AI images in stock.adobe

[Awl Right]

Does anyone besides me find it cheap and smarmy of Adobe to include AI generated images in their stock photos. It's a complete ripoff. Not to mention the art is rubbish. 

[Jill_C]

I don't know about "cheap and smarmy", but Adobe has definitely detected a market need and is attempting to fulfill it. They are accepting a lot of AI assets, and those assets are being licensed; otherwise, they wouldn't continue to allow AI assets to be submitted. Unfortunately, a lot of the inventory, particularly those uploaded early in the "AI boom" last year, are of questionable quality. I hope that eventually the worst of those gets weeded out. 

If you don't want to see an AI assets in your search results, use the Gen AI filter to omit them. 

[Abambo]

Why is it a rip-off?

There appears to be a market for such assets.

[Awl Right]

It takes zero imagination and a person is doing no work except telling the tool to implement their vision. There is no creative talent involved and that's what I'm paying for. I can use Dall-E and have used it to generate images. 

[daniellei4510]

" I can use Dall-E and have used it to generate images."

Cool.

AI is not art, I'll give you that. It's a craft, made more so by requiring the skills necessary to turn crappy AI into sellable assets. You are certainly welcome to have a distaste for it, but it's here and it's here to stay.

[Awl Right]

How does one do that? I cannot find the Gen AI filter you mentioned. 

[Awl Right]

NVM.. I found it. Thanks for the tip. 

[daniellei4510]

On the left-hand side, after you perform your initial search (I just leave my initial search field blank to call this up). 

[Abambo]

So use Dall-E. It's not that simple, as you say. There are also people saying that photography is only pushing a button.

[Abambo]

Unfortunately, the filter is not sticky.

@Awl Right,

In the Ideas section, there is a suggestion to make that sticky. You may like to vote for that.

[Awl Right]

Good photographers are creative and artistic. I've used Dall-E with a lot of success, but it's definitely time-consumer. The problem I have with the AI images on stock.adobe is that they are all easily identified as AI created. I much prefer an illustration or vector that a human has made. At least those don't have 7 fingers or missing limbs. 

[daniellei4510]

I submit 100% AI. And trust me, I'm just as burned as you are, if not more so, over a lot of the stuff that was accepted early on. I make daily sales, but I highly suspect I'd be doing better had more care been taken in the beginning. Bad AI, or assets that have not been marked as such, can always be reported here. I do believe Adobe is making a concerted effort to clean things up going forward.

[Abambo]

Good photographers are creative and artistic. I've used Dall-E with a lot of success, but it's definitely time-consumer. The problem I have with the AI images on stock.adobe is that they are all easily identified as AI created. I much prefer an illustration or vector that a human has made. At least those don't have 7 fingers or missing limbs. 

By @Awl Right

If you have 7-finger-hands in stock that means that the moderator did not count, or else they would have refused the asset. As for photographers, as I said, some people think it's just clicking around. That's OK, as long as they are not the ones approving your timesheet. 

BTW: good prompters are also artists. It's just those ones prompting-submitting en masse who create trouble, and untrained moderators. If you are used to check photographs, you do not count fingers. 

[JuliS111]

Hello! I'm using AI for 1.5 year from now. And I use it in Adobe Stock. The only thing I can tell you — if you just put 10 words in promt you will never get what you want (or what your customer wants). To create right promt is a real skill. But yes, sometimes you just get lucky (Look how much garbage they make. This will not help anyone without taste and skills!). I think when they started making shoes in factories, tanners also thought it was sacrilege. 

In promt (text for generate photo) the light and angle are set in exactly the same way, a color is chosen, a model is chosen. Just in virtual reality. Without good taste you won't succeed. The impression of AI was spoiled by millions of bad “fantasy” photographs of foxes and trees that have no commercial value.

AI is a huge driver for small businesses that can get themselves a photo shoot. Imagine when it will be possible to include a real product in a photo (this is already possible, but with complications).

As a result: no one person without taste and skills will be able to get rich from Adobe Stock any way. But some have talent and skills, but don’t have $5,000 for equipment, and they don’t live where the Whites and African-Americans live / Grown Green Grass (popular themes at Stock I mean). 

I see a lot of photographers switching to AI. Anyone who has a real passion for photography I think will ultimately appreciate this tool in some way. Plus, AI photography will go far beyond what we see now on stock. It will hack the system with incredible new features. What took 100 hours of graphic design now takes 2 minutes + 1 hour of editing. And if graphic designers don’t want to retrain, no one is forcing them, let them continue to spend their 100 hours. Its their choice actually which tool to use.

My opinion: AI will save us from drought, overpopulation, social and economic instability, and... lack of variety in photos! And the benefits for small businesses are, in principle, INCREDIBLY HUGE. Overall it also eliminates the gap between the poor and the rich just in the blink of an eye! The rich won't like it. The poor will like it. Just a fact.

The 7-fingered problem applies to those who do poor work without respect. This has no place for it on stock or anywhere else. This is not an indicator of the value of the idea, but simply the laziness of a particular person to make another shot.

[Abambo]

The 7-fingered problem applies to those who do poor work without respect. This has no place for it on stock or anywhere else. This is not an indicator of the value of the idea, but simply the laziness of a particular person to make another shot.

By @JuliS111

It's more a lack of understanding of the quality requirements. The issue is that the moderators let them pass.

[JuliS111]

Yes, it would be nice if these things were removed.

[Abambo]

Yes, it would be nice if these things were removed.

By @JuliS111

Adobe is not systematically scanning the database for bad assets. That's the job of the moderators. They remove the assets when they get reported here. That does not happen as fast as it could, but I have seen many assets disappearing.

[Awl Right]

I can see there are many defenders of AI, but the more details in an AI-generated item, the more chances for error there are. 

Today I searched "healthcare theme" and got an image of a leather medical bag and a stethescope, that actually looks pretty nice, but upon closer inspection. The stethoscope has three ear buds there are too many cords. and the bag has no opening and it looks like no other bag I've ever seen. There is no clasp. 

 it is pic
824710885

The point is. Adobe is peddling rubbish. This is unusable, so why is it even on the site? and why should anyone pay for stuff like this? 

[daniellei4510]

Actually, it looks pretty bad even upon a first look. A second isn't needed. @Contributor1?

[Abambo]

The point is. Adobe is peddling rubbish. This is unusable, so why is it even on the site? 

By @Awl Right

Because moderation failed. That happens and users looking for quality assets get angry.

The asset is marked as AI and can be filtered out. That does not solve the issue of being erroneous, however.

[Contributor1]

Hello @Awl Right, I see the issue you're referencing and I've sent these details to be reviewed internally. Thank you for the report and sorry for the problem with the image.

[Anne3778768223p0]

I've found that there are quite a few that are actually quite impressive and useful.

[Abambo]

@Anne3778768223p0 ,

That's correct. but there is also a lot of trash that should not have made it into the database. Moderation is done by humans and humans make errors.