I've had some in the queue for a long time (png), but I submitted a couple of editorials that got reviewed overnight.

I've noticed a few ports where the content seems like it's AI generated but hasn't been labeled as such. Could be wrong but the link below seems to have a lot of png files that are of the size and style of AI content.

https://stock.adobe.com/uk/contributor/209649716/Sandaru?asset_id=543344544

Could this type of action leave Adobe exposed, as in, the client wants to avoid AI but accidentally picks up content that is because it hasn't been tabled correctly. If they're receiving a lot of stuff like this from AI generators it would go someway to explain the long wait times for work to be approved.

Quote from: HalfFull on April 25, 2023, 06:50

I've noticed a few ports where the content seems like it's AI generated but hasn't been labeled as such. Could be wrong but the link below seems to have a lot of png files that are of the size and style of AI content.

https://stock.adobe.com/uk/contributor/209649716/Sandaru?asset_id=543344544

Could this type of action leave Adobe exposed, as in, the client wants to avoid AI but accidentally picks up content that is because it hasn't been tabled correctly. If they're receiving a lot of stuff like this from AI generators it would go someway to explain the long wait times for work to be approved.

Exposed to what?

Taking the other view, what if someone uploads an image that is not AI but marks it as AI created? Similar to claiming a photo is taken with a cell phone but it's actually a full frame digital camera or a scanned analog image.

Is this about the final image or how it was created? Is Adobe somehow liable for AI images that aren't marked as being AI originally, but now altered into invisible background PNGs?

Yeah I can see what you are saying about the size being 2048 square on these. Looks like more than a coincidence and style choice.

Legal action.

Scenario - Advertising agency receives a brief from one of their big name clients. In the brief it states the work is for a long running campaign and needs unique looking illustration that will have full copyright release and they do not want any AI imagery given the uncertainty over copyright in various countries.

The agency picks an image that's not marked as a AI (but it is AI). Later on, a number of countries ban the use of AI unless they can prove the datasets used by the AI to learn were collected after receiving permission from copyright owners with agreed compensation. Or, it turns out the image looks very similar to someones actual illustration and as a result, they're in breach of copyright.

The client is sued by the copyright owner, the client sues the agency, the agency sues the library and they sue the contributor. And, the agency loses their client.

Or, someone steals their campaign image and they try to sue for breach of copyright... but they can't because they don't have copyright themselves due to changes to or on going legal challenges.

The papers here seem to have a new story every other day from one group or another fighting for artist protection... that is, musicians, illustrators, photographers and writers etc.

Then there are data protection groups concerned about how the massive datasets were built and whether they've breached GDPR laws etc. I could see legal cases going on for years and while that goes on, companies will want to avoid negative publicity or potential law suits. This is early days to know exactly how things will go.

Adobe will be fine provided contributors give the correct metadata about the image origins. If they don't, then I guess the contributor has breached T&C's and leaves themselves exposed to being sued as well. Providing the correct AI data protects the contributor as well as everyone else. It's in all our interests to do so.

Edit. Oh, and marking something as AI when it's not is fine. If they like the image anyway as it will have full copyright protection.

 
 New record - 20 days of pending.
 

I think it may depend on the type of content.

Taking up to 10 days to review content seems reasonable, but I have some content in the queue for closer to 30 days now. So I eventually contacted contributor support. Then I received the standard reply about a high volume of uploads and review times being longer than usual.

I also recently submitted content to another large site and it was reviewed in less than 24 hours.

Quote from: LockStock on May 02, 2023, 12:52

Taking up to 10 days to review content seems reasonable, but I have some content in the queue for closer to 30 days now. So I eventually contacted contributor support. Then I received the standard reply about a high volume of uploads and review times being longer than usual.

I also recently submitted content to another large site and it was reviewed in less than 24 hours.

It is taking on average between 25-30 days for illustrations to be reviewed currently. We are working to get this down to a more reasonable length of time. To do so, we've recently implimented an upload limit for new contributor accounts. This should allow the moderation team to clear the backlog which is currently running deep. Once that is cleared, we'll start to adjust the upload limit up or down based on the volume of submitted assets at any given time. The goal is for timely reviews for everyone and I am confident we'll get back there in time. Thanks very much for your patience.

-Mat Hayward

Thank you for the explanation!

yeah, 22 days here.  If more photos come in than come out, the queue will increase little by little, until the wave passes. You have to start uploading the content for Christmas right now!

I�m over 30 days now. The status went from saying how many days ago I submitted my content to saying �Submitted last month�.

To clarify, the date range you see in your pending files is based on the date you uploaded the image to the Adobe Stock contributor portal, not the date you actually submit the file for review. If you uploaded a file and wait for a while before submitting, the time pending you see will be longer than the actual time it has been in the queue. 

That said, I acknowledge the wait time is still significant but progress is being made. We appreciate your patience.

-Mat Hayward

Thank you very much for the constant information!
It's good to know that things are progressing :-)

Have a nice day, Michael

Quote from: MatHayward on May 10, 2023, 15:47

Quote from: LockStock on May 10, 2023, 11:08

I�m over 30 days now. The status went from saying how many days ago I submitted my content to saying �Submitted last month�.

To clarify, the date range you see in your pending files is based on the date you uploaded the image to the Adobe Stock contributor portal, not the date you actually submit the file for review. If you uploaded a file and wait for a while before submitting, the time pending you see will be longer than the actual time it has been in the queue. 

That said, I acknowledge the wait time is still significant but progress is being made. We appreciate your patience.

I  always submit images on the same day I upload them, so the time I see there is the actual review time - 26 days for me right now, so I do not see this 'progress' that is being made, because review times get longer for me, not shorter. 

I am at 24 days waiting. I also submit on the same day I upload them.  I even have a photo in review that also has not gotten reviewed. Is there more than one queue a person might end up in? I have a friend doing AI that has been getting reviewed all along, they just got like 40 more reviewed that were uploaded within the last week or so while mine sit for 24 days?

Quote from: JustAnImage on May 10, 2023, 16:04

Quote from: MatHayward on May 10, 2023, 15:47

To clarify, the date range you see in your pending files is based on the date you uploaded the image to the Adobe Stock contributor portal, not the date you actually submit the file for review. If you uploaded a file and wait for a while before submitting, the time pending you see will be longer than the actual time it has been in the queue. 

That said, I acknowledge the wait time is still significant but progress is being made. We appreciate your patience.

-Mat Hayward

Thank you very much for the constant information!
It's good to know that things are progressing :-)

Have a nice day, Michael

Why these compliments? You look like a groupie. And is his real name Michael? I thought it was just Mat.

You could give complements to Mat if he would explain why this delay is happening. Most likely due to a massive inflow of AI images but that is not what he is sharing. He is leaving you in the dark, as usual, but you think it's great that he informs you. Djeez.

Hello SVH,

I think it's simply good that someone from a stock agency talks to us at all and keeps us up to date - it's perfectly acceptable to be polite and say thank you, even if this concept is apparently alien to you :-)

And my name is Michael (not his name), as it is usually added at the end of a note/email/etc. ;-)

And if you don't like me being polite, then please do us both a favour and keep your opinion to yourself!

Have a nice day,
Michael

Quote from: SVH on May 12, 2023, 12:50

Quote from: JustAnImage on May 10, 2023, 16:04

Quote from: MatHayward on May 10, 2023, 15:47

To clarify, the date range you see in your pending files is based on the date you uploaded the image to the Adobe Stock contributor portal, not the date you actually submit the file for review. If you uploaded a file and wait for a while before submitting, the time pending you see will be longer than the actual time it has been in the queue. 

That said, I acknowledge the wait time is still significant but progress is being made. We appreciate your patience.

-Mat Hayward

Thank you very much for the constant information!
It's good to know that things are progressing :-)

Have a nice day, Michael

Why these compliments? You look like a groupie. And is his real name Michael? I thought it was just Mat.

You could give complements to Mat if he would explain why this delay is happening. Most likely due to a massive inflow of AI images but that is not what he is sharing. He is leaving you in the dark, as usual, but you think it's great that he informs you. Djeez.

Hello SVH,

I think it's simply good that someone from a stock agency talks to us at all and keeps us up to date - it's perfectly acceptable to be polite and say thank you, even if this concept is apparently alien to you :-)

And my name is Michael (not his name), as it is usually added at the end of a note/email/etc. ;-)

And if you don't like me being polite, then please do us both a favour and keep your opinion to yourself!

Have a nice day,
Michael

Thanks Michael, I appreciate your courtesy very much. To clarify, yes, there is a large volume of generative AI content coming in which has created a backlog in the moderation queue. As mentioned, we have recently set upload limits to give the moderation team a chance to catch up in the queue. We are looking at up to 5 weeks in some cases for review times. I'm hopeful we will get that wait time down to a more reasonable level in the weeks to come.

Thanks to most of you for your patience,

Mat Hayward