MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Adobe Stock => Topic started by: Madoo on February 21, 2023, 03:54
-
I have files that are waiting 5 days for inspection.
That wasn't situation before.
They were accepted/rejected in a 3 days time tops.
Anybody else ?
-
Review times on Adobe have always been random for me and waiting times longer than 3 days weren't the norm, but do happen from time to time. On Adobe photos also don't get reviewed in chronological order and some take way longer to be reviewed than others. For me it is mostly images on white background that take much longer to be reviewed than others - no idea why.
-
I have files that are waiting 5 days for inspection.
That wasn't situation before.
They were accepted/rejected in a 3 days time tops.
Anybody else ?
Ai generated images take much more time to be approved, up to ten days, while traditional photography review is quickly as usual for me, max a couple of days
-
It usually only takes a day or two for me. Maybe it's because you submitted a large set of images and its taking them longer to process?
-
I have files that are waiting 5 days for inspection.
That wasn't situation before.
They were accepted/rejected in a 3 days time tops.
Anybody else ?
Yes, recently reviews have been taking longer than usual. Maybe because of more uploads or less staff if people have left the reviewer position? Anything is a guess, except, yes, slightly slower than in the past.
-
The current wait time for reviews is around 7-9 days on average. This varies based on the number of assets in the queue.
Thank you for your patience,
Mat Hayward
-
The current wait time for reviews is around 7-9 days on average. This varies based on the number of assets in the queue.
Thank you for your patience,
Mat Hayward
Good to know. Is it usually better to submit all the images you have in one go or a few every day? Does it make a difference? Currently, I submit 5 images a day and with these longer review times am thinking if it's better to send all 40-50 images I have at the same time.
-
I have files that are waiting 5 days for inspection.
That wasn't situation before.
They were accepted/rejected in a 3 days time tops.
Anybody else ?
I had two last batches of vector illustrations reviewed in 6 and 7 days.
-
10 days to review files.....It is obvious that Adobe is buried with Ai.
-
Review times have slowed elsewhere too: iStock, Pond5 and to a lesser extent Shutter.
-
Review times have slowed elsewhere too: iStock, Pond5 and to a lesser extent Shutter.
Not surprising. With AI generated content that can be literally generated within seconds the amount of submitted images must be crazy. And even for the agencies that don't allow AI images like iStock I bet that there are tons of such images submitted where the contributors simply don't label them as AI and try to pass them as their own work.
Review times are so slow that I won't even manage to get half of my Easter related images submitted till Easter.
-
The current wait time for reviews is around 7-9 days on average. This varies based on the number of assets in the queue.
Thank you for your patience,
Mat Hayward
The current wait time for reviews is around 12-14 days on average.
-
Review time for illustrations - 15 days
-
10 days to review files.....It is obvious that Adobe is buried with Ai.
Unfortunately yes. It was one of those obvious reactions. Now every man and his dog is submitting work because they're all "Artists" now. Sadly there is more to it than typing a couple of words and hitting return but, it won't stop many contributors (and thousands of new ones) submitting dodgy looking AI shots in the hope of making a fortune. Mean while, the rest of the contributor base suffers from long delays. I have a a couple over 14 days now.
-
I'm just glad I got 3000 odd images in when I did because right now, it seems pretty near impossible to get images reviewed let alone approved.
-
Some of my images are at 29 days now... hopefully this will change soon, 830 images in the queue and more than 1400 waiting to be uploaded.
-
Until recently, the video was checked very quickly, now we have to wait a long time.
:(
-
The current wait time for reviews is around 7-9 days on average. This varies based on the number of assets in the queue.
Thank you for your patience,
Mat Hayward
New average : 18 days
-
Well, I guess my christmas files will get online in time...
Photos is still ok, surprised that photo pngs are also affected by the long delay.
Has Adobe considered limiting gen ai uploads? Maybe 200 a week? Or a limit depending on sales levels?
Let people focus on quality instead of quantity.
-
Has Adobe considered limiting gen ai uploads? Maybe 200 a week? Or a limit depending on sales levels?
They actually added an upload limit, though it doesn't seem to do much good as review times get longer, not shorter. They did not tell what the limit was, but it must be waaaaaay more than 200 a week, because I have several hundret images waiting to be reviewed for over 2 weeks and I can still submit images.
This was posted on Adobe's disscord channel:
"As some of you may have noticed already, we have established some limits to the number of assets you can have pending moderation at once. If you reach that limit, you will have to wait until the moderation process is complete for your files before being able to submit new assets for consideration.
We hope this will unclog the moderation queue and result in better waiting times from now on.
The maximum number of assets you can have waiting for moderation will depend on several factors and will be adapted to the global queue.
."
-
Love Adobestock, but have to say, these looonnnngggg review times are frustrating.
-
New record : 19 days
:(
-
Really strange, because I don't see that at all.
Uploaded this weekend, reviewed today (Monday).
-
Really strange, because I don't see that at all.
Uploaded this weekend, reviewed today (Monday).
It depends on what type of content.
For me editorial content is reviewed within an hour.
Commercial photos within a few days up to a week.
Illustrations and png photos take 21 days right now.
-
I might miss all the pride events, because the content will be up too late. Same for July 4th.
I hope they can reorganise and bring the queue back down.
They must be getting 500 000 ai images a week, if the backlog is this bad.
-
I've had some in the queue for a long time (png), but I submitted a couple of editorials that got reviewed overnight.
-
Really strange, because I don't see that at all.
Uploaded this weekend, reviewed today (Monday).
It depends on what type of content.
For me editorial content is reviewed within an hour.
Commercial photos within a few days up to a week.
Illustrations and png photos take 21 days right now.
Yes, I also see a difference between editorial and commercial, where editorial gets faster processing (a day or two days) than commercial (several days).
I don't do illustrations or png's so can't comment on that.
But in general, I don't see any review delays for what I'm uploading.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
Laws do not apply Ex Post Facto, you can't punish retroactively.
The agency has provided the image, not the client. The client used the image with the promise that it was legal to use, they are not liable.
There is no law making it illegal to use an AI created image at this time.
There are questions, and there might be a law some day, depending on fair use and how the image is created.
If I take an AI illustration, edit and alter it, "significantly change the image" and then make that into a vector, is that a new image?
The whole thing isn't as easy as what about the artists livelihood or who likes or doesn't like AI. At this time, everything AI may be protected at the time it's created or may not, because you can't register anything AI.
-
New record - 20 days of pending.
-
It takes a lot longer then usual
I guess they overflowed with AI related stuff
Not so nice
-
I think it may depend on the type of content.
-
20 days for the last batch of illustrations. Just couple of months ago it used to be 3-4 days max
-
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.
-
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
-
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!
-
New record - 25 days of pending. :-\
-
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!
-
The current wait time for reviews is around 7-9 days on average. This varies based on the number of assets in the queue.
Thank you for your patience,
Mat Hayward
Can I apply to be a photo inspector ?
-
I’m over 30 days now. The status went from saying how many days ago I submitted my content to saying “Submitted last month”.
-
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
-
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
-
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’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?
-
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.
-
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
-
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
Ok, didn't get the closure line, Michael.
But still, why would you compliment Mat on not giving you information? There is really nothing in his response, other then you don't have to confuse your upload date with the review date. It doesn't go into the fact that review times are way longer then before.
It doesn't help if someone comes from an agency but does not give clear information about an issue. You might think so, I don't.
-
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
-
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
Hi Mat, thanks for the info but is there a reason, that you would give here, why some contributors images are not reviewed for a month while other contributors that submitted more recently are getting reviewed? I can accept waiting patiently except for the fact that it doesn't seem to be fairly spread out based on upload dates. I have less than 100 in the queue, the person I know with many reviews over the last month is usually at or under 100 in review at a time. I am speaking of AI mostly, though I do have one photo that is also waiting longer than typical. Neither of us are new adobe contributors.
Thanks,
Impatient for review justice ;)
-
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
Hi Mat, thanks for the info but is there a reason, that you would give here, why some contributors images are not reviewed for a month while other contributors that submitted more recently are getting reviewed? I can accept waiting patiently except for the fact that it doesn't seem to be fairly spread out based on upload dates. I have less than 100 in the queue, the person I know with many reviews over the last month is usually at or under 100 in review at a time. I am speaking of AI mostly, though I do have one photo that is also waiting longer than typical. Neither of us are new adobe contributors.
Thanks,
Impatient for review justice ;)
No, sorry but I don't have specific details on moderation queues and how they are set up to share.
thanks for the question,
Mat
-
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
Hi Mat, thanks for the info but is there a reason, that you would give here, why some contributors images are not reviewed for a month while other contributors that submitted more recently are getting reviewed? I can accept waiting patiently except for the fact that it doesn't seem to be fairly spread out based on upload dates. I have less than 100 in the queue, the person I know with many reviews over the last month is usually at or under 100 in review at a time. I am speaking of AI mostly, though I do have one photo that is also waiting longer than typical. Neither of us are new adobe contributors.
Thanks,
Impatient for review justice ;)
No, sorry but I don't have specific details on moderation queues and how they are set up to share.
thanks for the question,
Mat
I didn't really think you would. I was just stating the situation. :D But thanks for responding anyway, I finally see some progress. My 8 oldest images in the queue were reviewed in about 25 days! Let's hope it continues to progress so everyone can get a fair shake!!
-
My images over 30 days in the queue now, possibly closer to 40 days. Site doesn’t show upload date, but also originally uploaded and submitted on the same day.
-
I miss thoses days when review time was a day or two. Now it's around 9-12 days. :-\
-
Isn't this bad for Adobe, they will have less relevant time specific content.
-
I miss thoses days when review time was a day or two. Now it's around 9-12 days. :-\
You're lucky. Still 27 days for me and I don't see any progress of review time getting any faster. :(
-
Still 27 days for ai, I am really trying to focus on christmas.
Maybe a little halloween.
I really hope they can get the queue down by autumn. Uploading is more fun if you see content go online quickly.
-
Still 27 days for ai, I am really trying to focus on christmas.
Maybe a little halloween.
I really hope they can get the queue down by autumn. Uploading is more fun if you see content go online quickly.
ai is the reason for this ultra giga mega review time at the first place
-
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
12 days of pending for vectors. And 29 days for illustrations. I still can't see progress.
This is so demotivational.
-
Yes, agree! My illustrations are not created with AI! Thats not Ok!
I understand most everything but this…
-
Strangest thing about vector review time is the information that the beginner members share, on social media platform groups such as facebook adobe contributors group, that their vector work is reviewed in a day or two. ???
-
more than 10 days (vectors) ???
-
More than 20 day’s illustrations, Not created with AI. Stop sending this files.
-
More than 24 day’s illustrations not created with ai. Still waiting…
-
Who wants... to live... forever?...
-
I would really like the review queue to go down, but what makes you think they no longer inspect with people?
I also believe Adobe is probably the agency most interested in working with us, because we are all Adobe customers.
With an attitude this negative, it might be best to exit the stock market and do something else.
ETA:
I am also now testing Topaz to get cleaner files. I am old, but I can still learn and improve.
-
It's late here
-
I would really like the review queue to go down, but what makes you think they no longer inspect with people?
I also believe Adobe is probably the agency most interested in working with us, because we are all Adobe customers.
With an attitude this negative, it might be best to exit the stock market and do something else.
ETA:
I am also now testing Topaz to get cleaner files. I am old, but I can still learn and improve.
No one said that Adobe doesn't use people for inspect / moderation.
Review time problem is because AI created files acceptance.
P.S. About "attitude this negative" part...yeah....it would be the best for all of us that AI "creators" exit the stock market and do something else.
-
I was hoping things would catch up a bit since May, but no. I also am getting reviewed after 27 days, and I only get the images that are over 27 days reviewed. I know someone who is getting overnight reviews. It is demotivating for sure!
-
New record: 30 days review time.
-
New record: 30 days review time.
It's getting worse and worse.....I almost have feeling that I am throwing my work in a well.
-
It feels like all trends will be missed due to late reviews and rejections. It is necessary to send the Christmas concepts already. Even if it waits for 1 month review, then it will be rejected, then we will send it again and it will be accepted with 1 month waiting again. Then the new year is already:)
I'm sure many of them are still under scrutiny for their "Father's Day" concept.
-
" Submitted last month " -what a pathetic message :(
-
" Submitted last month " -what a pathetic message :(
I have some files with "Submitted 2 months ago"...
-
" Submitted last month " -what a pathetic message :(
I have some files with "Submitted 2 months ago"...
In a funny way I am glad that you wait 2 months.
That "Submitted 2 months ago" of yours state one thing only : that you are Ai "artist" which existence in a stock industry is actually cause of this all review time problem and this whole Ai charade.
-
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
Unfortunately review times are well over 5 weeks now. In fact, they are over two months now. So review times on AI images are still going up and not down as hoped for. Seems like the deluge of AI content is still increasing and they are not able to catch up and review files within a reasonable time period. Not sure why they don’t simply hire more reviewers to tackle the increased volume. Seems like a simple solution and the right things to do. Presumably contributors are losing money from the heavy delays in getting the content online and so is Adobe.
-
I find my weekly upload of 25 images are reviewed in 1 week - However the last 2 weeks every single image has been rejected due to quality which is ridiculous as they are no different in quality from my other 8000 approved images and I have never had more than 1 or 2 rejections each week historically......will see what happened this week!
-
i usually expect to wait about a week for a review, makes me less likely to post stuff that is in the news and wont stay there long
-
Its not only review time that has taken a hit in recent times. There are mainly three items which are bad in shape.
1. Review Time (my old is Submitted 21 days ago, 86 are in review queue)
2. Pending Payment (Requested on 21st July, still in pending state)
3. Sale (Earlier every other day sale used to be. Now Nothing after 11thJuly)
Looks like Adobe Stock is in Pause mode for strange reasons. Not sure Why Adobe is facing the issues which other agencies are not having at all. SS is reviewing fast even the illustrations. May be it is workflow issue or just bad luck on the sides of contributors. I still miss old Fotolia which used to be the most contributor friendly company.
Take care Buddies. That's how life works !
-
Its not only review time that has taken a hit in recent times. There are mainly three items which are bad in shape.
1. Review Time (my old is Submitted 21 days ago, 86 are in review queue)
2. Pending Payment (Requested on 21st July, still in pending state)
3. Sale (Earlier every other day sale used to be. Now Nothing after 11thJuly)
Looks like Adobe Stock is in Pause mode for strange reasons. Not sure Why Adobe is facing the issues which other agencies are not having at all. SS is reviewing fast even the illustrations. May be it is workflow issue or just bad luck on the sides of contributors. I still miss old Fotolia which used to be the most contributor friendly company.
Take care Buddies. That's how life works !
Finally my payment was released on 28/29 July.
-
I have photos on there for weeks if not over a month still in review.
-
Adobe have serious issues which are preventing them from reviewing images in under a month and preventing them from not rejecting a whole batch at once, hopefully they sort their business methods out next year
-
Adobe have serious issues which are preventing them from reviewing images in under a month and preventing them from not rejecting a whole batch at once, hopefully they sort their business methods out next year
It's ridiculous. Adobe has no problem, they sell, and don't need validation of new images to make a profit. On the other hand, yes, some contributors have problems not having a growing portfolio, to represent something other than a micro drop in an ocean of images.
But quality portfolios are still favored by algorithms, and that's good :)
-
Adobe have serious issues which are preventing them from reviewing images in under a month and preventing them from not rejecting a whole batch at once, hopefully they sort their business methods out next year
It's ridiculous. Adobe has no problem, they sell, and don't need validation of new images to make a profit. On the other hand, yes, some contributors have problems not having a growing portfolio, to represent something other than a micro drop in an ocean of images.
But quality portfolios are still favored by algorithms, and that's good :)
How do I know if I'm favored or not?
-
It's ridiculous. Adobe has no problem, they sell, and don't need validation of new images to make a profit. On the other hand, yes, some contributors have problems not having a growing portfolio, to represent something other than a micro drop in an ocean of images.
But quality portfolios are still favored by algorithms, and that's good :)
How do I know if I'm favored or not?
Be sure that prompters flooding their AI will be very soon not favored... ;)
-
Adobe have serious issues which are preventing them from reviewing images in under a month and preventing them from not rejecting a whole batch at once, hopefully they sort their business methods out next year
It's ridiculous. Adobe has no problem, they sell, and don't need validation of new images to make a profit. On the other hand, yes, some contributors have problems not having a growing portfolio, to represent something other than a micro drop in an ocean of images.
But quality portfolios are still favored by algorithms, and that's good :)
The introduction with ridiculous is of course always a good argument and a good start for a discussion at eye level.
Many of my pictures are now in their third month on hold.
Summer landscapes and cityscapes from Holland that are not yet represented at Adobe and are doing well at other agencies.
-
Adobe have serious issues which are preventing them from reviewing images in under a month and preventing them from not rejecting a whole batch at once, hopefully they sort their business methods out next year
It's ridiculous. Adobe has no problem, they sell, and don't need validation of new images to make a profit. On the other hand, yes, some contributors have problems not having a growing portfolio, to represent something other than a micro drop in an ocean of images.
But quality portfolios are still favored by algorithms, and that's good :)
The introduction with ridiculous is of course always a good argument and a good start for a discussion at eye level.
Many of my pictures are now in their third month on hold.
Summer landscapes and cityscapes from Holland that are not yet represented at Adobe and are doing well at other agencies.
So, your conclusion is to find ridiculous that Adobe don't review your pictures whereas they are doing well elsewhere... why not. personaly, I would not blame you.
-
Adobe have serious issues which are preventing them from reviewing images in under a month and preventing them from not rejecting a whole batch at once, hopefully they sort their business methods out next year
It's ridiculous. Adobe has no problem, they sell, and don't need validation of new images to make a profit. On the other hand, yes, some contributors have problems not having a growing portfolio, to represent something other than a micro drop in an ocean of images.
But quality portfolios are still favored by algorithms, and that's good :)
The introduction with ridiculous is of course always a good argument and a good start for a discussion at eye level.
Many of my pictures are now in their third month on hold.
Summer landscapes and cityscapes from Holland that are not yet represented at Adobe and are doing well at other agencies.
So, your conclusion is to find ridiculous that Adobe don't review your pictures whereas they are doing well elsewhere... why not. personaly, I would not blame you.
Well, if flooding the collection with useless AI images without any quality control, while rejecting real, unique photos from experienced artists is "doing well", then I would say that Adobe is doing great indeed!
-
good news they fixed it! now the banner says reviews will take up to 8 weeks which is much more accurate.
-
Adobe definitely changed something: now instead of waiting 2 months for reviews , my jpegs are reviewed in 1-3 days, but most of them are rejected for quality control. Before, I use to wait 2 months, but 100% of them were accepted. (Be careful what you wish for 😂)
Review times for png are now longer, 3 weeks instead of 2
My eye for my own quality control with a 30 years of experience didn’t change. I’m utterly confused. My only guess that Adobe hired more reviewers, but didn’t educate them? Why such a drastic change?
You really need to have a thick skin to continue in stock business… rejections and copycats are my daily reality now.
-
Adobe definitely changed something: now instead of waiting 2 months for reviews , my jpegs are reviewed in 1-3 days
This happened to me last week, but only for newly submitted images. They were reviewed within 1-3 days, while I have many images still waiting to be reviewed for over a month.
But it has stopped now. I had no images reviewed in 5 days, neither new nor old.
-
I now have a banner - up to 8 weeks.
-
For some reason my AI pictures does not get reviewed for a week now. Neither accepted nor rejected. I upload daily and the last month I had every day reviewed images. Did something change this year? Or is it maybe because of personal shortage because of start of the year or something?
-
For some reason my AI pictures does not get reviewed for a week now. Neither accepted nor rejected. I upload daily and the last month I had every day reviewed images. Did something change this year? Or is it maybe because of personal shortage because of start of the year or something?
i haven't seen any difference between photos and ai images - both take a month or more
-
Editorial images I believe get reviewed more quickly.
-
I find my weekly upload of 25 images are reviewed in 1 week - However the last 2 weeks every single image has been rejected due to quality which is ridiculous as they are no different in quality from my other 8000 approved images and I have never had more than 1 or 2 rejections each week historically......will see what happened this week!
Had exactly the same thing. Last saturday I uploaded some AI-images in the same quality as some I did before (and which already sold on Adobe Stock). All of them were rejected about 12 hours later because of quality issues. This is very strange. They usually take weeks to review and now in the weekend they can review with in 12 hours?
-
I find my weekly upload of 25 images are reviewed in 1 week - However the last 2 weeks every single image has been rejected due to quality which is ridiculous as they are no different in quality from my other 8000 approved images and I have never had more than 1 or 2 rejections each week historically......will see what happened this week!
Had exactly the same thing. Last saturday I uploaded some AI-images in the same quality as some I did before (and which already sold on Adobe Stock). All of them were rejected about 12 hours later because of quality issues. This is very strange. They usually take weeks to review and now in the weekend they can review with in 12 hours?
GOOD NEWS! thx
Only consider that the time of human AI prompters maybe already finished. Adobe knows they will propose directly AI generation in the hands of their customers, with real time quality evolution.
-
I find my weekly upload of 25 images are reviewed in 1 week - However the last 2 weeks every single image has been rejected due to quality which is ridiculous as they are no different in quality from my other 8000 approved images and I have never had more than 1 or 2 rejections each week historically......will see what happened this week!
Had exactly the same thing. Last saturday I uploaded some AI-images in the same quality as some I did before (and which already sold on Adobe Stock). All of them were rejected about 12 hours later because of quality issues. This is very strange. They usually take weeks to review and now in the weekend they can review with in 12 hours?
GOOD NEWS! thx
Only consider that the time of human AI prompters maybe already finished. Adobe knows they will propose directly AI generation in the hands of their customers, with real time quality evolution.
Yes, but not that soon.
-
Sure, not that soon, but they already organise the(yr) future.
Adobe is obviously interested in all the money they will keep without the royalties given to human prompters uploading rapidly outdated images generated by rapidly evolving technology.
Real photos will remain real photos.
On the other hand, portfolios mixing images generated by AI and real photographs may pose a problem for them. Maybe some -enthusiastic, euphoric, and already constantly complaining immaturely- contributors should think about it.
-
AI generated photos sells now absolutely successful, the clients do not care from what source the image come as long as it will "sell the story".
In the near future the final client will have the option to create the desired AI images much easy and fast than now, but nothing can replace the successful image proven in the search engine with many sales, so I think there is a space for search in real photos or AI photos or to generate personal image. We'll see, but one thing is sure very soon the real images will be a very tiny part of all stock photo base. No one can stop this, lol
-
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.
-
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.
Just to clarify "Real commercial photography" will be back as domain of professional photographers.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
...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...
-
...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 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... ;)
-
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.
-
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.......
-
...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.
-
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 ;).
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
Review time on Adobe is so ...random now?
It was really fast a week ago and now it has come to a full-stop for me. Not a single image reviewed in 5 days.
-
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.
-
Review time on Adobe is so ...random now?
It was really fast a week ago and now it has come to a full-stop for me. Not a single image reviewed in 5 days.
I can promise you, they are not reviewed in order of upload. I have waiting, 1 month, 17, 13,10, 4 days. And accepted from the same as the one month, and 10-13 days ago. That's one EPS, two AI illustrations. Not reviewed, one photo, one EPS, one AI illustration from a sample (with release), one 100% AI image.
Not any big complaint or anything, just pointing out that I have things of my own, uploaded and accepted, while others, of my own, are sitting longer, not reviewed. I can't come up with any order or conclusions from that.
-
I have a file submitted 5 weeks ago and still waiting.....
-
Review time on Adobe is so ...random now?
It was really fast a week ago and now it has come to a full-stop for me. Not a single image reviewed in 5 days.
I can promise you, they are not reviewed in order of upload. I have waiting, 1 month, 17, 13,10, 4 days. And accepted from the same as the one month, and 10-13 days ago. That's one EPS, two AI illustrations. Not reviewed, one photo, one EPS, one AI illustration from a sample (with release), one 100% AI image.
Not any big complaint or anything, just pointing out that I have things of my own, uploaded and accepted, while others, of my own, are sitting longer, not reviewed. I can't come up with any order or conclusions from that.
same here - i have more than a hundred images that have waited a month or more, but had many approved recently in much less time - including 20+ ai images
http://tinyurl.com/23z9uxkr (http://tinyurl.com/23z9uxkr)
a few days ago, i uploaded about 40 ai images in 1 batch - 8 were rejected the next day for quality (from 1 prompt) but all the others remain in review