I think it will become really difficult for actual photo amateurs to improve their photo skills by uploading to stock agencies.

The quality coming in with ai content, even from complete art amateurs, is just so much better.

Real commercial photography will become a domain of professional photographers, like real oil paintings only done by actual masters of the craft.

But I think the value of editorial photography will go up, as will photography with real models and real people, but only if it is done in a highly localized environment or subjects that need to be correct for the genre - medical, engineering etc...also gardening with real flowers and not ai mixed hybrids or real animals and underwater life that is genuine and not ai created.

If you keep this in mind, there is a huge field of content that can be worked on, especially if you add latin names to flora and fauna that should be even more valuable than now.

Yes, exactly this. The pros have actually always been there and made the most money, but amateurs could use stock agencies to improve the quality of their workj until they reached pro standards.

That will become more difficult if most of their uploads are declined.

Or maybe they move to the smaller agencies that take everything.

But I think most stock newbies will now come in via ai, not photography.

I think it will become really difficult for actual photo amateurs to improve their photo skills by uploading to stock agencies.

The quality coming in with ai content, even from complete art amateurs, is just so much better.

Real commercial photography will become a domain of professional photographers, like real oil paintings only done by actual masters of the craft.

But I think the value of editorial photography will go up, as will photography with real models and real people, but only if it is done in a highly localized environment or subjects that need to be correct for the genre - medical, engineering etc...also gardening with real flowers and not ai mixed hybrids or real animals and underwater life that is genuine and not ai created.

If you keep this in mind, there is a huge field of content that can be worked on, especially if you add latin names to flora and fauna that should be even more valuable than now.

In my opinion beginner or amateur photographers have no chance at all anymore. They are so far behind that they no longer even have the opportunity to learn what is in demand on the picture market through feedback from sales.
They should just do it for hobby or upload on Flickr, etc., otherwise they will only get frustrated.

I also think that many will switch to editorial photography and the value will rise up when the quality is high since the flooding deep fakes.
Just as authentic shots in special workshops, factories, hospitals, scientific institutions, where not everyone has access.

With AI images, I think the biggest differentiating feature will be the aesthetics and striking features of the images. Anyone can generate images. But few have experience of what really looks aesthetic, how color harmony, composition, etc. play a role.
Often simple images are also bought because they visually match other content (color of the website, subject, etc.) or they are just striking enough for click baiting in (social) online media.

Quote from: Lowls on January 16, 2024, 03:47

Just over half of submitted pictures rejected for "quality issues."

Another chunk for Shutterstock then which took all of the last lot after rejection by adobe. One of which has become my new best seller. One of which has won a prize and several of the others have sold a few times.

The quality issue is Adobe.

Don't hesitate to post here the picture (Ai? real photo?) which has won a prize and was rejected by Adobe. No doubt, you will not.
Shutterstock takes EVERYTHING

hahahahaha Adobe are no different. What a pathetic response.

And no I won't stupidly post the photo here so it can be copied and nor will I post the photos that are doing well despite adobe's rejection.

But I'm sure you'll post a photo of your best sellers here to show your confidence in the whole process.

We wait with baited breath 🙄

huh just found another adobe rejection that's a book cover. At least Shutterstock sell even if it's for peanuts it's some peanuts.

Quote from: Lowls on January 16, 2024, 07:44

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on January 16, 2024, 05:13

Quote from: Lowls on January 16, 2024, 03:47

Just over half of submitted pictures rejected for "quality issues."

Another chunk for Shutterstock then which took all of the last lot after rejection by adobe. One of which has become my new best seller. One of which has won a prize and several of the others have sold a few times.

The quality issue is Adobe.

Don't hesitate to post here the picture (Ai? real photo?) which has won a prize and was rejected by Adobe. No doubt, you will not.
Shutterstock takes EVERYTHING

hahahahaha Adobe are no different. What a pathetic response.

And no I won't stupidly post the photo here so it can be copied and nor will I post the photos that are doing well despite adobe's rejection.

But I'm sure you'll post a photo of your best sellers here to show your confidence in the whole process.

We wait with baited breath 🙄

huh just found another adobe rejection that's a book cover. At least Shutterstock sell even if it's for peanuts it's some peanuts.

Pathetic ? you should calm down your ardor a little. I wanted to suggest that you prove that Adobe's rejection was not legitimate.

If that were true you would have written "Can you post the image to show the rejection is not legitimate" like you manged above. Instead you wrote:

"Don't hesitate to post here the picture (Ai? real photo?) which has won a prize and was rejected by Adobe. No doubt, you will not.

If you think someone's a liar and imply as much - own it, don't try and crawl out of it just own it.

Quote from: Lowls on January 16, 2024, 18:24

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on January 16, 2024, 16:57

Quote from: Lowls on January 16, 2024, 07:44

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on January 16, 2024, 05:13

Quote from: Lowls on January 16, 2024, 03:47

Just over half of submitted pictures rejected for "quality issues."

Another chunk for Shutterstock then which took all of the last lot after rejection by adobe. One of which has become my new best seller. One of which has won a prize and several of the others have sold a few times.

The quality issue is Adobe.

Don't hesitate to post here the picture (Ai? real photo?) which has won a prize and was rejected by Adobe. No doubt, you will not.
Shutterstock takes EVERYTHING

hahahahaha Adobe are no different. What a pathetic response.

And no I won't stupidly post the photo here so it can be copied and nor will I post the photos that are doing well despite adobe's rejection.

But I'm sure you'll post a photo of your best sellers here to show your confidence in the whole process.

We wait with baited breath 🙄

huh just found another adobe rejection that's a book cover. At least Shutterstock sell even if it's for peanuts it's some peanuts.

Pathetic ? you should calm down your ardor a little. I wanted to suggest that you prove that Adobe's rejection was not legitimate.

If that were true you would have written "Can you post the image to show the rejection is not legitimate" like you manged above. Instead you wrote:

"Don't hesitate to post here the picture (Ai? real photo?) which has won a prize and was rejected by Adobe. No doubt, you will not.

If you think someone's a liar and imply as much - own it, don't try and crawl out of it just own it.

"One of which has become my new best seller. One of which has won a prize and several of the others have sold a few times."

 If that were true you wouldn't bother to come to this forum / topic just to say that.

And yet it is and I have. And the logic behind it is that I submit to Adobe first. If they reject it I upload to SS. Not because SS take anything because they don't. But because they may get taken by SS. Invariably they are because I tend to take photos that aren't represented very well.

And I upload to Adobe first because they didn't slash our payments to over half and their owner didn't post how sick he was of these people moaning and that they should get to work.

I posted that here because it shows others that they arent the only ones it's happening to. Instead I'm a liar apparently. I am not.

Quote from: Lowls on January 17, 2024, 02:39

...I tend to take photos that aren't represented very well.

Good photos are already well represented, and that's what I try to do. 
For my part, in 18 years, I have never complained about rejections, especially at Adobe. I just silently reacted by trying to progress and perfect my skills.
100% acceptance for my last batch at Adobe, I must clarify that I do not use and will never use AI to replace my photographic work. I know and I'm waiting for Adobe to clean up its contributors, that will come. It�s inevitable, simple law of supply and demand. And the complaints will rain...

You misunderstand - certain subjects aren't represented very well. Good photos obviously are. But if you are perfecting your craft to get better then it can only benefit you. If you are perfecting your craft to provide better quality to Adobe you are literally wasting your time. Rarely are these images appearing on gallery walls and selling for hundreds. And with the inclusion of A.I. imagery your appeal will be diluted among them.

Fast and dirty is the way it's going with a stack it high and sell it cheap business plan. And you know that because that's happening at all of the agencies. So quality isn't gonna get you sales like it did. Subject matter will.

I agree with you A.I. isn't photography its paint by numbers using someone else's hands and paints and fooling yourself that you've created a masterpiece. I won't be using it because I enjoy what I do. I've been doing it a long time and it's my one love. But I won't continue to submit regularly to a system that is flawed when previously, when I lacked the skill and equipment I do now, I managed better approval rates and still do with other agencies. I'm not great but I'm ok at the basics.

100% acceptance for my last batch at Adobe, I must clarify that I do not use and will never use AI to replace my photographic work. I know and I'm waiting for Adobe to clean up its contributors, that will come. It�s inevitable, simple law of supply and demand. And the complaints will rain...

Exactly the same, I don't do AI, not because I can't, just a matter of principles, I upload only normal images and videos and my acceptance rate is always like over 98% for both video and images.

Quote from: Lowls on January 17, 2024, 06:12

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on January 17, 2024, 05:52

Quote from: Lowls on January 17, 2024, 02:39

...I tend to take photos that aren't represented very well.

Good photos are already well represented, and that's what I try to do. 
For my part, in 18 years, I have never complained about rejections, especially at Adobe. I just silently reacted by trying to progress and perfect my skills.
100% acceptance for my last batch at Adobe, I must clarify that I do not use and will never use AI to replace my photographic work. I know and I'm waiting for Adobe to clean up its contributors, that will come. It�s inevitable, simple law of supply and demand. And the complaints will rain...

You misunderstand - certain subjects aren't represented very well. Good photos obviously are. But if you are perfecting your craft to get better then it can only benefit you. If you are perfecting your craft to provide better quality to Adobe you are literally wasting your time. Rarely are these images appearing on gallery walls and selling for hundreds. And with the inclusion of A.I. imagery your appeal will be diluted among them.

Fast and dirty is the way it's going with a stack it high and sell it cheap business plan. And you know that because that's happening at all of the agencies. So quality isn't gonna get you sales like it did. Subject matter will.

I agree with you A.I. isn't photography its paint by numbers using someone else's hands and paints and fooling yourself that you've created a masterpiece. I won't be using it because I enjoy what I do. I've been doing it a long time and it's my one love. But I won't continue to submit regularly to a system that is flawed when previously, when I lacked the skill and equipment I do now, I managed better approval rates and still do with other agencies. I'm not great but I'm ok at the basics.

I understood you perfectly, but you misunderstand me. The second degree brings subtlety to the exchanges, but you still need to be able to access it.
Sorry, but YOU were the one who was literally wasting your time by submitting a photo that won an award, since it was not accepted... 

Clearly you didn't but whatever I can't comment on your personal experiences though you seem determined to correct mine. It's funny because I don't remember you being in the script so much when I wrote my experience. Crazy eh.
The sentence "The second degree brings subtlety to the exchanges, but you still need to be able to access it" doesn't actually make sense in or out of any context and certainly doesn't pertain to anything I said  but ok 👍
Prize. It has won a prize not an award but thanks for the promotion lol. And I'll leave you to have the last word because we both know you'll be having the last word. Can't help yourself can ya, ya little tinker you.

Quote from: Shuttershock on January 17, 2024, 08:54

I am getting emails daily now from Adobe with submission reviews, so mine have certainly sped right up! Also, the few months of a blip getting 90% rejections appear to have gone and back to normal 95% acceptance.......

Yes, same for me too the recent days. Also strange actually. But, hey, no reason to complain .

For the files you are getting reviewed, how long ago did you submit them?

Quote from: Shuttershock on January 17, 2024, 08:54

I am getting emails daily now from Adobe with submission reviews, so mine have certainly sped right up! Also, the few months of a blip getting 90% rejections appear to have gone and back to normal 95% acceptance.......

It is obvious that Adobe hired more moderators.

Not me......still waitin' and waitin'. Editorial stuff gets reviewed quickly, but that's always been the case.

Same. I had photos reviewed in 1-3 days, now it is taking longer again.

But illustration review is still quick

eta

I take it all back.

I just had 27 files reviewed and all accepted. Illustrations were within 24h, photo ai 4 days.

Looks like my new postprocessing workflow fits the new Adobe stricter standards.