Automated AI "Similar Content" Rejection Loops for Rare Subarctic Expeditions Content — Need Human Review

Forum|Forum|2 days ago
September 11, 2026
10 replies
78 views

Hello Adobe Stock Community Managers and Staff,

I am writing this post out of deep frustration with the automated AI review system. Recently, I have faced multiple unfair rejections for "Similar Content" on entirely unique assets from my expeditions. My previous attempts to resolve this through standard support forms resulted in automated template closures without any human inspection.

Most of my portfolio consists of highly exclusive, premium content captured during high-cost, extreme sea kayak expeditions through the Senyavin Strait on the Chukotka Peninsula. These are rare subarctic botanical species and landscapes that are nearly absent from the Adobe Stock database.

Yet, the automated AI system continuously flags completely distinct compositions, different plant species, and separate camera angles as "duplicates" or "similar content," simply because they share a similar background texture (like arctic granite or tundra soil). The AI is completely blind to the actual unique subjects of the photos.

If Adobe Stock genuinely values authentic, rare, and difficult-to-obtain real-world photography over mass-produced AI clutter, this system error needs to be addressed by a human eye.

Since standard tickets are closed automatically, could an Adobe Staff member or Moderator please step in, look into my contributor account, and escalate this systemic AI issue to the Senior Review / Compliance Team for a manual audit?

Thank you,
Marina

yamato713108855

Community Expert

Rejections based on "similar content" apply not only to the asset's actual content but also to its title and keywords.
Assets may be rejected if their titles are too short or if their keywords resemble those of assets already registered.

When purchasing assets, users tend to buy those that appear at the top of search results.
If a large number of similar keywords are already registered, your asset will not sell unless it ranks high in search results.

Please check these points and resubmit the asset.

A

Atilio5E19

Participating Frequently

Adobe must be going broke; they’ve set up a chatbot to handle all their customers.

D

defaultqtvdlij27vg0Author

Participant

Exactly! It looks like they spent all their budget on training algorithms to reject real photography, leaving nothing for actual customer service.

Nancy OShea

Community Expert

Adobe employees don’t monitor this user-to-user forum.
Stock doesn’t confide what procedures they use, but all assets are reviewed by humans. See below.
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/content-moderation/content-moderation.html
Stock Reviewers decisions are final.
All you can do is correct the refusal problems and submit a 2nd time. If it’s refused both times, move on to other content or risk being flagged for spamming.
Read what Stock has to say about submitting distinct content below.
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/submit-your-content/submit-distinct-content/distinct-content-submission-best-practices.html

Keep in mind that Stock contains close to a billion assets. You have a good deal of competition from other content.

Hope that helps.

Nancy O'Shea— Product User & Community Expert

D

defaultqtvdlij27vg0Author

Participant

Thank you for providing the official links. However, the claim that "all assets are reviewed by humans" is clearly outdated. The industry is well aware that Adobe currently utilizes automated computer vision models for frontline batch processing, which frequently trigger false-positive "Similar Content" loops on rare, non-reproducible editorial photography.

When distinct compositions, separate biological species, and entirely different camera angles are bulk-rejected within minutes, it is mathematically impossible to be a human audit.

As for the "billion assets" competition — yes, the database is indeed flooded, but mostly with millions of identical AI-generated clones. Real-world expedition photography from remote areas cannot be treated with the same generic algorithmic filters. This is a technical issue that needs to be addressed by the engineering team, not brushed aside with standard copy-paste guidelines.

ZALEZPHOTO

Legend

The auto rejections have gotten out of control recently. I’m getting 85% of an entire batch rejected. What I am doing is resubmitting one or two days later, and nearly everything gets promptly approved.

I’m also saving titles and keywords so when I resubmit I only copy and paste.

I imagine this it the result of the unbelievable fast pace with AI, and that Adobe is fully aware of it.

Unfortunately they are not addressing this issue, probably bc higher ups fear it will further drag the stock price… I get that. And until they can solve this, we have no other option than to accept it, or quit.

So far my sales and downloads keep growing, so I choose to not quit, understanding one of this day the system may arbitrarily suspend my account for resubmitting assets… That’s a hill I’m willing to go to since my work like yours is not AI gen.

Patience!!!!

ZALEZPHOTO

D

defaultqtvdlij27vg0Author

Participant

Thank you so much for your support, understanding, and for sharing your experience! It means a lot to hear this from a fellow real-world photographer.

It is incredibly frustrating to see that contributors are facing an 85% automated rejection rate for authentic, hard-earned work. Your workaround strategy with a 1-2 day delay resubmission is pure gold — I will definitely try this approach for my remote expedition assets.

It’s reassuring to know I am not alone in this fight against broken algorithms. Let's keep standing our ground for real photography. Stay safe and good luck with your sales!

Best regards,
Marina