Author Topic: This is highly unprofessional (Read 8634 times)

Sandeel · « **on:** October 19, 2023, 07:17 »

Many may praise Adobe to the skies, but I think they are being unprofessional. As a high volume seller with a rather small portfolio I put a lot of work into each image, and Adobe (or rather Fotolia) used to appreciate that, but nowadays it's getting ridiculous.

A whole batch of seasonal images waited a whole month for review just to be rejected as a whole! I never get any rejections at all, so a whole beautiful batch, are you kidding me? Did they even look at them, or are they so overworked with the avalanche of AI images that they just don't care anymore?

My new images are not presented to the buyers at all. In theory they have a chance if they are shown under the older bestsellers when people click on those, but Adobe very unwisely shows videos under photos and vice versa. Also the thumbnails there, especially for panoramas, are STILL all stretched, distorted and useless. The series that are shown when you click on "see more" don't make sense at all. So much is missing randomly. It's all a mess, and Adobe has NO IDEA which images have high selling potentiality and which ones don't. They mostly show the images that never could pick up properly, and even after years stick to those, instead of showing new stuff or at least older stuff that sold great but suddenly got lost in the algorithm. And when once in a blue moon an image picks up and sells 5 times every day, after one month they literally kill it by throwing it from page one straight to page 300 or so, never to be seen again. This is not how you find and sell successful content, Adobe.

I wonder how many people have noticed these obvious problems. If you don't agree, fine, but please don't write comments like "if they are so bad why do you upload to them". I still earn my livelihood with them, but the better and bigger my portfolio becomes, the worse the sales become.

Her Ugliness · « **Reply #1 on:** October 19, 2023, 07:49 »

There has been a whole thread about the ridiculous rejections, but I cannot find it right now. Like you, many people say that they suddenly get many more images rejected than before. It is happening to me too and for me the difference of how many photos of mine used to get approved and how many get rejected now is really drastic. Mat claims nothing has changed, but obviously it has.

I don't think Adobe cares for real photos anymore. All that matters to them is AI.

Bauman · « **Reply #2 on:** October 19, 2023, 08:03 »

I agree with you. I am also a photographer with a small portfolio (around 5,000 images) selling a lot for 15 years.

The same thing happened to me for the first time last week with a batch of 15 images.

13 were rejected, and 2 were taken.

It had never happened to me. I have a nearly 100% approval rate at every agency.

I'm a professional; I shoot with a 60-megapixel camera and $2/3,000 lenses. I travel 30,000 km a year to shoot. Each image I upload requires 30 minutes/1 hour of postproduction with a $3000 desktop.

With this Adobe policy, my images that have always sold a lot are becoming invisible or rejected. Hidden by the sea of AI images (probably copied from some of our old images that were selling $:-\$ ) that Adobe approves every day and which cost like peanuts. No photography equipment, no travel costs, no effort to learn the art of photography.

Thanks Adobe. In a few years, I would like to know from which art AI will copy.

Bauman · « **Reply #3 on:** October 19, 2023, 08:14 »

Quote from: Her Ugliness on October 19, 2023, 07:49

I don't think Adobe cares for real photos anymore. All that matters to them is AI.

I'm afraid you're right. The future holds a world of fake images for us.

How sad!

pancaketom · « **Reply #4 on:** October 19, 2023, 10:33 »

I have always been annoyed and question what is going on when an entire batch gets rejected for the same reason. My batches are rarely all from the same photo shoot and are often quite different and when one batch is 100% accepted and the next is 100% rejected it does not inspire confidence in the review process, although it does suggest that it is a human reviewer and not a so called AI bot.

How all the AI dreck gets through is another question.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #5 on:** October 19, 2023, 10:44 »

Quote from: Sandeel on October 19, 2023, 07:17

the better and bigger my portfolio becomes, the worse the sales become.

I had this same experience as you on Shutterstock and Istock,but not on Adobe.

on Istock I exceeded the minimum payout after just 5 months,that is,I earned at least 100 USD (more) right from the start,with around 500 images in 2018,when I had just started in microstock,then instead of improving with the increase of the contents got worse,until it stabilized,and even adding thousands more contents after years it's still the same,50 more or less,always the same thing every month.

From my experience,which may obviously be different for others,Adobe's sales system works better than any other agency,in particular I noticed that the fluctuations in monthly income are minimal,and once I reach a minimum monthly sales volume I no longer go below that.

I've never been able to interpret Shutterstock,especially with the new payment structure you can't understand anything anymore,it's all too random and there are long periods of months and months of nothing,and then at a certain point comes the month in which I sell whatever thing repeatedly,at prices that are out of the ordinary,and it is like this for the whole month...and then again the void!

It seems to me that in all the other agencies the microstock has become more a matter of luck than anything else,and it also seems to me that the only real agency where it is possible to build a business over time is Adobe Stock.

I hope it continues like this for me,because I need this job.

as my Adobe portfolio grows,my sales increase.

these are my impressions and my experience so far....now you can also shoot me if you want!

Mifornia · « **Reply #6 on:** October 19, 2023, 18:30 »

I also noticed a trend that one illustration gets to the top of the search, sells well daily for about 2 months, then disappears. At the same time another illustration gets the spotlight and start selling well then also disappears, and so on. They are not my best illustrations even, so I don’t know why those particular ones outsell my “best” ones by 500%?

I’m fairly new to stock, about a year, with only 3 pages of png illustrations. So I assumed that was the norm. Is someone hand picking and dropping them or is it an algorithm?

yuriy · « **Reply #7 on:** October 19, 2023, 18:47 »

Quote from: Bauman on October 19, 2023, 08:03

I agree with you. I am also a photographer with a small portfolio (around 5,000 images) selling a lot for 15 years.

The same thing happened to me for the first time last week with a batch of 15 images.

13 were rejected, and 2 were taken.

It had never happened to me. I have a nearly 100% approval rate at every agency.

I'm a professional; I shoot with a 60-megapixel camera and $2/3,000 lenses. I travel 30,000 km a year to shoot. Each image I upload requires 30 minutes/1 hour of postproduction with a $3000 desktop.

With this Adobe policy, my images that have always sold a lot are becoming invisible or rejected. Hidden by the sea of AI images (probably copied from some of our old images that were selling $:-\$ ) that Adobe approves every day and which cost like peanuts. No photography equipment, no travel costs, no effort to learn the art of photography.

Thanks Adobe. In a few years, I would like to know from which art AI will copy.

you guys are getting images reviewed? must be nice.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #8 on:** October 19, 2023, 21:19 »

Quote from: Sandeel on October 19, 2023, 07:17

I still earn my livelihood with them

in my opinion you should be more than happy and satisfied to be able to say this sentence,and don't get angry about a rejected batch,it can happen.

I had uploaded a batch of 24 videos and a couple of days ago they rejected half of it.Honestly,i mostly stopped for 10 minutes to understand why,and then I moved on.

in any case you can be satisfied and happy to be able to say that phrase"I still earn my livelihood with them"wow!fantastic!

Injustice for all · « **Reply #9 on:** October 19, 2023, 21:52 »

Quote from: pancaketom on October 19, 2023, 10:33

although it does suggest that it is a human reviewer and not a so called AI bot.

yes,they are human reviewers.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #10 on:** October 19, 2023, 21:57 »

Quote from: Bauman on October 19, 2023, 08:14

Quote from: Her Ugliness on October 19, 2023, 07:49
I don't think Adobe cares for real photos anymore. All that matters to them is AI.

I'm afraid you're right. The future holds a world of fake images for us.

How sad!

yes,this is the reality,this is the future,so it's better to try to use this new technology to our own advantage,while we still have time.....tick..tock..the clock is ticking!

Sandeel · « **Reply #11 on:** October 20, 2023, 04:20 »

Quote from: Injustice for all on October 19, 2023, 21:19

Quote from: Sandeel on October 19, 2023, 07:17
I still earn my livelihood with them

in my opinion you should be more than happy and satisfied to be able to say this sentence,and don't get angry about a rejected batch,it can happen.

I had uploaded a batch of 24 videos and a couple of days ago they rejected half of it.Honestly,i mostly stopped for 10 minutes to understand why,and then I moved on.

in any case you can be satisfied and happy to be able to say that phrase"I still earn my livelihood with them"wow!fantastic!

Well thanks, but for me it's not a game of luck, it's a profession and I know what I'm doing, what sells and what doesn't, at least for my content. This is my main job and has been for over 10 years. That batch that was rejected was the result of 2 weeks of very focussed work for me. And I stand by it: it's highly unprofessional on Adobe's part, and has nothing to do with me being lucky or grateful or happy.

Sandeel · « **Reply #12 on:** October 20, 2023, 04:32 »

Quote from: Carmifornia on October 19, 2023, 18:30

I also noticed a trend that one illustration gets to the top of the search, sells well daily for about 2 months, then disappears. At the same time another illustration gets the spotlight and start selling well then also disappears, and so on. They are not my best illustrations even, so I don’t know why those particular ones outsell my “best” ones by 500%?

I’m fairly new to stock, about a year, with only 3 pages of png illustrations. So I assumed that was the norm. Is someone hand picking and dropping them or is it an algorithm?

In my experience images can receive a kind of little bonus from the reviewer if they really like them, this way they get a slightly better positioning in the search results. But that's never enough, somebody has to find and buy them. Then they climb up a little and if a few others buy them, they can make it to the top pages. But there's also weird randomness and some images stay down even after several sales and then they die. And then there are those who make it to the top and sell really well (like 5 times a day, that would be over 1000 a year), but are suddenly "cancelled" nevertheless.

Sandeel · « **Reply #13 on:** October 20, 2023, 04:47 »

Quote from: Bauman on October 19, 2023, 08:03

I agree with you. I am also a photographer with a small portfolio (around 5,000 images) selling a lot for 15 years.

The same thing happened to me for the first time last week with a batch of 15 images.

13 were rejected, and 2 were taken.

It had never happened to me. I have a nearly 100% approval rate at every agency.

I'm a professional; I shoot with a 60-megapixel camera and $2/3,000 lenses. I travel 30,000 km a year to shoot. Each image I upload requires 30 minutes/1 hour of postproduction with a $3000 desktop.

With this Adobe policy, my images that have always sold a lot are becoming invisible or rejected. Hidden by the sea of AI images (probably copied from some of our old images that were selling $:-\$ ) that Adobe approves every day and which cost like peanuts. No photography equipment, no travel costs, no effort to learn the art of photography.

Thanks Adobe. In a few years, I would like to know from which art AI will copy.

There are contributors who upload lots of content including series, like 50 shots of the same scene straight out of the camera and they get through. I'm not condemning it, it's a different approach to microstock, but for contributors like us who work a lot but don't go for that kind of quantity, our stuff gets buried heavily in the "most recent" search" all the time. All I'm saying is, it would be nice if Adobe could recognize and consider the type of contributor whose stuff they are reviewing. If you upload few files and sell a lot, they shouldn't reject anything from you, and maybe give the images a tiny little help to be seen by a few. There is so much they should reject but don't, and hey, why not, let others have their chance, but they could show a little fairness and balance.

Sandeel · « **Reply #14 on:** October 20, 2023, 04:55 »

Thank you all for the interesting input. I didn't know random rejections were becoming a trend. The AI stuff seems to cause even more problems than I thought.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #15 on:** October 20, 2023, 06:01 »

Quote from: Sandeel on October 20, 2023, 04:20

Quote from: Injustice for all on October 19, 2023, 21:19
Quote from: Sandeel on October 19, 2023, 07:17
I still earn my livelihood with them

in my opinion you should be more than happy and satisfied to be able to say this sentence,and don't get angry about a rejected batch,it can happen.

I had uploaded a batch of 24 videos and a couple of days ago they rejected half of it.Honestly,i mostly stopped for 10 minutes to understand why,and then I moved on.

in any case you can be satisfied and happy to be able to say that phrase"I still earn my livelihood with them"wow!fantastic!

Well thanks, but for me it's not a game of luck, it's a profession and I know what I'm doing, what sells and what doesn't, at least for my content. This is my main job and has been for over 10 years. That batch that was rejected was the result of 2 weeks of very focussed work for me. And I stand by it: it's highly unprofessional on Adobe's part, and has nothing to do with me being lucky or grateful or happy.

everything depends mainly on luck in life,it's just that too often we don't realize it.
in this case you were unlucky because your batch of seasonal content was rejected,of course I understand it's heavy,send it again,I'm sure it will be approved.

I had been printing in the darkroom as a hobby since 1989,then as a profession,working in collaboration with ophthalmologists,then digital photography arrived,I abandoned photography and got involved in other projects,only many years later did I pick up the camera again.

I don't intend to make this mistake twice.

Today I survive mainly on microstock,I'm lucky that I live in my own house,no rent,but it's not easy,taxes in Italy are among the heaviest in Europe.

erik trikowich · « **Reply #16 on:** October 20, 2023, 10:49 »

Quote from: Sandeel on October 19, 2023, 07:17

As a high volume seller with a rather small portfolio I put a lot of work into each image, and Adobe (or rather Fotolia) used to appreciate that, but nowadays it's getting ridiculous.

I'm in a completely similar situation to yours! In one of the topics I wrote that they began to ignore me 100% after I refused to give my works for free download.
Have you noticed this trend in yourself?
In the near future, IMHO, Adobe will only have artificial intelligence, large studios and stocker teams churning out photos like a conveyor belt. Small stockers will be reset to zero, since they take up a lot of time and are of little use.
And what kind of equipment do you have, how much does it cost and how much money do you spend on getting high-quality photography - they don’t give a * about that!
If the buyer is frivolous and unprepossessing, he will choose artificial intelligence. And such buyers, IMHO, are in the majority. And even if you dance with a shaman’s tambourine, nothing will change.

Sandeel · « **Reply #17 on:** October 20, 2023, 11:14 »

Quote from: erik trikowich on October 20, 2023, 10:49

Quote from: Sandeel on October 19, 2023, 07:17
As a high volume seller with a rather small portfolio I put a lot of work into each image, and Adobe (or rather Fotolia) used to appreciate that, but nowadays it's getting ridiculous.

I'm in a completely similar situation to yours! In one of the topics I wrote that they began to ignore me 100% after I refused to give my works for free download.
Have you noticed this trend in yourself?
...

Wow, that's an interesting viewpoint. I had never considered that. I didn't opt in for the free downloads either, but I can't remember when this became a thing. Did they start it recently or years ago?

Injustice for all · « **Reply #18 on:** October 20, 2023, 12:24 »

Quote from: erik trikowich on October 20, 2023, 10:49

Quote from: Sandeel on October 19, 2023, 07:17
As a high volume seller with a rather small portfolio I put a lot of work into each image, and Adobe (or rather Fotolia) used to appreciate that, but nowadays it's getting ridiculous.

I'm in a completely similar situation to yours! In one of the topics I wrote that they began to ignore me 100% after I refused to give my works for free download.
Have you noticed this trend in yourself?
In the near future, IMHO, Adobe will only have artificial intelligence, large studios and stocker teams churning out photos like a conveyor belt. Small stockers will be reset to zero, since they take up a lot of time and are of little use.
And what kind of equipment do you have, how much does it cost and how much money do you spend on getting high-quality photography - they don’t give a * about that!
If the buyer is frivolous and unprepossessing, he will choose artificial intelligence. And such buyers, IMHO, are in the majority. And even if you dance with a shaman’s tambourine, nothing will change.

this is called paranoia!

I see that unfortunately not everyone understands how an agency like Adobe Stock works,which works in a completely different way from "classic" microstock agencies.

anyway ok,I won't say anything else because it's useless anyway.

erik trikowich · « **Reply #19 on:** October 20, 2023, 12:31 »

Quote from: Sandeel on October 20, 2023, 11:14

Wow, that's an interesting viewpoint. I had never considered that. I didn't opt in for the free downloads either, but I can't remember when this became a thing. Did they start it recently or years ago?

About four months ago I was offered for $5 to buy from me some photos selected by Adobe itself for free downloading. I refused, just like when they offered me about a year ago. Before this, my acceptance rate was 95-100%. Then it became 80%, then 60, 40, 10. And now the last 2.5 months - 0%. Moreover, the refusal was for the most incredible reasons. Works are checked for 2-3 months. Well, it doesn’t take much intelligence to guess that you are not welcome here. I stopped uploading work. I don't see the point in this. I think that this is a deliberate squeezing out of small animals that get underfoot.
My son works as a designer in one of the manufacturing companies. Yes, they download a very small number of stock photos, mostly from Shutter. But they swear at him a lot. Incorrect delivery, a lot of spam, a lot of similar ones. Finding the right photo takes a lot of time. They even take pictures themselves, using an iPhone. But if they are working on a serious project, they hire a photographer, and he works under their guidance.
Many photo stocks have closed their forums, the support is simply disgusting, some have completely fallen under artificial intelligence (BigStock). In a word, the authors were given big and thick... And what’s most monstrous is that the authors themselves are to blame for this. Stupidity and greed played a role.
I’m simply amazed at how much you have to disrespect yourself in order to give your works for free download, or upload numerous sets of vector graphics in one file.
If someone thinks that by mastering artificial intelligence he grabbed God by the beard, then I laugh at that.

Very soon you too will be kicked in the butt with a heavy boot!

erik trikowich · « **Reply #20 on:** October 20, 2023, 12:42 »

Quote from: Injustice for all on October 20, 2023, 12:24

this is called paranoia!

I see that unfortunately not everyone understands how an agency like Adobe Stock works,which works in a completely different way from "classic" microstock agencies.

anyway ok,I won't say anything else because it's useless anyway.

I pay five dollars per word - just tell me, stupid, how Adobe Stock works!

cascoly · « **Reply #21 on:** October 20, 2023, 13:07 »

Quote from: Sandeel on October 20, 2023, 11:14

Quote from: erik trikowich on October 20, 2023, 10:49
Quote from: Sandeel on October 19, 2023, 07:17
As a high volume seller with a rather small portfolio I put a lot of work into each image, and Adobe (or rather Fotolia) used to appreciate that, but nowadays it's getting ridiculous.

I'm in a completely similar situation to yours! In one of the topics I wrote that they began to ignore me 100% after I refused to give my works for free download.
Have you noticed this trend in yourself?
...

Wow, that's an interesting viewpoint. I had never considered that. I didn't opt in for the free downloads either, but I can't remember when this became a thing. Did they start it recently or years ago?

no need for conspiracy theories - i've always been opted in and also get the batch rejects & long (2 month+) wait times.

correlation is not causation, especally when it's anecdotal

Shuttershock · « **Reply #22 on:** October 20, 2023, 13:51 »

The annoying part is the batch rejection, its not like just one of 2 images are rejected like the good days, now a whole batch of 25 will be rejected. It is as if the reviewer rejects one image so rejects all 25, no other logical reason.

erik trikowich · « **Reply #23 on:** October 20, 2023, 14:23 »

Quote from: cascoly on October 20, 2023, 13:07

no need for conspiracy theories - i've always been opted in and also get the batch rejects & long (2 month+) wait times.

correlation is not causation, especally when it's anecdotal

Absolutely no theories, much less conspiracy! There is no need for this. If this concerns my message.
These are the realities of today, predatory business and expectations of good margins. If I had voluntary slaves, who knows, maybe I would have done the same.
You know, I love anecdot too! Let's wait and see what comes of this. Then we'll laugh together.

The Mighty Jungle · « **Reply #24 on:** October 20, 2023, 14:34 »

Quote from: Shuttershock on October 20, 2023, 13:51

The annoying part is the batch rejection, its not like just one of 2 images are rejected like the good days, now a whole batch of 25 will be rejected. It is as if the reviewer rejects one image so rejects all 25, no other logical reason.

The same thing happened to me a few years ago. 18 images - all different kinds - many of which have always been accepted over the years - all 18 were rejected. I had included a few in an entirely new style for me, that I suspect the reviewer didn't like them so rejected the whole batch.

Ever since then, I have uploaded one image per batch at a time. It is much more time-consuming, but it's something I have to do to prevent the arbitrary rejections you discuss above.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: This is highly unprofessional (Read 8634 times)

Sandeel

Her Ugliness

Bauman

Bauman

pancaketom

Injustice for all

Mifornia

yuriy

Injustice for all

Injustice for all

Injustice for all

Sandeel

Sandeel

Sandeel

Sandeel

Injustice for all

erik trikowich

Sandeel

Injustice for all

erik trikowich

erik trikowich

cascoly

Shuttershock

erik trikowich

The Mighty Jungle

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors