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?

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.

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%.

As long as they still take images of cats, sunsets and plates with spaghetti I wouldn�t 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.

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.

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!!

I'm seeing about three week inspection times.

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? 

Quote from: cobalt on January 13, 2024, 06:51

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

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?

My review rates slowed down in last 2 weeks, no more daily acceptance of most of my files. Now it�s 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 don�t 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 it�s 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 don�t last.

Quote from: cobalt on February 05, 2024, 22:13

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.

Plus�back 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?

Quote from: blvdone on February 05, 2024, 23:44

Quote from: cobalt on February 05, 2024, 22:13

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.

Plus�back 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.

Quote from: Carmifornia on November 07, 2023, 17:26

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 seller�s 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

That is your total rank. You can switch to a weekly rank, which gives you a better indication of how you are doing compared to everyone else.

You see it when you are logged in via tablet or computer. At least for me on my phone it is cut off.

I am having a very slow week as well. My current weekly rank is a frustrating 4310, so you are doing much better than me. Last week I was around 3200, which I still consider bad.

Monday was a public holiday in the US, perhaps people are taking a break? Although it is mostly Europe that is buying less.

I have many spring/easter images in good search positions, but the sales are really slow. Positions for easter are actually much better than christmas.

I hope customers get back into working seriously soon.

Mine is also frustratingly low, at 3,720 currently (way lower than my ATH of 977). Weekly ranking does not take revenue into account, but the number of sold assets in the respective time frame. I don't think it accounts for the number of assets in your portfolio, just the number of sales.

Cobalt, really appreciate your reply.
The rating must be according to the amount of images divided by amount of sales one has?
Or it�s strictly based on amount of sales?

I have no idea. This is like asking how does the algorithm work to put my content on page one.

Every agency has their own secret sauce how to handle the review queue and I am sure it is adjusted all the time.

But all agencies want content that actually sells. So producers that upload stuff that sells should see their files moved up faster. It is business basics.

I am sure there is also a lifetime factor or something, probably also seasonal things, maybe now they prefer spring files to christmas etc�and certainly they have �hot content� customers really want and probably place that on top of the queue. Or maybe individual editors that can look into what is coming in and move something up for a high value customer who needs it�

And if they bring in more people and increase their team, everything will move faster.

But what you can do is try to make sure you upload what sells.

Obviously newbies need 1000 fresh files of varied content to see what works for them, but uploading 50 images of your dog looking left and right and up and down is not the way to go.

Quality and good editing help a lot.

Some of the most successful stock ports sometimes have very, very few files, sometimes less than 2000 or 4000 but they keep outselling everyone else.

If you look into those ports, literally every single image is a perfect bestseller.

My own strategy is not like that. I admire that very much, but I still upload a lot of midtail shots.

Quote from: Mifornia on February 23, 2024, 09:34

So there is roughly only 4000 accounts that have more weekly downloads than us?

That does not take into account what people are buying, if you are the only one with the images that the buyer has wanted then that makes you #1 ... its comparing apples to oranges. If that was 4000 buyers for those 4000 images then that makes everyone #1

🤣🤣🤣 omg, yet another confusing algorithm!
 Nothing like no growth prospect to kill a motivation! Thank you for taking time to clarify.

@cobalt
I wish I had your wisdom and a level head, but hope it�s not too late 🤣 Seems that Adobe doesn�t give information easy, I like puzzles, hope to figure this one out as well.
From my limited experience, I can share that a couple of my images are on the first page of search with 5 million results. They sit there and sell poorly. My bestseller is on page 7 and outsells them 6 times over per month. It doesn�t move up to better pages. How it is possible, I don�t understand. It sells always for 0.37 so may be it�s from the link outside and Adobe doesn�t count it? (but they fade to nothing in about 6 months, that�s disappointing for �passive income� ) I also have a couple images in Featured searches and they also sell poorly compared to bestsellers.
I can�t pin point what exactly will sell: I create 5 different images on a subject that I know will sell, but which image will take off - I can�t predict. Many times my perfect favorite images didn�t sell at all and I spent days painting them. I have only one AI image that became a bestseller (heavily edited) I�m yet to repeat that again, but I�m trying! Ah, and I make more $ now than when my account was featured on top sellers list.
It�s all quite confusing. I would sure would love to see ports that keep on selling the same images for years and years. It�s nice to know that they exist

Could it be that perhaps the search terms you use when you see your images on page 'X' are not the search terms being used by buyers? Perhaps the majority of buyers are using different search terms when they find your images to buy?

So there is roughly only 4000 accounts that have more weekly downloads than us?

Where is @WILM he understands this and was tracking the rank, long ago.

In 2020 an analysis showed that over 60% of all active portfolios had ten or fewer images. Based on that, I'm already well above the 50% mark. 

Predicted Lifetime Downloads / Position

Old data 2019
8,000/4,700
5,000/8,500
1,400/28,000
1,200/32,000
450    /67,000
200    /120,000

From others ranks 2022
40,000/2,230
11,660/7,440
8,030/10,000
2,000/25,000

4,000 accounts with more downloads could be they have thousands more or one more. Next week, your position will change again. And I'm not sure that the positions are by numbers. In fact, I'm fairly certain they are by a range. If someone is position 4,000 that means they could be position 4,000 to 5,000 as a group. It's not precise. Look next week, did you jump down to 6,000 with almost the same number of downloads? Or did you move up to 3,500 with a similar number as the previous week?

Finding your own images, I'd say, start with trying to determine from other sites, what words were used by a buyer, that purchased a license. Then test those on Adobe. I think SS, DT and Alamy will help you with that. Then search for your own, using at least three words. No buyer with any hope or sense would use one or two words only, and I suspect most use a minimum of three words.

If any site has a reasonable search, it's going to include "diversity", so if you have 50 uploads of some subject, the buyer won't see 50 of yours in a row, when they match the keywords. Whether random or based on sales or location, the best searches will show one of yours, then many others, before one of yours will show again. No buyer wants a page of the same variations of the same subject from the same artist.

That's why I personally say, upload the best 4 or 5 and move on. If those start to work, add 4 or 5 more, later. True, we don't know which one is "best" and what buyers will download, but we can generally see for our self, which images are best. For my own, I often upload one and maybe two, of any concept or idea. That's it. Sending 20 or 40 of the same shot does nothing, and just in case, the buyer might see 20 of the same and tend to think "that's common" or ordinary, instead of, that's a nice unusual shot?

Shotgun and hope a little pellet will fly in the right direction, and hit something, or sharpshooter with a accurate single bullet, and target the bullseye? 

In fact, Adobe has managed to speed up the review to a maximum of 20 days.
The rejection rate is directly related to the acceptance rate (actually a no brainer).

I am sure that Adobe has an AI automated process as a first step. Every bigger artifact will lead to a rejection.
The second step will include human, manual reviewers. Here every reviewer will absolutely certain look at the acceptance rate first. If this is high, he will be much less strict in order to save time.

My acceptance rate is currently over 99%. The last 800 images have all been accepted since I switched to motives, which create less artifacts.

My acceptance rate, affects my acceptance rate? Sounds like a death spiral. I don't know where to see my acceptance rate. I'm not sure I want to? 

Maybe this is useful also?  https://stock.adobe.com/pages/artisthub/pdf/generative-ai-guide.pdf

10 tips for getting your generative AI images approved for sale on Adobe Stock.

Yes, I'd be surprised if any agency now, didn't have a submission review for standards, the intake of files, before a person sees them. Size, file type, and could easily be some checks on obvious quality issues. Now, it could be more sophisticated like focus. But still Adobe or SS, the software used in the review process, is to assist the person doing the review.

My acceptance rate, affects my acceptance rate? Sounds like a death spiral.

Yep it's a death spiral. I am quite sure if you have a high rejection rate, you will get many rejection rates because the reviewer will be likely much stricter. Now when I managed to get less rejections most files are accepted even if I would spot myself some AI generation errors.
What I did is to shift to more simple images and other Stable Diffusion models, which create less image noise and artefacts.
You should first try to decrease your rejection rate by submitting much less complex images and then start to submit your favored images. Chances will be more that they then will be accepted.

What Adobe Stock does not examine are AI generation errors like false hands, nostrils, ears, etc. They just seem to focus on technical errors like image noise, etc.

Anyone else's review times are screwed up now? Today, in my to-be-reviewed tab, my oldest illustration now say "submitted over a year ago" and my oldest photo "submitted over 2 months ago".

I don't know if it's related,
but, I'm getting quick reviews now that I'm submitting batches of 10 images (1-2 days for the last 10 batches)

There are few images that are stuck in review, but they are maybe problematic and the reviewer didn't know how to handle them (somewhat news or current world events related AI images) not rejected but are stuck in review for a month or so...

Ah, got it now. In my case they show correctly. If it's a glitch, maybe it will go away soon.

Anyone else's review times are screwed up now? Today, in my to-be-reviewed tab, my oldest illustration now say "submitted over a year ago" and my oldest photo "submitted over 2 months ago".

Same here. Many of my images, which are stuck in the review are now shown submitted over a month or two and some even over a year ago.
I hope it's not due to the AI image flood, although it would be obvious that they get review problems every now and then.