Adobe stock takes a long time (30+) to accept my images?

[Son Bizon]

Hello everyone,

30+ days ago uploading around images and they all appear in the in review section, it is normal that it takes so long?

[Moderator moved the thread to the correct forum]

[Abambo · Accepted solution]

Yes, that is normal. Waiting before moderation can take up to two months.

[Jill_C · Accepted solution]

Read some of the other posts here in the forum, as this is a frequent topic of discussion. If you have submitted generative AI assets, you can expect to wait 2 months or longer.

[Son Bizon]

My images 3d modelling render 😞

I've never waited this long for approval before.

[Jill_C]

I understand the frustration. I'm also waiting far longer than ever before for my photographs to be reviewed... But they do eventually get reviewed and accepted, and will remain for sale for a long time, so I have no choice other than to be patient. 

[Abambo]

There's nothing you can do to accelerate this, but you can continue to submit.

[The Is NoNe]

I am a contributor at Adobe and 3 others bit stock markets for several years now. Adobe's review of the images takes the longest from all them. This year actually the time to review the images, has been even increased, even multiplied to what it used to be, while all the other markets are decreasing the review time significally every year. 

Dreamstime approve the images most of the time instantly, as if they have always people 24/24 with shifts working. Shutterstock's time is the next fastest, 1-3 days max. Adobe's review time personally and from other people who know, has became quite unispiring. I really wish for Adobe to do something about it. 

[daniellei4510]

Do any of these other stock sites that you contribute to accept AI? If not, that might explain things.

[The Is NoNe]

Dreamstime accepts AI and they reviewed them sometimes literally in a few seconds. I do not even remember anymore when was the last time that took them more than 2 hours to review them. They have decrease the time of reviewing the images so very much than 8  years ago and it feels so welcoming and inspiring as a contributor. 

It is not related to the AI content here, my partner has an account with just photos and 3D rendered content the time is the same, and recently has been increased significally. 

[Abambo]

Dreamstime approve the images most of the time instantly, as if they have always people 24/24 with shifts working. Shutterstock's time is the next fastest, 1-3 days max. Adobe's review time personally and from other people who know, has became quite unispiring. I really wish for Adobe to do something about it. 

By @The Is NoNe

Instantly approval means probably computer checking. Shutterstock's checking is basic. They let pass many out of focus pictures and things like that. They have a responsive support, but that is not solution oriented and does not accept valid arguments. That's why I stopped submitting there. Besides the fact that the sales and the royalties are very limited.

[The Is NoNe]

I cannot tell and I do not know which one of them has implemented a more AI/computer based system of reviewing the images. I expect that this eventually will be part of the process, as they evolve.  

As far as it concerns the strictness in regards to the quality, from personal experience, Adobe had accepted content of mine that had been rejected by Shutterstock more than once, which I was of course very glad, because I could not see the errors they were mentioning. 

But, on the other hand, how do you get support as a vendor for your submissions from Adobe? And yes, my experience in regards to the sales is the same as yours. My portfolio with Adobe sales relatively faster and more than the rest, but I have also clients of mine that I have brought here and I know that they buy, also because I own a website under the same name as my account here, people find me. One could think that because of the higher sales in Adobe, that would create more positions for regulators/reviewers = faster reviewing time. 

My points here are for improvement + curiosity. As a vendor I love to be able to sumbit and see my work on the market as soon as possible, it just makes sense and it feels more inspiring to come back with more. 
There has to be a way the whole process to become more accessible to the vendors, which I know that this is temporary, but it was a big surprise to me that the time of reviewing instead of evolving it is increasing considerably.

[Nancy OShea]

Adobe Stock inventory has increased to over 300 million assets with new ones added daily from hundreds to thousands of submissions per week.  Customers have no shortage of inventory to choose from. 

Adobe Stock reviews assets in the order received.  Review time varies by how many assets are ahead of yours in the wait queue.  Eventually, yours will be reviewed. 

Meanwhile, use your time wisely.  Work on other projects: engage in social media marketing, take courses to improve your skills, compare your work with other Adobe Stock inventory, find out what your competition is doing.  It's all part of the Contributor experience.  Have fun!

[The Is NoNe]

That's all very nice and I totally agree, but it does not mean that there is not space for improvement and evolution in regards to the reviewing time. 

[Abambo]

That's all very nice and I totally agree, but it does not mean that there is not space for improvement and evolution in regards to the reviewing time. 

By @The Is NoNe

The reviewing time has evolved to a more consistent one between 2 and 6 weeks. If the waiting time diminishes, that will mean that generative AI contributors contribute less or that Adobe has hired more moderators. Moderators need, however, training, so you can't just add a bunch of reviewers and hope that that solves the problems.

[Jill_C]

I suppose Adobe had weighed the cost of hiring and training more Moderators vs. the revenue stream to be gained from getting the saleable assets into the database faster.  My assumption is that the overall rejection rate still remains higher than for other asset types, so it wouldn't make sense for them to hire more Moderators to just sit there all day hitting the reject button.

[Abambo]

I suppose Adobe had weighed the cost of hiring and training more Moderators vs. the revenue stream to be gained from getting the saleable assets into the database faster.  My assumption is that the overall rejection rate still remains higher than for other ssset types, so it wouldn't make sense for them to hire more Moderators to just sit there all day hitting the reject button.

By @Jill_C

That makes sense. But you also have two other phenomena:

• Generative AI contributors contribute more/period than standard contributors.
• Despite the critics of generative AI in the Stock forum, I think that generative AI sells excellent if you have the right portfolio. Definitely, Adobe sells in all cases.

So, I'm certain that they ramped up the available moderation personal. But as said, you just can't point to someone, and tell them to moderate from now on, and different kinds of items need differently trained moderators. The moderator for video can't moderate vector graphics, and that one can't moderate generative AI…

[The Is NoNe]

Absolutely, to all that which has been said. Yet, the process will evolve and the time somehow will be decreased considerably. Something which all want to see, including Adobe 🙂 Which I am sure they are already working on this, it is just a matter of time (in all aspects IoI)

[Abambo]

Yet, the process will evolve and the time somehow will be decreased considerably. Something which all want to see, including Adobe 🙂 Which I am sure they are already working on this, it is just a matter of time (in all aspects IoI)

By @The Is NoNe

There is absolutely no need for Adobe to accelerate moderation. They are moderating many more assets than a year ago. They need to have more customers for faster moderation. It's a ROI question.