Participating Frequently

Question

It seems that Adobe doesn't accept AI generated images anymore though it still allow to submit.

Forum|Forum|1 year ago
July 8, 2024
6 replies
8311 views

Recently, I submityed a few AI generated images (including images generated by using Adobe AI as well) which have the same quality of images I submitted and accepted before. All of them are rejected by the quality issues. Don't know why? Adobe never gave detailed explanation. It seems that even Adobe itself doesn't support its own AI generated images. very frustrated!!! In addition, it doesn't provide any ways to communicate with its reviewers to learn what Adobe really looks for about AI genearted image. Should I submit them under illustration instead of Photo to make difference?

This topic has been closed for replies.

W

William Champlin

Participant

From Adobe Contributor Requirement help page:

Submit your generative AI image as asset type: Photos, if it looks like it was captured with a camera and features photo-realistic subjects that exist in real life and respect human and animal anatomy.
Submit your generative AI image as asset type: Illustrations, if it features artistic illustrations or fantasy concepts such as imaginative depictions of people, food, animals, environments that one would not necessarily see in real life.

W

WP98560Author

Participating Frequently

Thanks for youre response!

Nancy OShea

Community Expert

Adobe Stock accepts high quality assets that are commercial-ready for use. If you're not meeting Stock's high standards bar, examine your work more closely at 100-300% magnification and make necessary corrections. If you can't fix it, scrap it and start over.

We've seen more than our share of 3 legged models and 5 legged horses here. It's a wonder that contributors don't notice such blatant mistakes but they do. AI is ignorant about anatomy and facial details like hair, eyes, ears, nose, mouth, fingers, toes, clothing, etc... And the more complex your image is, the greater potential for AI drawing errors. Keep it simple.

Hope that helps.

Nancy O'Shea— Product User & Community Expert

daniellei4510

Community Expert

"We've seen more than our share of 3 legged models and 5 legged horses here. It's a wonder that contributors don't notice such blatant mistakes but they do. AI is ignorant about anatomy and facial details like hair, eyes, ears, nose, mouth, fingers, toes, clothing, etc... And the more complex your image is, the greater potential for AI drawing errors. Keep it simple. "

Nancy O'Shea

Actually, I'm not surprised. I like to do my preliminary editing on my laptop at my local bar. It's not a pro machine, so I mostly just prep my assets and do the real work on my desktop at home. The regulars are well aware of what I'm doing, so they pretty much leave me to myself while they discuss baseball, golf, politics and what have you.

But a couple of days ago, one of the regulars had no other place to sit down except next to me while I was working. He started asking about AI and wanted to know what all this "editing" entails. I was working on a photorealistic portrait and I pointed out to him that one of the subject's eyes was shaped like an over rather than round, that an ear was misshapen, and that her teeth were crooked. His response? "Oh, I never would have noticed that. I don't even see what's wrong now that you pointed stuff out!"

So it's not just contributors who don't notice the obvious details. It's the buyers as well, which is even more unfortunate. I don't know what could be at play here other than some sort of blindness, much like a bad singer who can't be convinced that they sing off-key. On the bright side, I do believe that AI contributors CAN be trained to start recognizing the issues. The buyers, not so much, which would certainly explain why bad assets still manage to be sold without any follow-up complaints.

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

Nancy OShea

Community Expert

One person's trash is another person's treasure.

Nancy O'Shea— Product User & Community Expert

M

MliO111

Inspiring

Not true that they not accepting anymore AI

W

WP98560Author

Participating Frequently

That's a good news.

daniellei4510

Community Expert

I have AI images accepted every day of the week, including weekends. I have a 97% acceptance rate. They are more than open to accepting AI generated images.

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

W

WP98560Author

Participating Frequently

Good for you. What's the link of your Adobe site? thanks

daniellei4510

Community Expert

I won't do that, because I don't feel this is the place to promote my profile page for a variety of reasons. But here is an example of how I edit when AI gives me garbage results. You can never edit enough. You just need to know when it's time to stop and submit the asset before you drive yourself nuts. And yes, the edited image was accepted.

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

Jill_C

Community Expert

It is not the job of the Moderators to instruct you in what constitutes a quality image. Imagine what would happen if every contributor contacted moderators to get a detailed explanation for every reject! Reviews of new submissions would grind to a halt. Adobe has made no assertion that images from Firefly are stock-worthy. I wouldn't consider any of these to be photo-realistic, so all should have been submitted as AI generated illustrations rather than under the Photos file type.

Jill C., Forum Volunteer

W

WP98560Author

Participating Frequently

thanks for you response.

daniellei4510

Community Expert

Some basic editing could help with the baby panda. The eyes could be improved. At the bottom, there appears to be some "cotton candy like" fluff that could be removed. And that white dot on its nose. Simple enough to remove.

Savannah Sunset. Some dust-spotting would help. Also, the baby looks like it's grown out of its mother's face, rather than be separate.

Lion King. The lion's teeth should be white. More dust-spotting needed.

Golden Embrace is the best of the four, but a couple of things could be improved upon.

All that said, it is not the job of the moderator's or Adobe to give you detailed critiques as to why images get rejected. That is what this forum is for. And Firefly was not created specifically for people to create perfect AI images suitable for stock. Editing will always be required.

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

W

WP98560Author

Participating Frequently

Thank you very much for your advice. Normally, I spent a couple of hours to process an AI generated image. The raw images generated by AI have some issues. Though moderator's job isn't give contributors details. But some kind of explanation is very helpufl to the contributors to improve in the future. Just like a student who hands in the exam, would like to know where he or she made mistakes if he or she didn't pass. Anyway, just my two cents. I believe that moderators get paid to do this job instead of volunteering.

Abambo

Community Expert

Moderators are moderating for the customers, to protect them from bad assets. They need to move fast to moderate all those files that get submitted. The refusal reason given by the moderator is basic, but still it's important. But there is no precise assessment, also because they refuse on the first error they see.

As a contributor you are supposed to submit perfect assets… Firefly generated assets are not perfect, as aren't all other generative AI assets.

Panda: look at the paws. The 5 finger rule also applies to pandas. The area around the eyes should be black fur. In your picture it's a black patch.

Savana sunset:

The ear is weird, the shadow on the mother from the cub is from a bad cutout. You have aliasing on the fur and the whiskers are not looking correct.

The lion king picture has a black line, in addition to many artefacts.

The golden embrace: You have a noise pattern on the image, looks a bit like halftone from a scan. The fur looks weird. You have aliasing.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded