Daniel, I just received a Reply by Community Expert Nancy O'Shea but unfortunately a reply is not possible. So perhaps, you an give you insight on it. As mentioned, our collection of Mandalas, as they are called in the western hemisphere, are absolutely created by traditional means in a traditional setting by artists that are highly reknowned in India. Nancy points out that our art is not distinct enough from the Mandalas which are already part of Adobe Stock. She refers to 3 links. But all three links are designs that are created by AI or in an urban household. There is virtually no traditional design in a traditional setting created by rural artists in the Adobe Collection. Adobe Stock has not rejected due to failure of being destinct, but merely failure of quality issues, that you kindly made clear. The question here is: Is Adobe perhaps a market place that gives preference to AI designs, because they can truly be made in absolute perfection, and ... Adobe does not wish to have true artists show their artwork in traditional settings, which may have quality issues. We can't compete with the fault free environment of AI. This is where I am puzzled. And in the Adobe collection, I have seen many Indian rangolis (Mandalas) which have a lot of the faults (created on dirty concrete) that you have pointed out, but they are part of the Adobe collection.
If Adobe prefers AI designs, then we need to seek a different platform which tolerates some speckles of powder which is not right on the line ... because these imperfections are part of traditional and natural art.
I fully understand and accept issues such as cropping, uneven colored background, sun shade issues, angle issues. All that is easily correctible.
But I now also read, that the Adobe algorithm misread rice powder as Noise. Adobe is more used to acrylic paints which are smoothe in texture, while rice powder ground by village women are uneven in size and texture, and can definitely be mistaken for grain or noise. The fact that not just one but all designs were rejected seems to indicate that the algorithm or the reviewer does not understand the original and traditonal mandala art.
What can we do? It also explains, why there is virtually no traditional art on the Adobe Stock platform. It is completely devoid of it.
As I mentioned previously, one of my concerns is the fact that Adobe is very strict about requiring property releases from the original artists. Even artists submitting their OWN work often have assets rejected for lack of a property release proving they are the owner and originator of their images. So if you are submitting assets that represent a group of creators, I would strongly suggest obtaining and submitting a property release. Releases can be downloaded here:
https://contributor.stock.adobe.com/static/releases/property/Releases-en.pdf
There are also digital versions available that can be downloaded and filled out on cell phones.
Of course, this also begs the question, under circumstances like this where a single contributor is representing a group, how will Adobe react to this particular circumstance?
AdChoices