AI images rejected because of quality issues

[arcmetal]

After reading other's posts, I get the impression that the AI images are not going to ever get accepted here.

Mine were rejected for "Quality Issues".  They could have been rejected for "snow storm", and it would have been just as informative.

The only suggestion was to post them here, and ask why they were denied.   This is the same effect we now have these days: where one doesn't usually find full service gas station pumps.  You now have to do the work yourself. ... Let's keep pushing out the externalities onto the consumers.

 

 

[Abambo]

Your posts here are too small to evaluate. You need to post one or two assets here as submitted. We can then take a look at them. 

As for your remarks: Check the stock database, and you will see that Adobe stock massively accepts generative AI. We are even thinking that the refusal rate is not high enough, seeing what comes through. 

You need to check the documentation, for understanding what quality issues are, and you can also read the posts here to see how to check your assets. It is, unfortunately so, that many contributors lack the basic knowledge of asset quality. 

May I ask what you consume here on Adobe stock? As a contributor, you are not a consumer. The consumers are the buyers. They have a right to high-quality assets, and they do not need to have to correct your errors before being able to use your asset. Moderation is to protect the customers, not for giving you a nice report on what to correct. As a contributor, you are a service provider (indeed the gas station), and you are supposed to be able to deliver a quality service. To keep your analogy, you are selling cars, and are expecting the customers to first repair the car, before they can drive it. 

[arcmetal]

I appreciate the reply.  Here is a higher res version of one of the above images.  But don't waste too much time on it, as I've noticed that this may not have been the correct site to post these. 

Thanks anyways.

 

[Abambo · Accepted solution]

Why should it not be the correct site?

Check your assets at 100%. Look at the windows and you will see some errors with them. And the base of your front light also contains errors.

I even didn't look very hard at this. You really should check geometries. Generative AI is not always good at determining front and back and when an object stops and a different object starts.

[arcmetal]

"Why should it not be the correct site?"

There might be too much to list, but for example, as another commenter suggested: the "images were too dark".   And, after briefly searching the images on this site, most appear to be in daylight, or brightly lit.

Without going into too much detail.  The effect I focused on for these images included a "glow", as one would see with the glow of plasma.  Increasing the lighting on the images would have washed out that effect, making the images pointless.  It would be like taking a photo of a campfire in the bright noon sun versus a shot of a campfire at midnight.  The glow of the fire would be missing, among other things.

But hey, I appreciate the friendly responses.

[BrickelleM]

What a wonderful and well thought out reply. Thank you for your contributions here, seriously!!

[Abambo]

Thanks for your praise. As a buyer and a seller, I know both sides of the aisle.

[daniellei4510]

Why wouldn't you have to do the work yourself? They're your images. 

[Adam28219092hwx0]

The third image down has a watermark in the bottom right corner. Also, these images look poorly drawn/rendered, but it's hard to tell without seeing them at full size. Not sure of what commercial value these would have either. They are "thingamaboops" that an AI art generator cobbled together, added a cool light effect, and now you're trying to submit them as . . . ?

[Adam28219092hwx0]

trying*

We can't edit our posts on this forum? Oh, my ocd for grammar no likey : (

[Jill_C]

For some reason, which I've forgotten now, you're not allowed to edit posts until you've reached a certain number of posts... 

[Abambo]

For some reason, which I've forgotten now, you're not allowed to edit posts until you've reached a certain number of posts… 

By @Jill_C

The reason is to avoid some posters to modify back moderator edits that were necessary because of the forum rules. It could have been solved also differently, like inability to edit posts after a forum moderator edited them. However, the forum software does not allow this setting, and Adobe is sourcing this from a third party.

[Abambo]

trying*

We can't edit our posts on this forum? Oh, my ocd for grammar no likey : (

By @Adam28219092hwx0

I've corrected your post for you.

[Adam28219092hwx0]

Oh, I understand now. Thanks for clarification.

[Abambo]

You're welcome. I can move this strain out of sight (equivalent to deleting), if you want.

[arcmetal]

heh, I hadn't noticed that watermark there.  Thanks for that.

[arcmetal]

"They are "thingamaboops" that an AI art generator cobbled together, added a cool light effect, and now you're trying to submit them as"

umm, no.

[Nancy OShea · Accepted solution]

IMO, these are all very dark. Dark images do not print well. Whatever you submit to Stock must be suitable for commercial-use.  I don't think these will reproduce well on a T-shirt or tote bag.

[arcmetal]

Yep, I see that they were too dark for submission here.