all on May 24, 2025, 21:15

... 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)

Injustice for all · « **Reply #61 on:** May 25, 2025, 05:11 »

Quote from: zeljkok on May 25, 2025, 00:13

Quote from: Injustice for all on May 24, 2025, 21:15
... 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!

mike123 · « **Reply #62 on:** May 25, 2025, 09:27 »

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

zeljkok · « **Reply #63 on:** May 25, 2025, 14:51 »

Quote from: mike123 on May 25, 2025, 09:27

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

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"

cobalt · « **Reply #64 on:** May 25, 2025, 17:13 »

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?

Injustice for all · « **Reply #65 on:** May 25, 2025, 18:00 »

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.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #66 on:** May 26, 2025, 01:38 »

with my last message I froze everyone!

@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.

angelacat · « **Reply #67 on:** May 26, 2025, 05:37 »

"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.

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #68 on:** May 26, 2025, 06:32 »

Quote from: angelacat on May 26, 2025, 05:37

"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.

angelacat · « **Reply #69 on:** May 26, 2025, 07:02 »

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.

angelacat · « **Reply #70 on:** May 26, 2025, 10:25 »

Petapixel article on Adobe recent upload limits.

https://petapixel.com/2025/05/22/almost-half-of-the-images-on-adobe-stock-are-ai-generated/

Injustice for all · « **Reply #71 on:** May 26, 2025, 10:59 »

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! 😄

zeljkok · « **Reply #72 on:** May 26, 2025, 13:38 »

Quote from: angelacat on May 26, 2025, 10:25

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

Quote

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 !!

SimonSays · « **Reply #73 on:** May 26, 2025, 14:04 »

Quote from: Injustice for all on May 26, 2025, 10:59

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?

f8 · « **Reply #74 on:** May 26, 2025, 15:01 »

Quote from: SimonSays on May 26, 2025, 14:04

Quote from: Injustice for all on May 26, 2025, 10:59
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.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: New submission limits for Adobe Stock Contributors (Read 5404 times)

Atomazul

Injustice for all

angelacat

DiscreetDuck

Injustice for all

zeljkok

Dami

f8

WendyT

Injustice for all

zeljkok

Injustice for all

mike123

zeljkok

cobalt

Injustice for all

Injustice for all

angelacat

DiscreetDuck

angelacat

angelacat

Injustice for all

zeljkok

SimonSays

f8

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors