assets rejected with similar content issues

ZALEZPHOTO, that reversal is useful evidence that moderation can vary, but it doesn't tell us whether the first decision came from AI or a human. I still wouldn't treat unchanged resubmission as the workflow: Adobe's current guidance says to address the refusal reason before submitting again, and repeated identical or near-identical content can be treated as spam. A cleaner test is to change one refusal-related variable and log the result. For Similar Content, reduce the batch and change buyer use, not just upload timing. If an unchanged file later passes, I'd record it as reviewer variance, not proof of an AI pre-screen.

Find Similar is useful for buyers, but it isn't a preview of the moderation decision. A result can look visually different and still answer the same buyer need as thousands of existing assets, and contributors cannot see the comparison set used in review.

I would audit the rejected batch in two passes: first compare each file with your own submission and portfolio; then strip the adjectives from the title and ask whether two files could illustrate the same article, ad, or design. If yes, keep the strongest one. Changing only color, crop, pose, or background usually leaves the buyer use unchanged; change the activity, problem, or intended use instead.

I wrote a deeper analysis based on 3,500+ real Similar Content refusals, including recurring patterns and side-by-side examples. If you'd like the full breakdown, it's here: https://www.stockphotoscout.com/en/guides/adobe-stock-similar-content-rejection-examples

I understand why your thoughts on moderators cross your mind.  Now flush them out.

It’s not even worth thinking a moderator is having a hard day.

Have you tried using AI for titles and keywords?  It’s a HUGE time saver. I take screen shots of each photo so the size is not too big, then attach it after typing the question. And the great thing is that you don’t have to ask the question each time, just add the next photo.

Use this prompt:  give me good titles for these stock photos, only use capital letter for first word, and give me 50 of the best single words associated with each photo, separated by commas.

I usually ask for 45 words, which allows me to add whatever Adobe’s keyword search gives me.   

Let us know how that works for you, and DM if you need more help.

Cheers,

Francisco 

are the moderators being unfair, dishonest, or opaque? Is there nepotism involved?

=========

Nepotism for whom? 

• All submissions are randomly assigned to the next available Stock examiner.
• Stock receives thousands of submissions per week
• Assets are date & time stamped and receive a nameless, faceless tracking number. 
• The moderation process is intentionally double blind: Reviewers have no idea who submitted the asset and Contributors don’t know who the asset was assigned to. 

So there goes that theory. 

Stock doesn’t make money from rejected assets. They make money from assets that sell. Their goals are the same as your goals—to create a great collection that lots of customers want to buy. 

If you can’t attain some satisfaction from being a Stock Contributor, you’re welcome to submit to outside services. Adobe Stock does not require exclusivity from its Contributors.

Good luck.

“I have no choice but to accept the situation—so where can I turn to voice my grievances?’

You can voice your grievances here, but nothing will change. It’s like talking to the choir.

You have to accept it and move on.

As we have often stated “a “similar” rejection can be based on several factors: 

• similar in the database
• similar in your submission
• similar in your portfolio
• similar meta data
• a moderators mistake