MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Review of AI generated photos are fast now, but many rejection  (Read 3933 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: January 13, 2024, 05:47 »
0
Rejections are mostly due to "QUALITY ISSUES", but I don't see any quality difference between the rejected photos and accepted photos of the same themes.  So, I'm just confused.  Maybe it's just that they already have many photos of the same theme?


« Reply #1 on: January 13, 2024, 06:16 »
+3
I have noticed the same effect and suspect that the guidelines for AI images or assets in general have become much stricter.

I took a look at my acceptance/rejection statistics for the last 8-10 weeks:

05.Nov 2023 to 12.Nov 2023 - accepted 287, rejected 13 - rejection rate: 4.3%
12.Nov 2023 to 19.Nov 2023 - accepted 223, rejected 57 - rejection rate: 19.6%
19.Nov 2023 to 26.Nov 2023 - accepted 180, rejected 32 - rejection rate: 15.1%
26.Nov 2023 to 03.Dez 2023 - accepted 245, rejected 12 - rejection rate: 4.7%
03.Dez 2023 to 10.Dez 2023 - accepted 150, rejected 28 - rejection rate: 15.7%
10.Dez 2023 to 17.Dez 2023 - accepted 175, rejected 21 - rejection rate: 10.7%
17.Dez 2023 to 24.Dez 2023 - accepted 166, rejected 126 - rejection rate: 43.2%
24.Dez 2023 to 31.Dez 2023 - accepted 217, rejected 95 - rejection rate: 29.5%
31.Dez 2023 to 07.Jan 2023 - accepted 252, rejected 249 - rejection rate: 49.7%
07.Jan 2023 to 13.Jan 2023 - accepted 245, rejected 239 - rejection rate: 49.3%

With the week starting Dec. 18, 2024, significantly higher rejections began and nothing has changed in my content since then.
Some of the images I am currently submitting were uploaded 4-8 weeks ago - so nothing has changed in terms of quality on my side.

A second effect since Dec 18, 2024 is a significantly higher review volume per week, which unfortunately is only reflected on the rejection side.

I have nothing against stricter acceptance, but unfortunately I cannot understand the reasons for the rejections with the general sentence for "quality problems" as a contributor and therefore cannot improve :-)

Greetings, Michael


Edit: It seems there is a second thread discussion this https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/do-adobestock-have-more-stringent-moderators-or-rules-on-ai-submitted-content/
« Last Edit: January 13, 2024, 06:20 by JustAnImage »

« Reply #2 on: January 13, 2024, 06:51 »
+2
You may need to look at your files in 200% to detect the artifacts or banding they are looking for.

Currently I am now reprocessing files with the stable diffusion upscaler instead of gigapixel and uploading smaller sizes, 2000*3500 etc...and the reprocessed files in smaller size are being accepted.

I really appreciate the much faster reviews. Makes a huge difference, bec<yue I can just process a few test files from a series, see if they get accepted, if not, reprocess and try again until I have a processing that works for the reviewers.

Fast reviews lead to a much happier community vibe because at least now you at least have a chance to get content on line in time and respond to fresh trends.




« Reply #3 on: January 13, 2024, 07:39 »
+1
Yes, I can confirm it too.
A rejection orgy has struck me again despite retouche and downscaling.

Similar images that were already accepted last weeks are now being rejected with different concept ideas.
Really annoying since it's very time consuming to research keywords, which have not very much content yet.

Some small preview of content, which I try to submit:
https://ibb.co/GvkTpmJ
https://ibb.co/DkHHjmH
https://ibb.co/YZSDNvR

I mean, yeah sure it is not perfect but I am not gonna risk a really time consuming photo setup for such content stuff to get 5$ in the long run. Altough I would have done it 10 years ago.

I will probably give up the image market completely and better learn skills for the video segment.

« Reply #4 on: January 13, 2024, 08:08 »
0
You can try posting some examples in the adobe discord. I have found the community explanations very helpful.

For my files the biggest problem seems to be artifacts and banding visible at 100-200%.


« Reply #5 on: January 13, 2024, 09:00 »
0
It's not only the images of people that are getting rejected.  I just had an entire batch of 50 or so interior photos rejected.  I wondered if they just don't want those kind of images anymore. 

« Reply #6 on: January 13, 2024, 10:48 »
0
As long as they still take images of cats, sunsets and plates with spaghetti I wouldnt worry that the genre is the problem.

My impression from reading various groups it is mostly about image quality close up.

They probably had a lot of customer complaints.

« Reply #7 on: January 13, 2024, 10:55 »
+2
Too bad that Adobe doesn't differentiate between the reasons for rejection.

Another trigger for strictness could also be that the reviewers are now only looking for the quality of Midjourney V6, which was released at the end of December and seems to have a considerable jump in quality:
https://mid-journey.ai/midjourney-v6-release/

Which AI engine do you use?
I'm too stingy for 48 to 60 bucks Midjourney's pro plan with stealth mode. I currently use a cheap provider with stable diffusion engine and various models/loras, who offers a private mode for 15 bucks / month without generative limitations.

« Reply #8 on: January 13, 2024, 11:09 »
+1
Too bad that Adobe doesn't differentiate between the reasons for rejection.

Another trigger for strictness could also be that the reviewers are now only looking for the quality of Midjourney V6, which was released at the end of December and seems to have a considerable jump in quality:
https://mid-journey.ai/midjourney-v6-release/

Which AI engine do you use?
I'm too stingy for 48 to 60 bucks Midjourney's pro plan with stealth mode. I currently use a cheap provider with stable diffusion engine and various models/loras, who offers a private mode for 15 bucks / month without generative limitations.

Actually, I tried the V6 and didn't like images I got compared to V5.2.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2024, 11:26 by blvdone »

« Reply #9 on: January 13, 2024, 11:27 »
+2
Interesting, I was wondering when they'd have a 'new' version out (it's still based on theft though, anyways, different topic).

(a) Adobe was still doing massive rejections before that. I don't believe it has anything (really) to do with quality, because it seems depending who is reviewing it, sometimes stuff will get approved, and other times it won't.
(b) Took a look at the quality of v6 (just a few simple tests) - some of the "photographic" shots do look more 'natural', but with other shots (i.e., not a standard type of pose "i.e., person standing smiling"), you still get some wierd artifacts, etc... It also seems to (inaccurately) "ban" certain types of prompts, i.e., if you said "beautiful woman wearing short outfit in summer" it would go crazy, because it didn't like the word "short" and figured it must be p0rn or something...

Right now I suppose because "everyone" seems to be trying to "get rich quick" via selling "ai" images, it doesn't seem to really be all that beneficial now (i.e., LOTS of work for teensy tiny payout)... now I suppose with my workflow I still do edit images/make sure they 'look good' - and probably a lot of people don't care (just upload what is input, cut/paste blocks of keywords/etc)...

I do it partially beacause I think it is fun/interesting - of course I'd like to make $$ from it, but if one is looking at getting "rich" from it (at least this way) I think a lot of work is involved... Of course, one can get 'lucky' and get one of the images to sell a lot (and maybe make a few hundred $$ from a single image)...

The "get rich" method is by selling the TOOLS (i.e., midjourney), which the tool itself is based off of massive theft. Midjourney SHOULD pay out contributors in the same RECURRING fashion to the contributors they stole the work from. That may be coming later. They I believe are making several hundred MILLION in regular recurring income right now...



Too bad that Adobe doesn't differentiate between the reasons for rejection.

Another trigger for strictness could also be that the reviewers are now only looking for the quality of Midjourney V6, which was released at the end of December and seems to have a considerable jump in quality:
https://mid-journey.ai/midjourney-v6-release/

Which AI engine do you use?
I'm too stingy for 48 to 60 bucks Midjourney's pro plan with stealth mode. I currently use a cheap provider with stable diffusion engine and various models/loras, who offers a private mode for 15 bucks / month without generative limitations.

« Reply #10 on: February 05, 2024, 20:17 »
+1
Now it says "moderation may take up to 8 weeks".  *.
8 weeks to find out mass rejection.  And then re-submit to wait for another 8 weeks.  That's nearly 4 months!!

« Reply #11 on: February 05, 2024, 22:13 »
+1
If you follow fb groups and discord, the 8 weeks seems to mostly affect newbie accounts.

Slowing them down to actually think before they upload is probably a good thing.

Slows down the spammers as well.

Illustration and photos are currently being inspected in my case in about a week, only pngs need 30 days.

That is a very fair review time.

Plusback to over 90% acceptance rate, which is even more important.

Main change - upsize with stability or midjourney directly, less gigapixel use and upload much smaller versions, often 3500*2000


wds

« Reply #12 on: February 05, 2024, 22:45 »
+1
I'm seeing about three week inspection times.

« Reply #13 on: February 05, 2024, 23:44 »
+1
If you follow fb groups and discord, the 8 weeks seems to mostly affect newbie accounts.

Slowing them down to actually think before they upload is probably a good thing.

Slows down the spammers as well.

Illustration and photos are currently being inspected in my case in about a week, only pngs need 30 days.

That is a very fair review time.

Plusback to over 90% acceptance rate, which is even more important.

Main change - upsize with stability or midjourney directly, less gigapixel use and upload much smaller versions, often 3500*2000

I have a bunch of AI photos in review que for 3 weeks now.  Maybe mass rejection affected my rating?

« Reply #14 on: February 06, 2024, 00:10 »
+1
You may need to look at your files in 200% to detect the artifacts or banding they are looking for.

Currently I am now reprocessing files with the stable diffusion upscaler instead of gigapixel and uploading smaller sizes, 2000*3500 etc...and the reprocessed files in smaller size are being accepted.

I really appreciate the much faster reviews. Makes a huge difference, bec<yue I can just process a few test files from a series, see if they get accepted, if not, reprocess and try again until I have a processing that works for the reviewers.

Fast reviews lead to a much happier community vibe because at least now you at least have a chance to get content on line in time and respond to fresh trends.


Cobalt,  Other than downsizing what process do you use: detail, structure, denoise? 

« Reply #15 on: February 06, 2024, 02:14 »
+5
After crazy rejections in December (and fast review), acceptance and rejections went down to a more normal rate for me again ("normal" meaning, one image in a few batches, though rejection reasons were still silly, like "usage of artist name" as rejection reason for a cupcake?) - Until yesterday, when I had 3 whole batches in a row all rejected for being "too similar". Every single photo.
I never had a single rejection for "too similar" on Adobe in all of my years with them before, so I would like to think I know how to avoid similar content.
But suddenly it was really like "Oh, you already have one photo of a dog in your port? Now you cannot have another photo of any dog in your port ever again!".
« Last Edit: February 06, 2024, 04:02 by Her Ugliness »

« Reply #16 on: February 06, 2024, 03:23 »
0
You may need to look at your files in 200% to detect the artifacts or banding they are looking for.

Currently I am now reprocessing files with the stable diffusion upscaler instead of gigapixel and uploading smaller sizes, 2000*3500 etc...and the reprocessed files in smaller size are being accepted.

I really appreciate the much faster reviews. Makes a huge difference, bec<yue I can just process a few test files from a series, see if they get accepted, if not, reprocess and try again until I have a processing that works for the reviewers.

Fast reviews lead to a much happier community vibe because at least now you at least have a chance to get content on line in time and respond to fresh trends.


Cobalt,  Other than downsizing what process do you use: detail, structure, denoise?

no other denoise procedure.but I am very careful with processing, no wild changes in color, contrast light, obviously no sharpening etc I usually just edit mistakes, cloning, repair brush etc

Ii still only use a small fraction of what I prompt, I try to find a file that is as perfect as possible

« Reply #17 on: February 06, 2024, 03:29 »
0
If you follow fb groups and discord, the 8 weeks seems to mostly affect newbie accounts.

Slowing them down to actually think before they upload is probably a good thing.

Slows down the spammers as well.

Illustration and photos are currently being inspected in my case in about a week, only pngs need 30 days.

That is a very fair review time.

Plusback to over 90% acceptance rate, which is even more important.

Main change - upsize with stability or midjourney directly, less gigapixel use and upload much smaller versions, often 3500*2000

I have a bunch of AI photos in review que for 3 weeks now.  Maybe mass rejection affected my rating?

might be a factor. perhaps also overall sales development. My sales rose quite drastically in 2023 after not uploading for 10 years.

that factor will probably get weaker this year. I hope to grow my overall sales on Adobe by 30-50% not 600%

but we dont know, my review times could change anytime. pngs need 30 days-

« Reply #18 on: February 06, 2024, 10:41 »
0
You may need to look at your files in 200% to detect the artifacts or banding they are looking for.

Currently I am now reprocessing files with the stable diffusion upscaler instead of gigapixel and uploading smaller sizes, 2000*3500 etc...and the reprocessed files in smaller size are being accepted.

I really appreciate the much faster reviews. Makes a huge difference, bec<yue I can just process a few test files from a series, see if they get accepted, if not, reprocess and try again until I have a processing that works for the reviewers.

Fast reviews lead to a much happier community vibe because at least now you at least have a chance to get content on line in time and respond to fresh trends.

Which "stable diffusion upscaler" online service are you using?

« Reply #19 on: February 06, 2024, 14:28 »
0
"Which "stable diffusion upscaler" online service are you using?"

wirestock and nightcafe

and sometimes still gigapixel

but the most important is to choose a good file to start with

eta

now 10 days for photo ai, review times getting longer again
« Last Edit: February 06, 2024, 23:36 by cobalt »

« Reply #20 on: February 07, 2024, 03:54 »
+2
My review rates slowed down in last 2 weeks, no more daily acceptance of most of my files. Now its weekly and they take only 2-5 files out of my 50 files queue. Acceptance is almost 100%

May be they hired more people for Holiday rush?

I also dont care for Gigapixel that adds lines around everything. MJ v6 has small upscale, so I still use v5 then downscale it and sharpen it in Photoshop or Lightroom. Adobe does like very sharp images, even when its not needed: I made an experiment and sharpened files to my liking and similar others I sharpen too much - AS took too sharpened files and rejected regular sharpening ones.

I probably spend way too much time on processing my images, but sold some for several hundred each at times only to be copycated later and then loose that income. So bestsellers dont last.

« Reply #21 on: February 07, 2024, 07:11 »
0
"Which "stable diffusion upscaler" online service are you using?"

wirestock and nightcafe

and sometimes still gigapixel

but the most important is to choose a good file to start with

eta

now 10 days for photo ai, review times getting longer again

Thanks for update.

« Reply #22 on: February 07, 2024, 09:35 »
0
If you follow fb groups and discord, the 8 weeks seems to mostly affect newbie accounts.

Slowing them down to actually think before they upload is probably a good thing.

Slows down the spammers as well.

Illustration and photos are currently being inspected in my case in about a week, only pngs need 30 days.

That is a very fair review time.

Plusback to over 90% acceptance rate, which is even more important.

Main change - upsize with stability or midjourney directly, less gigapixel use and upload much smaller versions, often 3500*2000

I have a bunch of AI photos in review que for 3 weeks now.  Maybe mass rejection affected my rating?

We have a rating? Where do I find that?

« Reply #23 on: February 07, 2024, 11:21 »
0
The rating is an idea. All agencies have factors that affect review times and showing ports and files in searches.

It is a secret sauce and differs from agency to agency.

However, simple logic would say that content that is in high demand by customers (perhaps by keywords?) from a proven seller with a good sales to port size with a very high acceptance rate (not wasting the time of the reviewers!) will probably be preferred.

Other factors might be overall age and success of port, weekly or total ranking etc...

If your decline rate is very high, you can "benefit" from longer review times to think about what it is you are actually doing...

The review times can probably be fine tuned in great detail. Adobe is a gigantic software specialist.

I actually think if we had a visible acceptance rate, for instance as a percentage over the last 500 files submitted, it could be helpful.

Adobe could even add cute little symbols to encourage us to go for the high acceptance rate and openly communicate that it can help review times.

If I have a new series I always send in a test batch first to check if there are issues. If it all goes through I start processing the rest and add them to the flow slowly every week.






« Reply #24 on: February 08, 2024, 07:52 »
0
If you follow fb groups and discord, the 8 weeks seems to mostly affect newbie accounts.

Slowing them down to actually think before they upload is probably a good thing.

Slows down the spammers as well.

Illustration and photos are currently being inspected in my case in about a week, only pngs need 30 days.

That is a very fair review time.

Plusback to over 90% acceptance rate, which is even more important.

Main change - upsize with stability or midjourney directly, less gigapixel use and upload much smaller versions, often 3500*2000

I have a bunch of AI photos in review que for 3 weeks now.  Maybe mass rejection affected my rating?

We have a rating? Where do I find that?

There is no rating to see. Our ranting is imaginary until some one shows it's real. Buyers and reviewers don't see our rank.

I guess I had 3 coincidences 😂 Mat, what are the benefits of top sellers list (other than getting a free PS subscription)?  Can customers see that seller was on that list? What about people who accept our submitted images, do they see that sellers images  are what customers seek?

The main benefit is an increased level of bragging rights. If you make it to that list, it's validation you are doing something right. It means your newer uploads are meeting the needs of customers and are selling well. The moderation team does not see this information, nor do customers.

Thanks,

Mat Hayward



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
2932 Views
Last post December 21, 2006, 07:38
by melking
4 Replies
3656 Views
Last post May 27, 2012, 14:28
by sam100
2 Replies
2342 Views
Last post May 02, 2014, 04:08
by ruigsantos
31 Replies
6063 Views
Last post October 23, 2023, 20:03
by PigsInSpace
4 Replies
559 Views
Last post February 26, 2024, 13:47
by cascoly

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors