Author Topic: review times?? (Read 11296 times)

Her Ugliness · « **Reply #50 on:** September 19, 2023, 01:29 »

Quote from: wds on September 18, 2023, 17:52

I had some editorials go through pretty quickly....maybe they are finally getting a handle on this?

I am afraid not. Editorial photos were reviewed fast all the time, nothing has changed about that.

Waiting 28 days for real non-editorial photos now....

cascoly · « **Reply #51 on:** September 19, 2023, 13:59 »

Quote from: Her Ugliness on September 19, 2023, 01:29

Quote from: wds on September 18, 2023, 17:52
I had some editorials go through pretty quickly....maybe they are finally getting a handle on this?

I am afraid not. Editorial photos were reviewed fast all the time, nothing has changed about that.

Waiting 28 days for real non-editorial photos now....

more delay than that for my AI batch; oddly, the other images i submitted at same time were reviewed a week or so ago

Her Ugliness · « **Reply #52 on:** September 20, 2023, 02:16 »

For me there seems to be a strange new pattern emerging: I am not getting any images, no matter whether they are real photos, illustrations, pngs or AI, reviewed at all for several days in a row. The only expection are editorial images. And then I suddenly get a rush of a lot of images being reviewed and then I am again getting no images reviewed at all. I did not have a single image reviewed since Friday. Last week I had a lot of images reviewed. The week before than almost none for the whole week.
I never get any images reviewed on weekends, but now it also happens on weekdays for several days in a row.
And if this would somehow be in accord with my upload pattern and I would not upload images for several days, then I would understand it - It's simply not "my turn". But I submit images daily and even spread out my uploads through the whole day, so there should be some daily reviewing going on if reviewers were working off the review queque chronologically. But that doesn't seem to be the case?

Lowls · « **Reply #53 on:** September 20, 2023, 04:51 »

Quote from: dragonblade on September 04, 2023, 11:05

Quote from: f8 on August 27, 2023, 13:43
What is even more fun is our content ferments for a month or so only to find out your content suddenly does not meet Adobe qaulity standards, evenwith years of a proven track record.

Yea their reviewers are becoming ridiculously strict. Some of my latest images were rejected for technical reasons and they look fine to me. I used to have a very good acceptance rate.

My last photo was rejected because there is supposedly a similar image already in my portfolio. That is complete nonsense. I went through my port twice and I see no images that are similar to this latest submission. The latest photo is a close up of a very young tree. I do admit that I have a close up of a plant that is already in my port but these types of vegetation are completely different and look nothing like each other. For example, one has large leaves and the other has no leaves. I guess Adobe are hinting that we are only allowed to have a maximum of one plant close up in our port and no more. Never mind that there are probably thousands of different types of plants out there but we can only have a closeup of one of them. So choose carefully.

I've had a discussion with Matt about this but it was blind script arguing from him. Lalalalalalalala I'm not listening etc. The similars rule is equally as moronic. If only they checked. Pages of swimming pool water from one account. Sand and brick and stones and leaves and clouds. And this is the simple stuff an easy search could reveal ... but yeah let's be thick as pig sh%t and leave those on there and reject two photos because one is autumnal leaves on a tree and another on the ground.

And heaven forbid we bring up A.I. similars jesus. Pages and pages.

Actual similar spamming offences ...

https://stock.adobe.com/uk/search?filters%5Bcontent_type%3Aphoto%5D=1&filters%5Bcontent_type%3Aillustration%5D=1&filters%5Bcontent_type%3Azip_vector%5D=1&filters%5Bcontent_type%3Avideo%5D=1&filters%5Bcontent_type%3Atemplate%5D=1&filters%5Bcontent_type%3A3d%5D=1&filters%5Bcontent_type%3Aaudio%5D=0&filters%5Bcontent_type%3Aimage%5D=1&filters%5Binclude_stock_enterprise%5D=0&filters%5Bis_editorial%5D=0&order=relevance&safe_search=1&serie_id=621281076&search_page=1&search_type=see-more&get_facets=0

there are far worse examples. Portfolios with 80+ pages of pool water. And they've been there for years.
Adobe is now my worst performer.

yuriy · « **Reply #54 on:** September 20, 2023, 11:56 »

what's the specific similars rule you're referring to? i get lots of rejections in shutterstock for similars but not as many on adobe.

Lowls · « **Reply #55 on:** September 20, 2023, 17:02 »

Quote from: yuriy on September 20, 2023, 11:56

what's the specific similars rule you're referring to? i get lots of rejections in shutterstock for similars but not as many on adobe.

rejection reason

Similar Images already submitted.

Thanks for giving us the chance to consider your image. Unfortunately, during our review we found that it's similar to another image(s) you've already uploaded, so we can't accept it into our collection.

Images must be different enough to provide additional value to our customers. We can't accept more than three color variations of the same image or similar images, and models must appear in different situations or with different expressions to be considered. Please be selective and submit only the very best from each image series.

To learn more about the reasons we decline certain images, including similarity to other images, please visit this page: https://www.adobe.com/go/stock-contributor-help

gnirtS · « **Reply #56 on:** September 21, 2023, 00:21 »

Is there any sort of common trend here? Im fully aware of huge review times (and know in person someone with the issue) but ive submitted 30 images on the weekend and they're already live.

I've had 1 image stuck in-queue for weeks now that hasn't moved but everything else has.

The review delays seem to be random and vary person to person with no clear link from what i can see.

MihaiZaharia · « **Reply #57 on:** September 21, 2023, 07:00 »

Probably images get assigned to different reviewers the moment we submit them, and that's why they're almost never evaluated in the order in which they were submitted. Some reviewers might be faster than others.

HalfFull · « **Reply #58 on:** September 21, 2023, 12:00 »

The latest non AI png files I had approved had been waiting about a month and a half. For a company the size of Adobe, it's a little embarrassing that they can't manage this. They have the money and resources to correct it.

It must be getting to the point when they realise the only way to resolve it is to pause the intake of AI content until they can bring in new staff to get the numbers back down to a sensible level.

Lowls · « **Reply #59 on:** September 22, 2023, 11:10 »

🤣 🤣 🤣

omg the latest failed submission rejected for

meh ... we no likey

🤣 🤣 🤣

non aesthetic or commercial appeal. Stock photography. Where you can buy photos of a used cat litter tray or worse. Ok lol. SS thanks you.

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #60 on:** September 22, 2023, 11:32 »

yuriy · « **Reply #61 on:** September 22, 2023, 11:58 »

i recently had a small batch of videos wait about 3-4 weeks. they got shoved into the reminder folder w/ "data issue." nothing there that i could easily spot (no brand names, no obvious spam) so i made some adjustments, resubmitted. 3-4 weeks later same thing again. maybe they'll earn me some sales in 2028.

gnirtS · « **Reply #62 on:** September 22, 2023, 23:26 »

I'm seeing parallels here with SS a few years ago.

When it decided to massively expand its library suddenly it lacked the software, systems and human staff to cope with the surge and just introduced poorly designed systems and procedures to wade through the mess.

This to me looks similar - they cant cope with volume and are desperately trying to implement things to counter it with no real testing or plan.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #63 on:** September 26, 2023, 05:35 »

Quote from: gnirtS on September 22, 2023, 23:26

I'm seeing parallels here with SS a few years ago.

When it decided to massively expand its library suddenly it lacked the software, systems and human staff to cope with the surge and just introduced poorly designed systems and procedures to wade through the mess.

This to me looks similar - they cant cope with volume and are desperately trying to implement things to counter it with no real testing or plan.

when Firefly was announced,and also when Adobe started accepting AI content,it was also said up front that this was a new thing for Adobe too.

I also have photos waiting for over a month,I think 40 days,but I'm not complaining and I'm sure that AS is doing everything possible to adapt to this new situation.

We live in an era where timing is everything,I don't think AS could easily sit down and waste a year organizing everything so as not to create these situations,they had to act quickly in their interest which coincides with ours,and clearly they are trying to manage the situation as best they can,and I'm more than sure that soon everything will be back to working in the best way.

Her Ugliness · « **Reply #64 on:** September 26, 2023, 06:04 »

Quote from: Injustice for all on September 26, 2023, 05:35

I'm sure that AS is doing everything possible to adapt to this new situation.

Like what?
Mat specifically said they are not looking for new reviewers. So, the rate of images submitted increases by 50, but they don't increase the reviewer numbe at all, which is the only possible solution. Obviosuly they don't have enough reviewers for the mass of AI images they get and the ones they have seem to work under extreme stress, seeing what kind of wonky images with impossible physics and trademarked items they let through in masses.
As far as I can tell AS is doing exactly nothing to adapt to this new situation.

And I would not mind the long review times, if it wouldn't mean that it became impossible to get time sensitive images approved in time. With seasonal content it is extremely crucial to get the timing exactly right to give the images their best sale potential. And with completely unpredictable review times that has become impossible. I started Halloween images when review times were around 7 days and calculated my submission time according to that. Suddenly the review time is not 7 days anymore, but 7 weeks+. How am I supposed to plan with something like this?

Injustice for all · « **Reply #65 on:** September 26, 2023, 06:26 »

Quote from: Her Ugliness on September 26, 2023, 06:04

Quote from: Injustice for all on September 26, 2023, 05:35
I'm sure that AS is doing everything possible to adapt to this new situation.

Like what?
Mat specifically said they are not looking for new reviewers. So, the rate of images submitted increases by 50, but they don't increase the reviewer numbe at all, which is the only possible solution. Obviosuly they don't have enough reviewers for the mass of AI images they get and the ones they have seem to work under extreme stress, seeing what kind of wonky images with impossible physics and trademarked items they let through in masses.
As far as I can tell AS is doing exactly nothing to adapt to this new situation.

And I would not mind the long review times, if it wouldn't mean that it became impossible to get time sensitive images approved in time. With seasonal content it is extremely crucial to get the timing exactly right to give the images their best sale potential. And with completely unpredictable review times that has become impossible. I started Halloween images when review times were around 7 days and calculated my submission time according to that. Suddenly the review time is not 7 days anymore, but 7 weeks+. How am I supposed to plan with something like this?

Sorry,but how can you say they aren't doing anything about it?

yes,Mat said they don't hire other reviewers,but maybe here through microstockgroup,maybe they already did it,maybe they will,you don't know.

Of course,it's important to have seasonal content approved on time,and you think they don't know that?

Do you think not having this type of new content ready for sale in time would please AS? Why not? Obviously it would be better for them too!

Don't think that they are naive,I am more than certain that they are doing everything possible to bring the situation back to normal,I don't see why it should be any different than this.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #66 on:** September 26, 2023, 07:45 »

I don't know what Adobe Stock is doing, but I can - and have - observed the new approvals over the last couple of months.

What I see is that the same parade of mistakes continues - there are some decent images buried in the flood, of course.

If things were being taken care of, I'd expect to see fewer logos, extra/missing limbs/digits, laws of physics being mangled in photo-realistic images, etc. etc.

f8 · « **Reply #67 on:** September 26, 2023, 09:29 »

The current review times at Adobe are a disgrace. Not to reminisce but back in the good old days before microstock and digital we used to package up our slides and send to the agency across the country or to another country by Fedex. The submission rejects would be returned usually within 2-3 weeks with a personal note from your editor. Surely a company like Adobe can do better than analog.

Jaggy · « **Reply #68 on:** September 26, 2023, 10:29 »

I'm now at over 6 weeks on some of my submissions. It's a joke.

Dani1985 · « **Reply #69 on:** October 02, 2023, 04:47 »

Mine is now over two months..

Dog-maDe-sign · « **Reply #70 on:** October 23, 2023, 07:05 »

Hey Mat, don't you think Adobe should hire some new employees, with human intelligence, for real contents review?

cascoly · « **Reply #71 on:** October 23, 2023, 13:21 »

the problem isnt just the long review times - it's random chance of review - many here reporting reviews of a week while others have images stewing for months.

i recently had a handful of images rejected (for the usual vague 'quality' reasons) that were submitted about a week ago, while many others (including AIM) have been there for 2 months

Injustice for all · « **Reply #72 on:** October 23, 2023, 19:14 »

Quote from: cascoly on October 23, 2023, 13:21

the problem isnt just the long review times - it's random chance of review - many here reporting reviews of a week while others have images stewing for months.

i recently had a handful of images rejected (for the usual vague 'quality' reasons) that were submitted about a week ago, while many others (including AIM) have been there for 2 months

maybe it depends on the quantity you send,I never have such long times,a couple of weeks max,because I send about a thousand contents in a year.

I also have several rejections,and I have noticed a trend,perhaps a coincidence, at the beginning of each year I never have rejections,as the year progresses the percentage of rejections increases.

but who knows for sure?maybe it just happened that way for other reasons.

however,nothing can be ruled out,because Adobe's sales system seems like clockwork to me,apart from last month when I had an amazing surge in sales, the fluctuations in the number of sales have always been minimal with a slow increase upwards in time.

blvdone · « **Reply #73 on:** October 23, 2023, 19:31 »

I have 2,000 AI generated photos in review now. The oldest batch is "2 month ago". They must be having hundreds of thousands of AI generated photos in review now.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #74 on:** October 23, 2023, 20:00 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on September 26, 2023, 07:45

I don't know what Adobe Stock is doing, but I can - and have - observed the new approvals over the last couple of months.

What I see is that the same parade of mistakes continues - there are some decent images buried in the flood, of course.

If things were being taken care of, I'd expect to see fewer logos, extra/missing limbs/digits, laws of physics being mangled in photo-realistic images, etc. etc.

You're right about that,sorry I didn't notice your reply,wow it's already been a month!

anyway yes,instead of rejecting valid content,they should clean up all these AI generated images uploaded without even looking at them,I agree 100% with this.

I generate AI content on repeat these days,but first I divide it into categories,then I look at them all carefully,and I select them carefully,and I discard many,in a similar series I choose a maximum of 2-3 that are best for me...in short,a long process that takes time.

some (many?) contributors don't care,they just want to generate and upload and Adobe shouldn't allow that.

However,in Mat's latest livestream,he said that they are working on it.

I think their situation also needs to be understood,because they are working on many things at the same time,I can only imagine what a mess they are dealing with!

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: review times?? (Read 11296 times)

Her Ugliness

cascoly

Her Ugliness

Lowls

yuriy

Lowls

gnirtS

MihaiZaharia

HalfFull

Lowls

DiscreetDuck

yuriy

gnirtS

Injustice for all

Her Ugliness

Injustice for all

Jo Ann Snover

f8

Jaggy

Dani1985

Dog-maDe-sign

cascoly

Injustice for all

blvdone

Injustice for all

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors