Author Topic: Rejections on adobe (Read 34760 times)

HalfFull · « **Reply #175 on:** June 19, 2023, 14:00 »

Quote from: SVH on June 19, 2023, 13:50

Quote from: HalfFull on June 19, 2023, 13:20
Quote from: SVH on June 19, 2023, 13:14
Quote from: HalfFull on June 19, 2023, 12:46
Mine haven’t been declined on quality. For instance, if I submit 2 images of mountains, two completely different ones and keyworded and captioned detailing all visible mountains etc so they can be used in relevant magazine articles, they’re been declined as similar… because everyone knows all mountains are the same. Writing an article about K2, don’t worry, Everest summit will do… they look similar!
Then it must be the morons they hired. Or maybe Mat is doing the reviews these days of real photos while all others are doing the AI submissions? He understands prefectly why your submissions are being rejected

I've fired a question over to support. If it's a case of no longer wanting this particular content then I'm ok with that, I can just direct it to the other agencies. I just don't want to waste my time submitting stuff to them if they're never going to accept it. That's just wasting my time and theirs.

Usually Mat is very proactive with supporting contributors so I would have thought he'd chime in with an explanation.
And I do understand the mountain problem. "The moderator needs to make a decision within a second or two and move on to the next image or video" (quote Mat).

So obviously within those two seconds of watching your photo or video and reading your title, those mountains must look the same
It's like ultra fast scanning with collateral damage.

Thanks Adobe for taking your time on our curated submissions!

Edit:
Maybe Adobe can get some classes from Getty's which (unlikable as they might be to some) do a thorough review, give you the abillity to revise stuff, if possible, and otherwise explain very clearly why your submission is rejected. And they do it within a week.

The best review process I experienced was Corbis. They were thorough but you knew a pass was a pass and a decline was a decline. Get this, you actually dealt with them over the phone as well and could chat about any problems! I'm probably showing my age now 🤣

Just_to_inform_people2 · « **Reply #176 on:** June 19, 2023, 14:15 »

Quote from: HalfFull on June 19, 2023, 13:20

I've fired a question over to support. If it's a case of no longer wanting this particular content then I'm ok with that, I can just direct it to the other agencies. I just don't want to waste my time submitting stuff to them if they're never going to accept it. That's just wasting my time and theirs.

Usually Mat is very proactive with supporting contributors so I would have thought he'd chime in with an explanation.

Let us know how they respond. Quite curious, as others will be also.

f8 · « **Reply #177 on:** June 19, 2023, 14:32 »

Quote from: HalfFull on June 19, 2023, 14:00

Quote from: SVH on June 19, 2023, 13:50
Quote from: HalfFull on June 19, 2023, 13:20
Quote from: SVH on June 19, 2023, 13:14
Quote from: HalfFull on June 19, 2023, 12:46
Mine haven’t been declined on quality. For instance, if I submit 2 images of mountains, two completely different ones and keyworded and captioned detailing all visible mountains etc so they can be used in relevant magazine articles, they’re been declined as similar… because everyone knows all mountains are the same. Writing an article about K2, don’t worry, Everest summit will do… they look similar!
Then it must be the morons they hired. Or maybe Mat is doing the reviews these days of real photos while all others are doing the AI submissions? He understands prefectly why your submissions are being rejected

I've fired a question over to support. If it's a case of no longer wanting this particular content then I'm ok with that, I can just direct it to the other agencies. I just don't want to waste my time submitting stuff to them if they're never going to accept it. That's just wasting my time and theirs.

Usually Mat is very proactive with supporting contributors so I would have thought he'd chime in with an explanation.
And I do understand the mountain problem. "The moderator needs to make a decision within a second or two and move on to the next image or video" (quote Mat).

So obviously within those two seconds of watching your photo or video and reading your title, those mountains must look the same
It's like ultra fast scanning with collateral damage.

Thanks Adobe for taking your time on our curated submissions!

Edit:
Maybe Adobe can get some classes from Getty's which (unlikable as they might be to some) do a thorough review, give you the abillity to revise stuff, if possible, and otherwise explain very clearly why your submission is rejected. And they do it within a week.

The best review process I experienced was Corbis. They were thorough but you knew a pass was a pass and a decline was a decline. Get this, you actually dealt with them over the phone as well and could chat about any problems! I'm probably showing my age now 🤣

The Image Bank, Tony Stone, First Light, Masterfile, and even early Getty all used to do that and get this... take 40% commission for representing your work. That's right the contributors received 60%.

Yes, you are definitely showing your age. I went through the very same rigorous editing process and took my lumps as they were usually designed toward improving my craft.

The Adobe rejections of today are laughable from my perspective and experience.

When multiple respected platforms take 90%-95% of submitted work and only one respected platform suddenly, and I do mean suddenly rejects 90%-100% of my submitted content with no explanation other than "quality" issues you can safely assume there are internal issues that need resolving.

HalfFull · « **Reply #178 on:** June 19, 2023, 15:19 »

I remember joining Corbis. You sort of let them know you were interested and then waited... waited... then one day a phone call say,"Corbis Calling" 😂

I remember my editor was Vanessa Kramer... Scared the *$%$ out of me initially but she was great to deal with! I think she retired when Getty took them over!

"When multiple respected platforms take 90%-95% of submitted work and only one respected platform suddenly, and I do mean suddenly rejects 90%-100% of my submitted content with no explanation other than "quality" issues you can safely assume there are internal issues that need resolving."

Definitely... same happened here. Reliably have 90-95% accept then all *&^% breaks out!

cobalt · « **Reply #179 on:** June 19, 2023, 15:27 »

I interpret Mat not chiming in as a sign that discussions at Adobe are not finished. I hope at some point they just tell us clearly what they want.

Just_to_inform_people2 · « **Reply #180 on:** June 19, 2023, 15:41 »

Quote from: cobalt on June 19, 2023, 15:27

I interpret Mat not chiming in as a sign that discussions at Adobe are not finished. I hope at some point they just tell us clearly what they want.

Or they don't care. I didn't hear the words "we are looking into it". I heard the words that reviews are done as normal (maybe a bit hasty) but it's your submission that has errors. Or did I miss something?

And, by the way, hope is postponed dissapointment

cobalt · « **Reply #181 on:** June 19, 2023, 15:45 »

Quote from: SVH on June 19, 2023, 15:41

And, by the way, hope is postponed dissapointment

Never looked at it this way. Sad but true.

If this is the new normal and producers have to just now live with an erratic review process, that would be very disappointing.

And like I said, I am absolutely ready to adapt my workflow. The tip to use Topaz for normal photos was a helpful suggestion. I have thousands of older iphone files that lived a happy and profitable life on eyeem, but where not suitable for normal agencies. Now I can transform and improve quite a few of them.

I can also use my current mobile phone more often and then postprocess with Topaz.

But if this what they would like, to make camera photos look more like ai content close up…just let us know.

BT1976 · « **Reply #182 on:** June 19, 2023, 19:09 »

I wouldn't be so upset if one or two photos from the set I sent were accepted. The entire set is rejected for quality reasons. That's why I'm sending my sets in sets of 5. Thus, fewer images are rejected at the same time. Smaller sets are accepted. As it says in their description, I change the name of the rejected images and send them again. All are accepted. And the image is bought immediately..
Rejections are just a waste of time and frustrating. I've been posting photos to adobestock for years and it was rarely rejected. I thought it was about me. But when I read the comments, I realized that I was not alone.

cobalt · « **Reply #183 on:** June 19, 2023, 19:40 »

This is why sharing information is so useful.

This rejection issue popped up two weeks (?) ago in all kinds of different stock groups by very different people and in different languages. And every day more people chime in as they realize it is not them.

I don't mind if agencies adapt their review process and want to take their collection in a new direction. I simply expect to be told this is happening so we can adjust our work.

Uploading, then reuploading a few weeks later is a complete waste of time.

Also we all have a lot of experience with our targeted customer groups and know what will sell. We also know how to time our uploads for optimal results.

Whatever the issue at Adobe, I hope they sort themselves out and let us know.

[email protected] · « **Reply #184 on:** June 19, 2023, 22:18 »

i also hope that adobe with fix this issue soon. adobe is the only company i love so much

Madoo · « **Reply #185 on:** June 20, 2023, 00:29 »

It seems that Adobe recently change the way of submitted content moderation

cobalt · « **Reply #186 on:** June 20, 2023, 08:20 »

Two ai files accepted. Different themes one food/ one animal.

But in a German group people report mass rejections of batches with 30 files.

I will try to space my files mostly as individual elements, instead of a cohesive series. Hope that helps.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #187 on:** June 20, 2023, 16:57 »

It feels a bit like flogging a dead horse, but here's another example of some items accepted into the GenAI collection that should have been rejected.

I know it's not news that AI can't spell, but accepting this work (and these were just a few examples) isn't helping customers in any way. Please have some creatives at Adobe take the C-suite folks aside and explain that filling the collection with unusable work is doing harm. Why would Adobe want to tarnish its reputation as a quality stock site??

Click on the small image to see the previews full size

kubeslaw · « **Reply #188 on:** June 20, 2023, 18:13 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on June 20, 2023, 16:57

It feels a bit like flogging a dead horse, but here's another example of some items accepted into the GenAI collection that should have been rejected.

I know it's not news that AI can't spell, but accepting this work (and these were just a few examples) isn't helping customers in any way. Please have some creatives at Adobe take the C-suite folks aside and explain that filling the collection with unusable work is doing harm. Why would Adobe want to tarnish its reputation as a quality stock site??

Click on the small image to see the previews full size

Well, accepting such a crap and at the same time rejecting quality content from real phographers is very disrespectful, both to creators and customers of Adobe Stock. I wonder why Mat suddenly stopped replying in this topic, especially considering that there is more and more evidence that review process is completely broken.

cobalt · « **Reply #189 on:** June 21, 2023, 03:12 »

I always remove broken texts unless it is complete „artful“ gibberish or looks like an intentional alien language.

But like others write, if they take this stuff, why reject so many normal photos?

Wouldn‘t the firefly ai need as many real world photos as possible for ai training?

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #190 on:** June 21, 2023, 04:38 »

Quote from: cobalt on June 21, 2023, 03:12

I always remove broken texts unless it is complete „artful“ gibberish or looks like an intentional alien language.

Minimal ethics.
One should not be too satisfied to become one of the AI slaves...

And avoid feeling like becoming an AIrtist...

cobalt · « **Reply #191 on:** June 21, 2023, 04:55 »

I am happy to explore a new medium.

I create useful content for stock customers, my artist soul doesn't care if I shoot objects on white, happy people eating salad or ai content.

If it brings money I am fine.

Not here to "discover myself and transform the world with my unique painful essence"...or whatever floats your boat...

If art is your big thing, why do stock?

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #192 on:** June 21, 2023, 05:11 »

Quote from: cobalt on June 21, 2023, 04:55

I am happy to explore a new medium.
I create
If art is your big thing, why do stock?

I'm going to feel creative too next time, when I flush the toilet, since that's what happens when you press a button...
End of story. I stop loosing time now.

cobalt · « **Reply #193 on:** June 21, 2023, 05:14 »

Apparently you don‘t create with your camera or computer.

Make yourself happy as a „proper“ artists and keep looking down on us lowlife stock creatives.

I am perfectly fine to take in all the money with MY CREATIONS, irrespective of medium or tools used.

RalfLiebhold · « **Reply #194 on:** June 21, 2023, 06:00 »

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on June 21, 2023, 05:11

Quote from: cobalt on June 21, 2023, 04:55
I am happy to explore a new medium.
I create
If art is your big thing, why do stock?

I'm going to feel creative too next time, when I flush the toilet, since that's what happens when you press a button...
End of story. I stop loosing time now.

Well, with my camera I also only press one button

I am absolutely no friend of AI. But now it's there and it won't go away.

So I also played around with my Midjourney subscription for a month. First of all, I had to realize that meaningful, complex images can't be created only at the push of a button.
It needs a bit more.
Different formulations, settings, even the image format lead to different results. So you need a little experience and maybe even a little language talent.
Afterwards, the images have to be reworked, sometimes at great expense, and also keyworded. So all in all, it's a bit more complex than flushing a toilet.

In the meantime I have paused the AI again, because I prefer to be outdoors quite old fashioned with my camera instead of spending the whole day at the computer.

But there's definitely no reason to go after those who are trying to make money with the new medium.

So I also assume that there is still a market for real photos. For illustrators it might look a bit more critical.

cobalt · « **Reply #195 on:** June 21, 2023, 07:24 »

Another 4 ai files accepted, no declines.

This really makes me feel a lot better. My ai processing seems to be ok.

2 christmas, one food, one painting. No series, all individual files.

yougogirl · « **Reply #196 on:** June 21, 2023, 10:01 »

Quote from: f8 on June 19, 2023, 13:27

Mat...

Can you please chime in on this. It is now 7 8 pages of concern from several contributors and not a peep from Adobe. In the meantime I will cease to submit my work as it has become a complete waste of my time. These sudden rejections for quality issues en masse is nonsensical and confusing.

I will reach out on a limb and suggest I am not the only one who would like an explanation.

Thanks in advance.

I'm guessing Mat hasn't seen this thread because I don't think he checks the general forum. If this thread was moved over to the Adobe Forum, he'd probably jump in....which would be nice

HalfFull · « **Reply #197 on:** June 21, 2023, 10:06 »

Quote from: yougogirl on June 21, 2023, 10:01

Quote from: f8 on June 19, 2023, 13:27
Mat...

Can you please chime in on this. It is now 7 8 pages of concern from several contributors and not a peep from Adobe. In the meantime I will cease to submit my work as it has become a complete waste of my time. These sudden rejections for quality issues en masse is nonsensical and confusing.

I will reach out on a limb and suggest I am not the only one who would like an explanation.

Thanks in advance.

I'm guessing Mat hasn't seen this thread because I don't think he checks the general forum. If this thread was moved over to the Adobe Forum, he'd probably jump in....which would be nice

Take a look at his replies on page 4 of this thread. Some of them were most unlike Mat... I'm starting to worry Adobe may have cloned him with a faulty bit of AI (joking).

On a positive note, Shutterstock now seem to have lost the dodgy AI reviewing system (or improved it) as they no longer seem to produce weird similar, poor quality declines that we are seeing at AS now.

Maybe they sold the old system to AS?!? Again...not being serious.

f8 · « **Reply #198 on:** June 21, 2023, 10:31 »

Quote from: yougogirl on June 21, 2023, 10:01

Quote from: f8 on June 19, 2023, 13:27
Mat...

Can you please chime in on this. It is now 7 8 pages of concern from several contributors and not a peep from Adobe. In the meantime I will cease to submit my work as it has become a complete waste of my time. These sudden rejections for quality issues en masse is nonsensical and confusing.

I will reach out on a limb and suggest I am not the only one who would like an explanation.

Thanks in advance.

I'm guessing Mat hasn't seen this thread because I don't think he checks the general forum. If this thread was moved over to the Adobe Forum, he'd probably jump in....which would be nice

I am going to presume that Mat has not chimed in because his employer has directed him to not chime in. Lest we forget that Mat is not on this forum of his own free volition, he is a salaried employee of a corporation and has a set of parameters of what he can and will say.

Her Ugliness · « **Reply #199 on:** June 21, 2023, 10:38 »

Quote from: yougogirl on June 21, 2023, 10:01

Quote from: f8 on June 19, 2023, 13:27
Mat...

Can you please chime in on this. It is now 7 8 pages of concern from several contributors and not a peep from Adobe. In the meantime I will cease to submit my work as it has become a complete waste of my time. These sudden rejections for quality issues en masse is nonsensical and confusing.

I will reach out on a limb and suggest I am not the only one who would like an explanation.

Thanks in advance.

I'm guessing Mat hasn't seen this thread because I don't think he checks the general forum. If this thread was moved over to the Adobe Forum, he'd probably jump in....which would be nice

But he replied in this thread, so he must have seen it? He said everything was peachy at Adobe and Adobe had a very high acceptance rate and that was pretty much all he had to say on that matter.

But then again, Mat also claimed they were making progress with the review times and all that is really happening is that review times get longer and longer. Honestly, I did not have the feeling that Mat even had any real insight into the review process.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Rejections on adobe (Read 34760 times)

HalfFull

Just_to_inform_people2

f8

HalfFull

cobalt

Just_to_inform_people2

cobalt

BT1976

cobalt

[email protected]

Madoo

cobalt

Jo Ann Snover

kubeslaw

cobalt

DiscreetDuck

cobalt

DiscreetDuck

cobalt

RalfLiebhold

cobalt

yougogirl

HalfFull

f8

Her Ugliness

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors