..

       Adobe's business is very lucreative: they feed us money peanuts (but about 30 or 40 millions dollars for peanuts if paid around $0.10 per image) for stealing us the "food" they gave to their filthy beast. Why didn't they pay before doing it? They had to be able to first analyze the excrement of this beast? Agree or not, everyone must feed the beast! This is how it is, and Adobe calls it �developing generative AI responsibly�, like the ironic words of a dictator.
 
       I am sorry, but I was not happy to receive that money, which I would have liked to refuse to preserve my freedom and image rights, as other more �responsible� stock sites permit us by an opt-out.
But the beast will always be hungry, and they will still use our products, perhaps for free. Products made always made more invisible because they are dissolved in the crowd more and more, and mistreated by search engines. But that will be perfectly well sucked up for use by their deep thing.
 
       They have absolute power, who would stop them in this corrupt world on all levels?
Justice? when the only certainty is lawyers win in any case... the money they get from the people who have been abused.

Have you also had a big drop in sales?
Me especially with images created with AI

"with images created with BY AI"

Dear "Artists"  , here is:

Definition of 'watercolor'
(wɔtərkʌlər IPA Pronunciation Guide)
Word forms: watercolors plural
REGIONAL NOTE: 
in BRIT, use watercolour
1. VARIABLE NOUN
Watercolors are colored paints, used for painting pictures, which you apply with a wet brush or dissolve in water first.
Oil paints can be replaced with watercolors.
2. COUNTABLE NOUN
A watercolor is a picture that has been painted with watercolors.
...a lovely watercolor by J. M. W. Turner.

Lying has a gain as well as a price. Why complain, it's just the logic of life.
Do watercolor with your hands if you like it!!! end of story.

If ADOBE closes accounts, ADOBE supports real artists. A good news.

All allowing AI images to be submitted as photos did was prolong the review time for real photos as well.
My real photos have been waiting to be reviewed for 16 days now. It really sucks when you want to submit time sensitive content.
I usually submit all my images to all agencies at the same time and managing different submitting times for individual agencies is really quite the hassle - especially since Adobes review time changes all the time  -  getting longer and longer.
Will my Halloween photos be reviewed in 2 weeks or 2 months? Impossible to know when the right time to submit time sensitive photos is now. 

You complain against flooding AI images, and, in the same time, submit Ai images yourself. You set fire to the forest and complain that it burns? Modern maturity... 

Only people who have produced quality images, at the cost of effort, time, renunciation of mediocrity, self-challenge, and perhaps ultimately talent can understand this turning point. And they see absolutely no benefit in what AI produces.
AI enthusiasts can only be delighted to finally be able to produce what they have never been able to produce.

Haven't they already used everyones data without permission or payment ?

It seems to me that Adobe should reserve compensation (if they ever keep their promise) only for contributors not submitting AI-generated images.
For AI prompters and AI enthusiasts, compensation is already taking place, as they benefit and take advantage of the generation of their images by an AI, that exploits images from other authors.

Thank you! readers and voters 

Yup review has been inconsistent as of lately, some batches get 100% rejection (and I'm a stock contributor for 15 years now and was in top 100 contributors at one point, so it's pretty strange - maybe I bumped my head against something and forgot everything I knew?), and some AI crap with floating hands passes review.

I don't know the inner workings at Adobe, but something needs to be done about that.

AI knows how to take steal photos
AI prompters know how to control obei AI
Adobe knows doing business in ethic prolific way

Good to see Shutterstock joining the conversation!!

Don't be Shuttershocked! 

More from the "how on earth can a reviewer miss these" department

I don't disagree with you.
Of course, Adobe is responsible for not controlling the monster that they have greatly welcomed.
 
But...
"how on earth can a contributor miss these" New Department

The infringement is -firstly- made by the person submitting these images. There are clear laws they must follow when submitting. Why does it seem we are going in a world where image creators don't inspect their "own" "work" anymore?
 
Adobe can react by refusing the images concerned during review, or, and here is the new thing, delete entire portfolio. I think they realize now that the uncontrolled flood of AI images can be dangerous for themselves too. Before, there was no risk for contributors who submitted mass AI images. Should we regret? Do you regret Jo Ann?

AI wants to make the exceptional Ordinary. Let's continue to make the ordinary Exceptional!

Quote from: SVH on August 24, 2023, 14:44

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on August 24, 2023, 12:14

I was so afraid that my Adobe Stock account would be blocked for not uploading AI images... 

Very funny, thanks for the laugh

It's nice to see that some here have fun with the fact that someone's years of work and commitment may be destroyed and is looking for support and help here.
 
Oh yes, I remember, SVH, you are already once flown out of the forum. I personally would have fun with a repetition  .

Here in bold, you want to defend the current or future victims of AI?
However, I pity those who find themselves in this situation and end up with a blocked account for not having measured the consequences.

The disappointments you wish at SVH would make you happy? why so little respect?