Author Topic: Update to metadata requirements for generative AI content at Adobe Stock (Read 5760 times)

MatHayward · « **on:** June 14, 2023, 14:39 »

Hi everyone,

I'm announcing a big update in the workflow for those of you submitting generative AI images to Adobe Stock. With the successful launch of the search filter and generative AI display in the customer facing site, we are no longer requiring you add "generative AI" to your title or keywords. Effective immediately, you can stop adding "generative AI" to your title and keywords if you prefer.

It is VERY important you continue to select the "created using generative AI tools" checkbox and that you submit your generative AI content as an illustration. Let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Mat Hayward

LizC · « **Reply #1 on:** June 14, 2023, 15:01 »

Why does Adobe think my uploaded PNG file is ai generated? It is not, it was made in Inkscape. It's sitting in review with a message reminding me to select the generated with ai checkbox

Just_to_inform_people2 · « **Reply #3 on:** June 14, 2023, 15:26 »

cobalt · « **Reply #4 on:** June 14, 2023, 15:26 »

Thank you, that will save us time

sbob76 · « **Reply #5 on:** June 14, 2023, 16:28 »

Quote from: MatHayward on June 14, 2023, 14:39

Hi everyone,

I'm announcing a big update in the workflow for those of you submitting generative AI images to Adobe Stock. With the successful launch of the search filter and generative AI display in the customer facing site, we are no longer requiring you add "generative AI" to your title or keywords. Effective immediately, you can stop adding "generative AI" to your title and keywords if you prefer.

It is VERY important you continue to select the "created using generative AI tools" checkbox and that you submit your generative AI content as an illustration. Let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Mat Hayward

But how will you filter a portfolio for AI images in the future if the keywords no longer have to be added? The option to browse portfolios based on search criteria is, in my opinion, long overdue and i cannot understand why this has not been possible for a long time.

LizC · « **Reply #6 on:** June 14, 2023, 20:54 »

Quote from: MatHayward on June 14, 2023, 15:17

Quote from: LizC on June 14, 2023, 15:01
Why does Adobe think my uploaded PNG file is ai generated? It is not, it was made in Inkscape. It's sitting in review with a message reminding me to select the generated with ai checkbox

Are you referencing the yellow bar in the contributor portal that says "If you submit Generative AI images you must select the checkbox"?

If so, that isn't targeted to you specifically and is not triggered by your PNG file. That message is visible to all contributors upon upload, regardless of asset type.

Thanks for the question,

Mat

Yes the yellow bar is what I was referring to, but it was only the PNG image that had the ai generative checkbox option when I was submitting the file, the other files I submitted before and since didn't have that checkbox available. I'm guessing it's because they were vector files?

Madoo · « **Reply #7 on:** June 15, 2023, 00:32 »

Quote from: MatHayward on June 14, 2023, 14:39

Hi everyone,

I'm announcing a big update in the workflow for those of you submitting generative AI images to Adobe Stock. With the successful launch of the search filter and generative AI display in the customer facing site, we are no longer requiring you add "generative AI" to your title or keywords. Effective immediately, you can stop adding "generative AI" to your title and keywords if you prefer.

It is VERY important you continue to select the "created using generative AI tools" checkbox and that you submit your generative AI content as an illustration. Let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Mat Hayward

Do you realize that no one of AI uploaders is forced to select that option ?
Do you realize that yellow bar in upload section does nothing to force them to upload AI content as they are pleased to ?
Do you realize that AI content is uploaded even as photos ? And there is nothing to stop AI uploaders to do so ?
Do you realize that AI content is uploaded even as vectors ? And there is nothing to stop AI uploaders to do so ?
Simply look at new photos or vectors in collection, you'll see what I am talking about.
Do you realize that there is various groups on social media that are posting, on daily bases, basically content with how to F**K Adobe and submit AI content?
Do you realize how much it is demotivational for your contributors to wait 28 days for moderation and we all know that cause of that is AI pandemic ?
Do you realize how much it is demotivational for your photo/vector/illustration contributors to see that blurry AI "art" with deformed faces and hands are accepted ?
Do you realize how much your AI acceptance with no quality standards harm your photo/vector/illustration contributors ?

gnirtS · « **Reply #8 on:** June 15, 2023, 00:46 »

I posted this in response on FB, not aimed at Matt but AS in general.

The various FB groups along with other forums are full of people doing this. Actually asking for help in how many AIs they can submit before account gets flagged, what happens if they don't tick the boxes and so on.

There are verifiably, a large number of people, bulk submitting AI to the main collection without labelling. And its getting accepted.

There's no detection and no sanction for this.

(Yes SS and others have the same problem).

kuriouskat · « **Reply #9 on:** June 15, 2023, 03:01 »

Quote from: gnirtS on June 15, 2023, 00:46

I posted this in response on FB, not aimed at Matt but AS in general.

The various FB groups along with other forums are full of people doing this. Actually asking for help in how many AIs they can submit before account gets flagged, what happens if they don't tick the boxes and so on.

There are verifiably, a large number of people, bulk submitting AI to the main collection without labelling. And its getting accepted.

There's no detection and no sanction for this.

(Yes SS and others have the same problem).

Agree - the problem is widespread, and for those who are trying to play by the rules, it's a kick in the teeth and further crashing our earnings.

At first, I thought 'how can the reviewers not see that this is AI?', but now it's getting harder and harder to tell. By allowing it, the flood gates have opened to a lot of people who are willing to cheat the system for short term gain.

Put a REPORT button on your pages, so that anything suspicious can be flagged and checked, before the problem gets totally out of hand.

Maybe also do a search in the database for Generative AI, then exclude 'Generative AI' from the results? There are over 140k images that mostly shouldn't be there, which can't be good for your customers and is certainly not good for the rest of us who are trying to play by the rules.

And that's just people who forgot to tick a box.

The genie is out of the bottle, and we can't put it back, but we do have a responsibility to figure out how to control it.

Stockmaan · « **Reply #10 on:** June 15, 2023, 03:51 »

if you work according to the rules and are honest, then you have a hard time competing with those who do not follow the rules. Nonsense.

jav · « **Reply #11 on:** June 15, 2023, 06:09 »

Hello, I want to know when the file review will be normalized, since I have a couple that have been uploaded for 25 days.
Thank you!

Madoo · « **Reply #12 on:** June 24, 2023, 05:25 »

More and more AI content is added to a vector collection ?

?
How it is possible ?

??

And Adobe still doesn't punish fraudulent uploaders.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #13 on:** June 24, 2023, 10:43 »

Quote from: KuriousKat on June 15, 2023, 03:01

Put a REPORT button on your pages, so that anything suspicious can be flagged and checked, before the problem gets totally out of hand.

While I agree and that's a good idea, they should also have a report button for stolen images. (I mean all agencies not just targeting Adobe) But as much as we'd like to see a report button, I think we have seen over the years how the agencies don't care and don't respond and don't police these things on their own.

We'd like it, they don't care. That's why we won't see a report button or any agency that cares enough to look for stolen images or AI that's not properly tagged. It cost money and the task of finding and removing is complex and time consuming. If they started with 2020 and reviewed every image since then for AI that's not tagged as AI?

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #14 on:** June 24, 2023, 13:57 »

There is a lot of newly-accepted work that seems (to me) to be clearly AI generated and yet isn't marked as such - so buyers who choose to turn on the "Exclude Generative AI" filter will still see this work in search results.

I think it's fundamental to mark AI generated work in the Adobe Stock collection as such - I'd like to see an overlay similar to the "EDITORIAL ONLY"

Some of the portfolios I've looked at over the last couple of days have a mix of tagged and untagged work, perhaps suggesting they just forgot to check the box. In that case it seems imperative that the review process fix this - build a tool to detect the AI content.

For the portfolios that don't have any tagged images it suggests either that they don't understand what they need to do, or that they hope to get the widest exposure for their work and don't want the tag for that reason. There are a lot of new contributors who only have AI submissions; perhaps some extra scrutiny for the first 100-200 images (like with stolen work detection) would help fix this problem.

Some items have "Generative AI" in the title, so even though they're not tagged, they'd be easy to find. There are ~200 like that in one of the "Premium" portfolios (which does have other AI content correctly tagged).

I have kept lots of notes on the items I've found. I'm happy to share with Adobe if they want to fix this problem and properly tag the AI generated content in their (growing) collection.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #15 on:** June 24, 2023, 16:57 »

gnirtS · « **Reply #16 on:** June 24, 2023, 22:59 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on June 24, 2023, 13:57

For the portfolios that don't have any tagged images it suggests either that they don't understand what they need to do, or that they hope to get the widest exposure for their work and don't want the tag for that reason. There are a lot of new contributors who only have AI submissions; perhaps some extra scrutiny for the first 100-200 images (like with stolen work detection) would help fix this problem.

Realistically most are fully aware of what they SHOULD be doing but also aware the system doesn't enforce and won't catch them so they're knowingly generating vast numbers of AI images, submitting them as non-AI to pad their portfolio.

Places like Pakistan on the FB groups have a *lot* of people openly admitting to doing this.
On SS for example, get approved with a handful of mobile phone photos of stuff in your garden, next day 200 AI coffee cups appear.

AI has allowed people who previously couldn't generate much content to suddenly massively bulk up.

How to fix it? Its hard and as AI gets better it gets harder. More pattern recognition on upload profiles maybe.

I do like the idea of a "report" button which with the right usage limits and constraints could trigger a search for similars and if suspicious, flag up for a human to check.

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #17 on:** June 25, 2023, 05:11 »

“The wind is rising!…We must try to live!” Paul valery/Miyazaki Hayao

stoker2014 · « **Reply #18 on:** June 25, 2023, 10:04 »

Quote from: Madoo on June 15, 2023, 00:32

Quote from: MatHayward on June 14, 2023, 14:39
Hi everyone,

I'm announcing a big update in the workflow for those of you submitting generative AI images to Adobe Stock. With the successful launch of the search filter and generative AI display in the customer facing site, we are no longer requiring you add "generative AI" to your title or keywords. Effective immediately, you can stop adding "generative AI" to your title and keywords if you prefer.

It is VERY important you continue to select the "created using generative AI tools" checkbox and that you submit your generative AI content as an illustration. Let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Mat Hayward

Do you realize that no one of AI uploaders is forced to select that option ?
Do you realize that yellow bar in upload section does nothing to force them to upload AI content as they are pleased to ?
Do you realize that AI content is uploaded even as photos ? And there is nothing to stop AI uploaders to do so ?
Do you realize that AI content is uploaded even as vectors ? And there is nothing to stop AI uploaders to do so ?
Simply look at new photos or vectors in collection, you'll see what I am talking about.
Do you realize that there is various groups on social media that are posting, on daily bases, basically content with how to F**K Adobe and submit AI content?
Do you realize how much it is demotivational for your contributors to wait 28 days for moderation and we all know that cause of that is AI pandemic ?
Do you realize how much it is demotivational for your photo/vector/illustration contributors to see that blurry AI "art" with deformed faces and hands are accepted ?
Do you realize how much your AI acceptance with no quality standards harm your photo/vector/illustration contributors ?

And what does MatHayward have to do with it? Does he decide whether or not to accept AI content?
What are you so afraid of, competition? About 10 years ago, stock site databases began to grow, and everyone was screaming that everyone would go bankrupt, that income would fall, etc. Outside the window is 2023, and bases of several tens of millions of content do not greatly affect the income of authors.
At the expense of AI content, which one of the authors does not mark as AI content, well, here on the forum I have already discussed this issue, programs that create AI add this information to the file metadata. As a result, such an author will be banned from Adobe. Not to mention the fact that there will not be many such authors initially.
In short, do not hysteria.

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #19 on:** June 25, 2023, 10:17 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on June 25, 2023, 10:04

In short, do not hysteria.

Psychiatrization is an easily accessible method for people who do not have the strength of arguments.
You haven't proven anything in your post. Btw, it seems to be you shoot videos for stock, not photography or illustrations.

Her Ugliness · « **Reply #20 on:** June 25, 2023, 11:34 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on June 25, 2023, 10:04

And what does MatHayward have to do with it?

He works for Adobe and is our only means of communicating with Adobe on this froum. So, when we have questons or concerns regarding Adobe, who else are we suppposed to address here than him?

stoker2014 · « **Reply #21 on:** June 25, 2023, 13:28 »

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on June 25, 2023, 10:17

Quote from: stoker2014 on June 25, 2023, 10:04
In short, do not hysteria.

Psychiatrization is an easily accessible method for people who do not have the strength of arguments.
You haven't proven anything in your post. Btw, it seems to be you shoot videos for stock, not photography or illustrations.

I wrote everything correctly, there is definitely hysteria.
Well, I also sell photos, too, a little. And what's stopping you from making videos too?

stoker2014 · « **Reply #22 on:** June 25, 2023, 13:30 »

Quote from: Her Ugliness on June 25, 2023, 11:34

Quote from: stoker2014 on June 25, 2023, 10:04
And what does MatHayward have to do with it?

He works for Adobe and is our only means of communicating with Adobe on this froum. So, when we have questons or concerns regarding Adobe, who else are we suppposed to address here than him?

You need to ask normal and correct questions, and not write a stream of hysteria. Many of the questions are completely stupid.

Her Ugliness · « **Reply #23 on:** June 25, 2023, 14:09 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on June 25, 2023, 13:30

Quote from: Her Ugliness on June 25, 2023, 11:34
Quote from: stoker2014 on June 25, 2023, 10:04
And what does MatHayward have to do with it?

He works for Adobe and is our only means of communicating with Adobe on this froum. So, when we have questons or concerns regarding Adobe, who else are we suppposed to address here than him?
You need to ask normal and correct questions, and not write a stream of hysteria. Many of the questions are completely stupid.

I did not ask these questions.

And I do not think they are stupid at all, but real concern Adobe needs to address.

stoker2014 · « **Reply #24 on:** June 25, 2023, 15:34 »

Quote from: Her Ugliness on June 25, 2023, 14:09

Quote from: stoker2014 on June 25, 2023, 13:30
Quote from: Her Ugliness on June 25, 2023, 11:34
Quote from: stoker2014 on June 25, 2023, 10:04
And what does MatHayward have to do with it?

He works for Adobe and is our only means of communicating with Adobe on this froum. So, when we have questons or concerns regarding Adobe, who else are we suppposed to address here than him?
You need to ask normal and correct questions, and not write a stream of hysteria. Many of the questions are completely stupid.

I did not ask these questions.
And I do not think they are stupid at all, but real concern Adobe needs to address.

What is the problem with adobe? - Has the duration of the check increased. Besides Adobe, there are many stock agencies that sell AI content.

Madoo · « **Reply #25 on:** June 25, 2023, 23:44 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on June 25, 2023, 10:04

Quote from: Madoo on June 15, 2023, 00:32
Quote from: MatHayward on June 14, 2023, 14:39
Hi everyone,

I'm announcing a big update in the workflow for those of you submitting generative AI images to Adobe Stock. With the successful launch of the search filter and generative AI display in the customer facing site, we are no longer requiring you add "generative AI" to your title or keywords. Effective immediately, you can stop adding "generative AI" to your title and keywords if you prefer.

It is VERY important you continue to select the "created using generative AI tools" checkbox and that you submit your generative AI content as an illustration. Let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Mat Hayward

Do you realize that no one of AI uploaders is forced to select that option ?
Do you realize that yellow bar in upload section does nothing to force them to upload AI content as they are pleased to ?
Do you realize that AI content is uploaded even as photos ? And there is nothing to stop AI uploaders to do so ?
Do you realize that AI content is uploaded even as vectors ? And there is nothing to stop AI uploaders to do so ?
Simply look at new photos or vectors in collection, you'll see what I am talking about.
Do you realize that there is various groups on social media that are posting, on daily bases, basically content with how to F**K Adobe and submit AI content?
Do you realize how much it is demotivational for your contributors to wait 28 days for moderation and we all know that cause of that is AI pandemic ?
Do you realize how much it is demotivational for your photo/vector/illustration contributors to see that blurry AI "art" with deformed faces and hands are accepted ?
Do you realize how much your AI acceptance with no quality standards harm your photo/vector/illustration contributors ?
And what does MatHayward have to do with it? Does he decide whether or not to accept AI content?
What are you so afraid of, competition? About 10 years ago, stock site databases began to grow, and everyone was screaming that everyone would go bankrupt, that income would fall, etc. Outside the window is 2023, and bases of several tens of millions of content do not greatly affect the income of authors.
At the expense of AI content, which one of the authors does not mark as AI content, well, here on the forum I have already discussed this issue, programs that create AI add this information to the file metadata. As a result, such an author will be banned from Adobe. Not to mention the fact that there will not be many such authors initially.
In short, do not hysteria.

There are two types of contributors, people that play by the rules and people that don't.
It is simple as that.
Problem is that AI "authors" which doesn't play by the rules are NOT , and it seems that they will NOT be, banned from Adobe. Even as this Ai "wild west" upload situation getting worse and worse on daily basis.
I strongly think that Adobe suppose to protect their contributors by punishing those who doesn't play by the rules.

And by the way....If you in that post of mine found Mat directly and not Adobe...Maybe you should try thinking out of the box.
In short, use brain.

Madoo · « **Reply #26 on:** June 26, 2023, 00:19 »

gnirtS · « **Reply #27 on:** June 26, 2023, 01:18 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on June 25, 2023, 10:04

At the expense of AI content, which one of the authors does not mark as AI content, well, here on the forum I have already discussed this issue, programs that create AI add this information to the file metadata.

You do realise it takes seconds to batch change any Metadata you want to remove things?

Her Ugliness · « **Reply #28 on:** June 26, 2023, 01:26 »

Quote from: gnirtS on June 26, 2023, 01:18

Quote from: stoker2014 on June 25, 2023, 10:04
At the expense of AI content, which one of the authors does not mark as AI content, well, here on the forum I have already discussed this issue, programs that create AI add this information to the file metadata.

You do realise it takes seconds to batch change any Metadata you want to remove things?

I already told him that, even explained to him how to remove the metadata, but he is resistant to learning, it seems.

stoker2014 · « **Reply #29 on:** June 26, 2023, 02:10 »

1. Why do you all think that non-AI labeled content sells better than AI labeled content?

gnirtS · « **Reply #30 on:** June 26, 2023, 08:31 »

Non-labelled AI allows them to absolutely flood the database with content and knock other, real items way down the search.

Her Ugliness · « **Reply #31 on:** June 26, 2023, 08:52 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on June 26, 2023, 02:10

1. Why do you all think that non-AI labeled content sells better than AI labeled content?

- It gets reviewed much faster (2-3) as in opposite to AI content (30 days), thus it appears at the top of the seach when reviewed, but when AI content finally gets approved, it appears somewhere fat in the back, unless customers use a serach filter, so it doesn't get noticed as much.

- There are customers who do not want to buy AI contet, they only want real photos, many because of the still ongoing legal uncertainties surrounding AI content. I have not yet heard of any customer who wants AI images only, and not real photos. So the change of people enabling filters to look at real photos only is higher than of people enabling filters to only look at AI content

So AI content that is mislabeled as real photos has a higher chance of selling, simply because it is easier to be found. Why else do you think Facebook is full of groups discussing how to get away with labeling AI content as real photos? Why do you think people purposefully mislabel their content, if there is nothing to gain from it?

stoker2014 · « **Reply #32 on:** June 26, 2023, 09:43 »

Quote from: Her Ugliness on June 26, 2023, 08:52

So AI content that is mislabeled as real photos has a higher chance of selling, simply because it is easier to be found. Why else do you think Facebook is full of groups discussing how to get away with labeling AI content as real photos? Why do you think people purposefully mislabel their content, if there is nothing to gain from it?

These questions should be answered by MatHayward. At least these are at least reasonable questions.
Links to Facebook groups where they teach how to deceive adobe can you post here?

Well, as for what sells better, it's the authors who should write here. We need a comparable percentage of sales. For example, in a month the author sold 1,000 real photos with a total portfolio of 15,000, which means that he sold 6.7%. And he sold 200 photos created by AI with a portfolio of 2000, which is equal to 10%. I look forward to similar comparisons from those who sell content with AI.

cascoly · « **Reply #33 on:** June 26, 2023, 19:46 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on June 26, 2023, 09:43

...We need a comparable percentage of sales. .... I look forward to similar comparisons from those who sell content with AI.

why would anyone reply to the suggestions of someone who may not even HAVE a portfolio!

continued complaining when you don't give actual examples from a portfolio make it impossible for AS or others to respond to questions.

stoker2014 · « **Reply #34 on:** June 27, 2023, 06:46 »

Quote from: cascoly on June 26, 2023, 19:46

Quote from: stoker2014 on June 26, 2023, 09:43
...We need a comparable percentage of sales. .... I look forward to similar comparisons from those who sell content with AI.

why would anyone reply to the suggestions of someone who may not even HAVE a portfolio!

continued complaining when you don't give actual examples from a portfolio make it impossible for AS or others to respond to questions.

I didn't complain, I answered the question.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Update to metadata requirements for generative AI content at Adobe Stock (Read 5760 times)

Just_to_inform_people2

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors