Skip to main content
Participating Frequently
March 2, 2024
Answered

I do not accept this from Adobe, it is a lack of respect towards the creator

  • March 2, 2024
  • 6 replies
  • 1439 views
Hello, because Adobe Stock tells me that it is created by AI, if it is not, it was created from 0 from an image that is happening. Maybe they no longer believe in one's potential. It is a shame that this platform thinks that it is generated by AI, something that It is not like this
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Correct answer Abambo

First: the image has been rightfully rejected.

Second: If you read the text correctly, it refers only in the second point to AI (even that the first point is also related to AI, but it does not name AI).

Third: the third point says: “Content not compliant with overall guidelines”!

Possible reasons:

- Non compliant use of another artist’s name.

- Undeclared Generative AI Content.

- Content not compliant with overall guidelines:

 

Nobody is complaining about the third point, may be that they stop reading after the second one.

 

The whole text is stock text. The text is not coined at your specific asset, but at the millions of assets that are refused for a reason.

 

Let me be blunt, as you were quite critical: if you do not accept a refusal, stop contributing. Easy.

 

As for your asset, see below for some errors (all screenshots at 100%)

 

Noise or other artefacts:

Aliasing:

These cutouts are terrible, as you see immediately the errors:

(white border, hard lines, in addition very artificial cut lines for the lower part of the goblet)

Washed out colours and strange artefacts.

In all circumstances, this asset has earned a refusal. I don't understand why the moderator told you that the image is non-conforming, but there are many general requirements you can violate, like keywords. It may also be that the moderator considered this as a bad generative AI asset. It does not exactly look like an AI asset, as there are plenty of errors, that are inconsistent. Your cream looks like scanned from a newspaper. The palm sheets look like an overprocessed smartphone image. The ice cubes seem like simply pasted into the image, especially the one I pointed out (this screenshot is at 10%):

I would have rejected this asset on the grounds of quality. But the moderator may have seen a keyword, that was wrong, or they may really have thought at the first sight that this was an AI asset. Or they may have chosen the wrong refusal reason. Whatever it is, the refusal is rightfully granted.

 

If you are new to stock, you should consider these resources: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/tutorials.html
Please read the contributor user manual for more information on Adobe stock contributions: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/user-guide.html
See here for rejection reasons: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html
and especially quality and technical issues: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html

6 replies

Abambo
Community Expert
AbamboCommunity ExpertCorrect answer
Community Expert
March 3, 2024

First: the image has been rightfully rejected.

Second: If you read the text correctly, it refers only in the second point to AI (even that the first point is also related to AI, but it does not name AI).

Third: the third point says: “Content not compliant with overall guidelines”!

Possible reasons:

- Non compliant use of another artist’s name.

- Undeclared Generative AI Content.

- Content not compliant with overall guidelines:

 

Nobody is complaining about the third point, may be that they stop reading after the second one.

 

The whole text is stock text. The text is not coined at your specific asset, but at the millions of assets that are refused for a reason.

 

Let me be blunt, as you were quite critical: if you do not accept a refusal, stop contributing. Easy.

 

As for your asset, see below for some errors (all screenshots at 100%)

 

Noise or other artefacts:

Aliasing:

These cutouts are terrible, as you see immediately the errors:

(white border, hard lines, in addition very artificial cut lines for the lower part of the goblet)

Washed out colours and strange artefacts.

In all circumstances, this asset has earned a refusal. I don't understand why the moderator told you that the image is non-conforming, but there are many general requirements you can violate, like keywords. It may also be that the moderator considered this as a bad generative AI asset. It does not exactly look like an AI asset, as there are plenty of errors, that are inconsistent. Your cream looks like scanned from a newspaper. The palm sheets look like an overprocessed smartphone image. The ice cubes seem like simply pasted into the image, especially the one I pointed out (this screenshot is at 10%):

I would have rejected this asset on the grounds of quality. But the moderator may have seen a keyword, that was wrong, or they may really have thought at the first sight that this was an AI asset. Or they may have chosen the wrong refusal reason. Whatever it is, the refusal is rightfully granted.

 

If you are new to stock, you should consider these resources: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/tutorials.html
Please read the contributor user manual for more information on Adobe stock contributions: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/user-guide.html
See here for rejection reasons: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html
and especially quality and technical issues: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer
Nancy OShea
Community Expert
Community Expert
March 2, 2024

1.  Don't be a snowflake.  Stock refusals aren't personal. It's a generic refusal letter.

 

2. Read the Stock Contributor User Guide where Noncompliance is fully explained. 

 

3. Critique:  The spots on the cup look like artifacts.  The ice cubes don't look real.  The white balance is not neutral. And the palm tree leaves look diseased.  If I were the Reviewer, I would have rejected this image for technical/quality reasons as it's not commercial-ready for use.

 

Hope that helps. Good luck!

 

 

Nancy O'Shea— Product User & Community Expert
Participating Frequently
May 27, 2025

No se si llorar o no con tu comentario pero de visión tecnica no tienes nada mucho menos entiendes de balance de blanco con ese perfil de michi pixelado recortado tus teorias sobre mi fotografía no cuadran porque si almenos tuviese un trabajo donde pueda observar pero tus trabajos son orribles para que opines sobre el mio de tal manera sin concepto ni enterder lo que es balance de blanco 

 

Abambo
Community Expert
Community Expert
May 27, 2025

You have a thin skin, IMHO. Don't take critique personal. 

 

And wow! You needed more that a year to formulate this attack on an honest critique of your composition. Just to say: @Nancy OShea is a veteran graphic artist who makes a living of what she does.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer
daniellei4510
Community Expert
Community Expert
March 2, 2024

Maybe I was confused. I was under the impression that the image was accepted, but then labeled as Generative AI.

Adobe Community Expert | If you can't fix it, hide it; if you can't hide it, delete it.
George_F
Community Expert
Community Expert
March 2, 2024

The OP posted a screenshot of a Non-Compliance rejection in another language above.

George F, Photographer & Forum Volunteer
daniellei4510
Community Expert
Community Expert
March 2, 2024

Thanks, @George_F , missed that.

Adobe Community Expert | If you can't fix it, hide it; if you can't hide it, delete it.
Jill_C
Community Expert
Community Expert
March 2, 2024

It definitely looks like a Generstive AI image, though from the layers label you have provided I can see that it was created in Photoshop. It's not a matter of Adobe being disrespectful to Contributors. There have been and continue to be many submissions on which the contributors fails to identify assets as created by AI. It is the Moderstor's job to protect the Buyer and ensure that they can license high quality, properly identified assets. Unfortunately, there's no way to dispute the findings of the Moderators. You can send a request for review via the Contact Us link on your account page, though they may not answer since it is generally their policy to not engage with Contributors on rejected images.

Jill C., Forum Volunteer
daniellei4510
Community Expert
Community Expert
March 2, 2024

It's a bug in the algorithm that I believe Adobe is aware of. 

Adobe Community Expert | If you can't fix it, hide it; if you can't hide it, delete it.
Participating Frequently
March 2, 2024

George_F
Community Expert
Community Expert
March 2, 2024

Undeclared AI content is just one of the many reasons for a Non-Compliant AI rejection.  If there is no AI in this image, then the third line of the text is for you.  It just means there is a general submission guideline that isn't being followed.

 

Edit:  I do agree with @Jill_C though, this definitely does have an AI essence to it.  It's also possible that the moderator selected the wrong rejection reason and meant to check the box for Quality Issues instead.  I see some quality issues with both the textures/noise and halos around objects.  

George F, Photographer & Forum Volunteer
Participating Frequently
March 2, 2024