So, what is the point of creating this post if not to show the rejected images and find why you got such rejections? It's a frivolous to assume Adobe, the biggest company in the photography area don't know what they do, but you know. Many experienced people here can help you to find some weak points in your job and to resolve this rejection problems.

I'd agree, if we can't see the image, everything is just guessing and accusations.

At the same time if the reviews said something more than "Image Quality" it would be useful for everyone involved. First off, AS wouldn't have so many images to review, if we knew why they are rejected, and maybe don't send more with the same problems. That also helps everyone else, if it means less wasted time in the review processing.

For myself I could make better images and learn why AS is refusing some images.


Image Removed

That one could have been, too many like this, similar, "it's not suitable" LCV, just don't like the composition... What quality caused it to be refused? Maybe not sharp all the way from front to back? I'd go for that one?

To me this topic is useless in the forum if there is no discussion on the particular problem with the problematic examples, it looks like personal problem between contributor and Adobe, but not professional. I can't believe in this, by my experience Adobe do it's job professional. But maybe there is some private case and better contact Mat or Adobe directly, if you don't want to share your images, something I understand...

the point is, individual images aren't relevant when entire batches from multiple established artists get rejected.

and by posting here we discover it's not an isolated instance (or reviewer) but an ongoing major problem that AS refuses to recognize

Quote from: Deyan Georgiev Photography on December 19, 2023, 03:06

So, what is the point of creating this post if not to show the rejected images and find why you got such rejections? It's a frivolous to assume Adobe, the biggest company in the photography area don't know what they do, but you know. Many experienced people here can help you to find some weak points in your job and to resolve this rejection problems.

This has been going on and on and on for months now. The point is to complain and maybe to finally get Matt to aknowledge that there is something wrong. Rejections have become CRAZY on Adobe. I used to have a 95% acceptance rate, it went to below 40% from one day to the next and I stopped submitting real photos to Adobe completely, because the reject so much (at the same time they accept almost all my AI images, even though the full size quality doesn't even come close to the quality of my real photos) and there have been multiple threads by contributors reporting the same issue.
 Yet Matt claims "everything was fine and nothing changed" when people keep telling him over and over and over again that this is not the case.

Now, if this were just posts from new contributors who do not understand the quality requirements for submitting this would be one thing, but the complains come from experienced contributors who have been doing this for years and when the acceptance rate changes so drastically for so many people from one day to the next, then it seems right to assume that a bunch of people not suddenly and simultaneously lost their abilities to take good quality photos and the problem is with Adobe instead. But to this day Matt refuses to aknowledge that.

What is the point in showing Matt individual photos? I've seen  the extreme level of nitpicking he goes to to justify rejections (like "The photo shows different kind of plates!"). This is not an individual problem, but a large structural problem on Adobe. Nitpicking single photos will not solve this problem.

Yes, that is pretty much what I am saying.

I know what a good image is, what a saleable image is. I know to submit unique shots (i.e., no "300 cucumbers" with "slight angle variations" like some ppl do, and actually currently have in their profile). I know about looking & removing artifacts, pixellation, etc. I know about proper subject focus, copyspace, etc, etc. I know about proper & relevant keywording, as well as proper & relevant titles. etc, etc, etc.

And for both genAI & real photos/illustrations/etc, it seems in particular the last 2 months - (more so the "weekend" reviewers, i.e., if content happens to get reviewed on the weekend) - it just seems to be an "auto-reject" for a majority of stuff, almost like "they" need to reach a quota. (Not always of course, but more so than it should be that it has become very noticeable).

Why not - for any contributor account created pre Jan-2023, realize those contributors probably know what they are doing, and be process those images better/be more reasonable for acceptance rates? (Jan 2023 was when the media in a co-ordinated fashion announced "ai" images and "ai" stuff in Jan 2023, and you subsequently had the "ai gold rush").

I realize there are now probably 10's of thousands of new daily contributors (in particular I believe from east india, malaysia, etc) trying to get on the 'genAI gravy train'. While nothing wrong with that - obviously some of those new people probably have no idea what constitutes a 'good' image, nor how to do pre-quality checks, many times quite frankly because they simply don't care - because they watch youtube videos how to make one billion dollars in 2 days from genAI images, and just rush to do it, not caring whether someone has 3 hands, 15 toes, just so they can make 'billions' in one day...

So - why not - as an 'easy' way of reviewers still meeting their quotas - take into account whether an account was created pre Jan 2023, and realizing pre Jan 2023 accounts probably know how to do proper pre-reviews, so be more reasonable in accepting content that is submitting from those contributors?

Thanks.

I know what a good image is, what a saleable image is. I know to submit unique shots (i.e., no "300 cucumbers" with "slight angle variations" like some ppl do, and actually currently have in their profile).

But if they are sliced vegetables, 300 cucumbers at various angles? That could be real Microstock!   

Ouch, had a whole batch of AI images rejected - This never happened to me before. Real photos, yes, that has become the new normal, but with AI almost everything used to get accepted.
Looks like someone is very grumpy about having to work on Christmas.... 

Just had half my files declined.

It hurts.

Will try to downsize even more for new submissions and make even smaller and more mixed batches.

I will also look at the declined ones and reprocess them. Because I think they are useful files that will sell.

"downsize" ??

Quote from: MatHayward on December 15, 2023, 16:56

Quote from: SuperPhoto on December 15, 2023, 10:41

So...

a) For actual photos (not genAI)... Do you "need" keep the meta data in the images? I submitted a batch of high quality photographs - and "all" were rejected... (I had cleaned out the meta data, i.e., what camera was used, and other details)... was that just laziness on the reviewers part (i.e., did they just "assume" it was genAI because of no meta data, so just rejected it), or what was going on - do I "need" to leave that data in? Extremely frustrating, as I had waited quite some time for them to be processed...

b) When I do some of the genAI,I do take the time to remove extra fingers, logos, make sure the composition is correct, etc... I realize there are probably many that don't (seeking 'genAI' riches with no work/editing/etc)... HOWEVER... it's also frustrating when it seems you get a lazy reviewer - that rejects 90%-95% of a batch that required a lot of time consuming editing to make sure it looked good... Matt, could you please fix that?

Thanks very much!

Removing metadata such as camera details would have zero impact on moderation results. The quality of the asset is the top criteria when it comes to image reviews. Without seeing the content you are referencing, I can only assume there were issues with the files and that the moderators got it right. I'm certainly open to being proven wrong and would encourage you to share a couple of examples here.

-Mat Hayward

I totally agree with you Mat, In my 15 years experience in stock photography I also many times got frustrated about rejections, but looking at those images 5-10 years later I see the reviewers were right in most of the cases.Without examples this topic is useless.
I see overall people thinking on quality only on technical aspect, but to me in one stock photo quality means also what value it brings to the collection and from there the quality of the Adobe Stock collection as a whole. Every image is like a small pixel who create the whole collection image. From this point I think with AI we have to think even more on this level of "hidden" quality and to think what our brain can create as idea and bring it to the image's heart, because a couple of years from now there will be an option in the AI tools to create millions of images in a couple of hours in bulk by group of criteria and prompts templates. I'm very excited to see our new role as stock photographers. Sorry, got a bit off topic.

Hi Mat,
I am not afraid of showing my rejected images. Could you please explain to me what is wrong?













My only guess is that they are upsized too much, 8 mpx would be enough. I um using Midjourney, and edit my images in LR and PS to improve the quality and get rid of unwanted artifacts.

In fact we all really need a more detailed rejection reason for images, AI images, Videos.

"quality issues - Thanks for giving us the chance to consider your image. Unfortunately, this image doesn't meet our quality standards so we can�t accept it into our collection.Common issues that can impact the technical quality of images include exposure issues, soft focus, excessive filtering or artifacts/noise."

Current "quality issues" explanation gives absolutely no chance to understand, fix it and improve. Is it so difficult to make multiple select checkbox list for reviewers to select the exact rejection reason? It will really help both Adobe and contributors.

There is something strange going on with rejections for sure,
over 50% rejections for quality issues for my latest submissions, when the whole of last year was under 10% (thousands of images)

Is it higher standards?

Nothing changed in the quality of my images, I got even better at editing/upscaling over time...

Something fishy is going on with all the reports I see here

...
In fact we all really need a more detailed rejection reason for images, AI images, Videos.

Quote

"quality issues - Thanks for giving us the chance to consider your image. Unfortunately, this image doesn't meet our quality standards so we can�t accept it into our collection.Common issues that can impact the technical quality of images include exposure issues, soft focus, excessive filtering or artifacts/noise."

Current "quality issues" explanation gives absolutely no chance to understand, fix it and improve. Is it so difficult to make multiple select checkbox list for reviewers to select the exact rejection reason? It will really help both Adobe and contributors.

Great ideas & pix - my take is AS may (unjustifiably) consider them too 'soft' even tho photorealistic.

as far as quality reasons, we've been asking for YEARS to get real comments about quality, otherwise it's just a guessing game - even alamy with its ridiculous rejected a batch when they find 1 error, has changed its previous policy & now at, least identifies the culprit and gives a better reason (tho w/o changing it's all or none policy)

and even much maligned SS has always given detailed reasons for rejection (and responded when rejection reasons are challenged. eg, i get a lot of 'ai generated content' for photographs & get a case # to resubmit -- a pain, but most are accepted on 2nd try.

-

I like them, lovely colors and drama.

There might be some issues with details, like does the basket of a ballon and the end of the balloon really look like this?

I would downsize the favorites and resubmit.

But a hint to the real problem could be really helpful.

there were more balloons with better baskets, all were rejected

Ouch, had a whole batch of AI images rejected - This never happened to me before. Real photos, yes, that has become the new normal, but with AI almost everything used to get accepted.
Looks like someone is very grumpy about having to work on Christmas.... 

seems like the weekend reviewers are grumpier, but yeah... that's what I've noticed too...

There is a discord channel where you can post up to 3 declined image numbers and if you are lucky they will discuss your decline.

It is a good way to learn more about the Adobe review process.

https://discord.com/channels/692119372793118831/1156159908966846574/threads/1187088185034031135

I really want to improve my quality so they don't need to decline and I don't need to reprocess.

eta

Since they kick out anything slightly wobbly, I have to admit my port looks absolutely stellar.

I must improve what I do, a really good file will never be declined.