Why Is Adobe Stock Rejecting Banner-Ready Panoramic Content That Buyers Actually Need?

I create images in a non-standard 4:1 aspect ratio specifically to meet a clear market demand: banner-friendly visuals. These wide panoramic compositions are designed so buyers can use them directly without aggressive cropping.

However, most of my submissions are rejected with the reason that they are “too similar to content already available on Adobe Stock.”

I understand that similarity is a valid concern in a large collection. But in this case, the issue seems misaligned with actual marketplace needs. While there are indeed many similar themes and concepts on Adobe Stock, there are very few images created in a true panoramic format like 4:1.

From a buyer’s perspective, this creates a real problem. When searching for banner images, users are often forced to crop standard formats (such as 3:2 or 16:9), losing more than 50% of the original composition. This frequently results in visually unbalanced and unusable designs.

I recently experienced this issue myself while searching for banner visuals for my own projects. Despite the large library, I couldn’t find a properly composed, horizontally extended image that was intentionally designed as a panoramic banner.

This raises an important question: why is content that clearly addresses an existing gap in the marketplace being rejected on the basis of similarity, when in reality its format and use case are underrepresented?

I would appreciate clarification on how originality is evaluated in cases where the concept may be common, but the format, composition, and practical application are distinctly different.