@ Andrej.S. thanks and good luck to you too.

@ HalfFull congrats,it must be a great satisfaction! 

@gnirtS I was talking about AI content,the scenario you describe is another story.

all this always in relation to the contents rejected for similar content because already in the Adobe Stock library,this is what I'm talking about.

What I'm saying is that it's simply not fair that contributors should have to pay the consequences for mistakes that others have made.

some/many were allowed to upload 20000+ AI contents in a year and now we have to pay the consequences of this,I think this is wrong.

I also believe that the solution to the problem is not to reject it but lies in the management of the library.

In my opinion,we should allow everyone equally,talent or not,to accept a maximum of 1000 AI contents per month,because 1000 are already a lot,or rather it should have been done before,now I don't think it's possible to have more than 1000 contents accepted per month.

I am not the one who allowed more than 1000 AI contents to be uploaded per month,so I am not the one who has to pay the consequences,and this applies to all contributors like me,who try to produce quality AI contents,at least try,they are not the ones who have to pay the consequences of this error.

finding a better solution is inevitable,I'm sure it will happen,I think that all this is just temporary,cannot last for many reasons,and I am sure that they will find a solution to the problem,or soon it will not be possible to upload anything anymore,because it will all be similar to content already present in the library.

@Cobalt "Why should adobe stop the uploads of someone who understands what customers like?"

not to stop,but to limit.

in the absurd hypothesis that Adobe had done as I said in 2023,we would not find ourselves in this situation,do you agree?

I had proposed a limit of 500 AI contents maximum per month per contributor,but probably 1000 would be even more fair,but no more for each contributor.

come on,1000 contents per month accepted at most for each contributor I think is enough,and then it pushes people to be more selective.

but now,you,me and everyone are complaining (rightly,in this case imo) because Adobe rejects similar content,not only in comparison to its own port,but also to the entire library.

this,in addition to being wrong,because as you said,you no longer have control of your port,I agree with you,it is wrong,because if the content have quality and commercial value,I also have the right to sell this content,even if there are already millions similar on Adobe Stock.

so,as I was saying,besides being wrong,it is also counterproductive for a whole series of businesses that revolve around content generation,including firefly.

so here,in my opinion,the real problem is that we are still in a primordial phase,in which is not known how to manage such a large library.

That's why over time,Adobe will gain experience in managing this type of content,and experience in selling this type of content,and unfortunately we have found ourselves in the middle of this ongoing evolution.

but for me,the important thing is the will to solve problems,which I see in Adobe Stock,which is always there looking for new solutions and strategies,if there is the will,everything will be solved,unfortunately for us it takes time.

this fact of rejecting similar content in comparison to the library,is like trying to repair the cylinder head of an engine with electrical tape! 

Well Adobe could be a gold mine if there would be no algorithm / ranking shifts or rejection rates / deleting of images.

You can't plan with Adobe for the next months or years.
You can only try to squeeze the last dollars before the coming big collapse in some years.

2500 USD / month (just 625 USD / week) with 20000 images sounds very managable. One member named half_full is making 1000 USD / week with the same sized portfolio.

But I guess the problem is more that you won't upload that much content so fast as in the last years anymore because Adobe will increase massively the rejection rate.

and here we disagree.

I think the fact that they are cleaning ibrary is better,while you think it's not.

then you think about the great collapse that according to you will happen in a few years,I instead think that there won't be one,in my opinion there will be an evolution,not a collapse.

imo we are only experiencing a first phase,in which things have to settle down.

I agree instead on "no algorithm / ranking shifts" but unfortunately this is not possible,and you know very well why,but clearly this too can be improved and will surely improve in the future.

as for "rejection rates" it seems to me that the review have become more efficient and have already had a taste of the "evolution" I was telling you about.

we are in the midst of a microstock revolution,which until 3 years ago was a completely different job,imo nothing more than this.

I know someone who uploaded 20,000 images from summer 2023 to summer 2024 and earned $31,000,which is about $2,500 per month.

This is probably why many of us are unable to earn as much as we should in a pre-AI situation.

Unfortunately I cannot verify if this information is true,but it is likely true.

if it's true,In my opinion this is wrong and should be avoided,Adobe shouldn't allow a single contributor to upload 20,000 images in a year,that's just too much.

but this happened at the beginning,now something like this can't happen anymore,Adobe is already fixing it by cleaning up the library for example,and should probably try to stop accepting content from people who uploaded that much,or just remove at least half of the content from people who uploaded more than 1000 AI content per month,while it should give more space to those who upload less content more regularly.

It seems to me that Adobe has already started this policy,which is necessary for the future of Adobe Stock,so things should improve in the future.

At the moment we are still suffering the impact of this flood,but soon I hope and believe it should get better.

I hope the review team has a chance to see who uploads this content and HOW MANY they have already uploaded.

I'm sure the Adobe Stock team knows better than us what they're doing and I hope things will get better soon.

as far as I'm concerned,lately the review seem right to me,I have nothing to complain about,i have approved content and rejected content in a normal level.

I will also spend Easter Sunday working and the future of this work for me with Adobe Stock will depend a lot on what happens in the next 2 months at most,for some reasons that I won't write here.

I will soon know what my future will be,for now I just have to keep working.

Happy Easter to all of you fellow contributors and the entire Adobe Stock team! 

we need a better future,help us make it happen!

as far as I'm concerned, even a part-time salary is fine with me,I never thought I would get rich and famous with microstock.

However,i think that this is just a transitional moment,and that in the near future more effective and faster ways will be found to solve all the problems we know,like copycats,slow reviews,rejections for similar content already in the library,thieves...

This is still an early stage of a radical event that began only 2-3 years ago.

then we must also consider that the future of microstock and of us contributors depends not only on how events on Adobe Stock develop,but there are many more things at stake in a broader vision.

to put it simply,in the absurd event that Adobe Stock stops accepting content,this will impact a whole host of businesses outside of Adobe,so it can't happen,just as it can't happen that 90% of the contents are rejected,because it would be the same, just as it can't happen that thieves and copycats continue to do as they want.

The problems are there,and they are known,and Adobe has always moved in the right direction, so I don't see why it shouldn't continue to do so.

this is just a transitional moment,the prehistory of modern microstock,things will be different and better in the future,with new tools available,to resolve any potential problems.

It's an inevitable consequence,there's a lot of money and a lot of business at stake,it can't be otherwise.

There are problems,but there is also the will to solve them,otherwise they wouldn't have bothered to clean up the library,or they wouldn't have bothered to impose the new rule of only one account unless absolutely necessary,otherwise they would have already lowered the royalties,otherwise the contributor bonus would not be given,otherwise they would never have accepted the AI ​​contents... otherwise many things!

It's a difficult time,but it will pass,there are no alternatives,then anyway it's certainly not easy to manage all this,as I said it's easy to criticize,but the situation is very complex,keep up with the times and at the same time try to please everyone,it's difficult.

then as far as I'm concerned,the future of this work for me,depends on the development that will take place in the near future.

I use a tool which I can generate up to 2000 images a day with no cost for images. And different tool for video. Works for me.

I don�t intend to invest too much time into this. Especially if the reward is less than 10 pence

Are you sure these free AI models producing content that is allowed for commercial use?

I simply use content that I already have in my port to copy keywords from content that is similar in subject or concept,then i review them and add some more pertinent to the subject.

not always but generally,when I upload content to AS I upload 2 copies,I send one,and I keep one among the contents to be sent with the indexing already copied from the same content sent,so in case of rejection,if I want to make changes and send again,I just copy the indexing data from the content I left.

If I want to send this content to other agencies in the future,I simply copy the indexing from the content that is in my AS port.

This is because if the content is rejected it is still possible to copy the title but not the keywords.

productive day for me,definitely a step forward! 

@Andrej.S. those descriptions look like they were generated by a bot! 

I too have had rejections for similar content,when in reality there was nothing similar in my port,then I read on the Adobe pages that the rejection for similar content is also related to the Adobe Stock library.

Quote from: Injustice for all on April 09, 2025, 06:12

and then how do you explain this?

If there have been weeks where I have made these numbers,it means that it is possible that I can very well make an average of 20-40 sales a week.

this year so far the best week has been 14 sales,excuse me,I'm also a little tired?

Adobe punished your portfolio ranking.
One can only guess what the reason was.

Have you uploaded to many similar images?
Got too much competition in best selling categories?
How good is your portfolio diversified?

I mean instead of beeing angry and upset you should either doing other things or analyze and try other content.

but I'm not angry,I'm just very disappointed.

I'm already trying other ways,for example with AI videos,but are still in review since 12 days.

I'll try downloading Premiere Pro soon and processing this AI videos differently,hoping that somehow they will be accepted sooner or later,I have already used Premiere Pro or even Illustrator,a couple of years ago I had all the Adobe apps,another thing i would like to try is AI vectors too.

I'm still looking for other ways,but in any case,the number of sales I've made since the beginning of the year is really depressing.

and then how do you explain this?

If there have been weeks where I have made these numbers,it means that it is possible that I can very well make an average of 20-40 sales a week.

this year so far the best week has been 14 sales,excuse me,I'm also a little tired?