MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Adobe Stock => Topic started by: yuriy on March 04, 2024, 12:33
-
is it one decade ago?
-
Feel free to post images that should be reviewed. If it's unfair, so we can have an opinion.
-
is it one decade ago?
This is an indicator that you uploaded a file but didn't submit it. The date reflected in the review page is based on the upload date.
-Mat
-
is it one decade ago?
This is an indicator that you uploaded a file but didn't submit it. The date reflected in the review page is based on the upload date.
-Mat
No Mat.
It is also happening to me and it only started today. And I always submit my files the same day I upload them.
Yesterday the files showed in my "to be reviewed" tab as submitted 2 months ago and suddenly today it says "submitted a year ago." I did not upload these files a year ago, they did not even exist a year ago.
Everything that I submitted longer than 4 days ago suddenly shows as "submitted last month", even though it was between 5-21 days yesterday. Everything that was submitted more than a month ago and has not been reviewed yet is showing as "submitted a year ago".
-
correct @Her Ugliness, these were submitted months ago but got lost under the couch cushions. i currently have 6 images in this state plus 1 that says "2 months ago."
-
I also experienced this sometime in the last 24 hours.
The last 7 images out of 290 currently in review jumped from "3 months ago" to "one year ago".
Attached is a picture (sry for the german screenshot ^^)
Have a sunny day,
Michael
-
and just to confirm for the folks with the ability to provide answers. these were not images that you uploaded 3 months ago but only submitted yesterday right? they've been hanging on the vine for some time waiting to be picked?
-
It's so funny that some people here complain that AI low range things gets stuck in queue. Why not create "Eternity" for the validation time of these ?
More seriously, if you tick "Exclude Generative AI", you get tons of AI pictures, something you are supposed to get, expecially if you sort by "Featured".
Why aren't Adobe programmers concerned about this? :-\
If today I bought images like in the past, I think I would be very angry that Adobe cannot have intelligent management of its content. Are we in the era of Artificial Intelligence or rather in the era of Artificial Incompetence???…. ???
"Medientyp: Fotos" Oh, of course, AI images ARE photos at Adobe Stock!!! ;D ;D ;D
-
It's so funny that some people here complain that AI low range things gets stuck in queue.
No one in this thread is complaining about images being stuck in queue?
We are complaining about a bug, about wrong display times. The images that are shown as "submitted a year ago", were not submitted a year ago.
-
I also have 1 "sent 1 year ago", in a queue with 4k sent 1 month ago.
-
I have the same problem. Some photos that have been sitting in the queue for a couple of months have suddenly jumped from 'Submitted 2 months ago' to 'Submitted 1 year ago'.
-
I see something is changing on the website. Payout button is on left side now on my computer, and it looks weird on the phone, so maybe "a 1 year ago" is a bug while more exciting news are coming to the site?
-
and just to confirm for the folks with the ability to provide answers. these were not images that you uploaded 3 months ago but only submitted yesterday right? they've been hanging on the vine for some time waiting to be picked?
In my case the images have been sent to the review queue about 2 1/2 month ago.
-
We've hit a leap year and oh god, it's like Y2K!!!
-
I've been able to recreate the issue. I will escalate this to the team today. Thanks for alerting me.
Thanks,
Mat Hayward
-
Just bringing this up again in case it got forgotten, as it hasn't been fixed.
-
It has not been fixed, since if you tick "Exclude Generative AI", you still get tons of AI pictures ::)
-
It has not been fixed, since if you tick "Exclude Generative AI", you still get tons of AI pictures ::)
As said before, I think you are still confusing what this issue is about.
-
It has not been fixed, since if you tick "Exclude Generative AI", you still get tons of AI pictures ::)
As said before, I think you are still confusing what this issue is about.
;D ;D ;D
-
decided to revive this oldie not because i want to complain again but because i made a small discovery based on a suspicion. after this original thread and with mat's help the ducks i was waiting 5 months to be reviewed were reviewed and approved (probably, i didn't even care anymore but they are no longer in "in review"). at almost exactly the same time i also uploaded some images of a bridge. these images are currently waiting to be reviewed for 10 months. they were uploaded, tagged and submitted 10 months ago. i have about 100 files that are stuck on 3+ months along with them. they are not amazing images but a smaller, less famous bridge that isn't well covered in the agencies. images like this don't sell a lot but do get a few sales here and there. in fact these images have sold on other agencies already in the last 10 months since no agency lets images sit that long without review and the other agencies accepted them no problem. about 3 or 4 months ago i uploaded the same images again with the same metadata. they are also stuck. a few weeks ago i uploaded them again, a 3rd time but wrote the minimum number of words in the metadata fields. they have been reviewed and approved. my suspicion was metadata caused some of these files to get flagged and put in the "we'll get to it in 10 years" pile. in this particular case i used specific name places (like the name of the county, etc) that this bridge is located in. if you have images stuck forever try re uploading with minimal metadata and fill it all in once they get reviewed. as for the original images... it seems i will soon find out what comes after "1 year ago."
-
getting closer...
-
The video is still pending verification for many months. However, the video has been submitted for verification.
-
decided to revive this oldie not because i want to complain again but because i made a small discovery based on a suspicion. after this original thread and with mat's help the ducks i was waiting 5 months to be reviewed were reviewed and approved (probably, i didn't even care anymore but they are no longer in "in review"). at almost exactly the same time i also uploaded some images of a bridge. these images are currently waiting to be reviewed for 10 months. they were uploaded, tagged and submitted 10 months ago. i have about 100 files that are stuck on 3+ months along with them. they are not amazing images but a smaller, less famous bridge that isn't well covered in the agencies. images like this don't sell a lot but do get a few sales here and there. in fact these images have sold on other agencies already in the last 10 months since no agency lets images sit that long without review and the other agencies accepted them no problem. about 3 or 4 months ago i uploaded the same images again with the same metadata. they are also stuck. a few weeks ago i uploaded them again, a 3rd time but wrote the minimum number of words in the metadata fields. they have been reviewed and approved. my suspicion was metadata caused some of these files to get flagged and put in the "we'll get to it in 10 years" pile. in this particular case i used specific name places (like the name of the county, etc) that this bridge is located in. if you have images stuck forever try re uploading with minimal metadata and fill it all in once they get reviewed. as for the original images... it seems i will soon find out what comes after "1 year ago."
Great detective work. This is actually a really good theory. Some images might have keywords that the bot can't fully detect as IP infringement so it goes to the burner. Some of these images for me contain monuments or brandless vehicles. Although, I don't know how well this theory stands for the more abstract images.
-
... a few weeks ago i uploaded them again, a 3rd time but wrote the minimum number of words in the metadata fields. they have been reviewed and approved. my suspicion was metadata caused some of these files to get flagged and put in the "we'll get to it in 10 years" pile. in this particular case i used specific name places (like the name of the county, etc) that this bridge is located in. if you have images stuck forever try re uploading with minimal metadata and fill it all in once they get reviewed. as for the original images... it seems i will soon find out what comes after "1 year ago."
If this theory is true, good point. We need more people to test. Maybe mixed upload, a couple with the full data, Dateline, location all that, and a coupe with simple descriptive words. Sure would be nice.
Interesting that one of mine that went into Never Never Land, was a bridge and a news headline. Problem is, I uploaded more than one, and all but one got accepted in a reasonable time, only one, and they had the same type caption, if not identical, only that one went over six months.
So someone test the theory, and lets see. That sure would help. 8)
-
I agree with this theory. Mine that have got stuck in review have location keywords that the bot probably didn't understand and may have flagged for IP concerns. When I re-uploaded them without the location names they were accepted overnight.
-
I agree with this theory. Mine that have got stuck in review have location keywords that the bot probably didn't understand and may have flagged for IP concerns. When I re-uploaded them without the location names they were accepted overnight.
WOW! This could be useful. Unusual keywords, send images off to review limbo, to wait? Keep It Simple
-
I agree with this theory. Mine that have got stuck in review have location keywords that the bot probably didn't understand and may have flagged for IP concerns. When I re-uploaded them without the location names they were accepted overnight.
I also have bunch now 7 months old from Santiago Chile. On the other hand, some from Barcelona Spain got picked up for review almost immediately. Other shots from Chile didn't get stuck. Location present in keywords in all cases. So I am not certain this is correct.
The only thing that is for certain is that dumb AI is pre-processing everything.
-
I have a mixture of videos awaiting inspection for 7 months - some obvious locations like London landmarks, some generic rural scenes.
Since Adobe and Getty are the only games in town now, if Adobe don't get their inspections sorted it'll make exclusivity with Getty far more attractive.
-
I agree with this theory. Mine that have got stuck in review have location keywords that the bot probably didn't understand and may have flagged for IP concerns. When I re-uploaded them without the location names they were accepted overnight.
The only thing that is for certain is that dumb AI is pre-processing everything.
its stupid, but there are several (unrelated) santiago trademarks
for a long time SS wouldnt accept my Newport OR pix because of the same-named cigarette
-
Here is more review inconsistency I simply can not explain.
This was just accepted as Illustrative Editorial
(https://as2.ftcdn.net/v2/jpg/13/50/10/55/1000_F_1350105565_yqLpHLnPMxhEW87BFKIzAQALpOR1DPKQ.jpg)
(https://as1.ftcdn.net/v2/jpg/13/50/10/44/1000_F_1350104422_KT67nyXIlKWdPxYG59kemACgpB2iJdmW.jpg)
But following, taken from same place hasn't for "Does not meet Adobe Illustrative Editorial Criteria"
(https://autumnsky.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p362789832-2.jpg)
(https://autumnsky.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p10327165-2.jpg)
(People on wider shot are definitely not recognizable).
-
decided to revive this oldie not because i want to complain again but because i made a small discovery based on a suspicion. after this original thread and with mat's help the ducks i was waiting 5 months to be reviewed were reviewed and approved (probably, i didn't even care anymore but they are no longer in "in review"). at almost exactly the same time i also uploaded some images of a bridge. these images are currently waiting to be reviewed for 10 months. they were uploaded, tagged and submitted 10 months ago. i have about 100 files that are stuck on 3+ months along with them. they are not amazing images but a smaller, less famous bridge that isn't well covered in the agencies. images like this don't sell a lot but do get a few sales here and there. in fact these images have sold on other agencies already in the last 10 months since no agency lets images sit that long without review and the other agencies accepted them no problem. about 3 or 4 months ago i uploaded the same images again with the same metadata. they are also stuck. a few weeks ago i uploaded them again, a 3rd time but wrote the minimum number of words in the metadata fields. they have been reviewed and approved. my suspicion was metadata caused some of these files to get flagged and put in the "we'll get to it in 10 years" pile. in this particular case i used specific name places (like the name of the county, etc) that this bridge is located in. if you have images stuck forever try re uploading with minimal metadata and fill it all in once they get reviewed. as for the original images... it seems i will soon find out what comes after "1 year ago."
Thanks für the tip. I will try that, becaus ei have image ssitting in review for 7months+ and resubmitting just has them sit in review again. I will try to use less keywords.
-
let us know, seems like others tried too and it worked for them as well. its frustrating because i can tell some of the words being flagged and just fairly generic place names and not company ip. a few seem to be places named for a person. guess it'll have to be "a bridge" from now on, wish me luck.