Participant

Question

AI Images rejected mass

Forum|Forum|2 years ago
December 18, 2023
8 replies
2897 views

I've been facing a growing trend of content rejections lately. I understand that the system is currently overwhelmed with the sheer volume of generated images in the intake process. However, I fail to comprehend why we frequently encounter problematic content, featuring three or six fingers or devoid of any logical coherence, while my submissions get rejected due to presumed low quality. Is it possible that some content from a batch is accepted, while another portion is rejected? This raises doubts and diminishes the motivation to strive for high quality, as low-quality submissions are rejected just as readily as those that clearly stand out.

I am committed to consistently improving the quality of my images, refining descriptions and keywords, and generating images at a higher resolution than before. In this context, it becomes challenging to maintain a high level of motivation when the selection criteria appear unclear and variable.

This topic has been closed for replies.

S

Sdobrick

Participant

A mí también me rechazan muchas, ahora llega el carnaval y tengo algunas ¿ qué opináis, por qué lo rechazan?

Abambo

Community Expert

Those are not the pictures as submitted. Post what you submitted to s tock in the quality as submitted.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

M

moe hong

Inspiring

I think part of it is that these are tremendously cliche, unoriginal and derivative images. Sure, I get that everything AI is by its very nature unoriginal, in some way at least, but these two images are exceptionally boring examples of very well-trod paths.

I am having a very large proportion of my AI submissions accepted, but then again I am constantly fine-tuning subject matter to match what clients need, and trying not to do the same old stuff over and over again, although not doing that would certainly make things easier/faster.

Nancy OShea

Community Expert

AI art is cliché. The only original artwork I've seen lately is from very talented artists who combined AI with original content to create something completely new.

Nancy O'Shea— Product User & Community Expert

Davida02

Inspiring

Hola la fotografia del paisaje tiene muchas areas fuera de foco para la próxima utiliza aperturas más cerradas para pisajes tipo f/11, f/8. La imagen del retratro no se, si enviaste el formulario con la autorización de la modelo, yo pienso que como es una imagen muy producida no te la aceptaron si vaz a fotografiar personas trata que sea lo más naturale posible.

daniellei4510

Community Expert

These are AI images, not photographs. I thought I had posted a comment earlier along with part of the image of the woman, but maybe I just clicked Preview and then wandered off somewhere. But my apologies if I'm posting a second time, although I can't find it. The woman's eyes need fixing.

While facial restoration software can often fix such issues, AI, if one is lucky, can render some very realistic irises. When that happens, I copy them and store them in my Photoshop Library. Different sizes, different colors, different catchlights, different sized pupils, etc.

Adobe Community Expert | If you can't fix it, hide it; if you can't hide it, delete it.

O

oleschwander

Legend

Personally I think the image of the girl is ok and could have been accepted. But I'm not the one to judge ... if something is wrong it's the unfinished ear in the right side of the image. But the reviews have become very trict.

Jill_C

Community Expert

There's almost nothing in focus in the first image. The iris on the left is malformed in the second image. Improving the quality of your images requires more than just increasing the resolution. Zoom in to at least 100% and inspect all the details for inaccuracies. That's exactly what the Moderators do.

Jill C., Forum Volunteer

D

David287897922ff2

Participating Frequently

We were commenting it in this thread, some of us (many probably) are suddenly facing 100 % rejections in the last weeks.

https://community.adobe.com/t5/stock-contributors-discussions/anyone-submitting-ai-notice-the-increase-in-rejections-all-of-a-sudden-they-keep-rejection-my-item/td-p/14302729

And what I find strange is how this evaluation process has accelerated at the same time. Until last month it lasted more than a month to get the results but now they have it clear in 7-8 days.

Apparently it's because the guys "analyzing" the pictures are much better trained now. They are so well trained they don't even need to look at the pictures to decide anymore. I guess they must be having pain in the finger after rejecting content at such speed.

Abambo

Community Expert

And what I find strange is how this evaluation process has accelerated at the same time. Until last month it lasted more than a month to get the results but now they have it clear in 7-8 days.

Apparently it's because the guys "analyzing" the pictures are much better trained now. They are so well trained they don't even need to look at the pictures to decide anymore. I guess they must be having pain in the finger after rejecting content at such speed.

By @David287897922ff2

7-8 days was formerly a very long time. Typical moderation was less then 48 hours!

The speed increase can only be achieved with more moderators or less submissions. And there is also the increased awareness of generative AI flaws. So be prepared to get assets refused that you would have gotten accepted weeks ago.

Individual moderators were rejecting/accepting always at the same speed. You do not think that someone looked for 4 weeks at your assets, before accepting/rejecting them. Moderation time for a single asset was always only seconds, especially when getting refused.

During the last year, moderators moderated millions of assets. To get your waiting time down, more moderators needed to be added. To increase the quality of the assets in the database, more assets need to be refused. Assets get refused when moderators detect errors. Moderators detect errors, when they are well trained. Generative AI creates unique flaws, that the moderators were not trained to detect. In photography, you do not have bad geometries, six fingers, three arms …

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

George_F

Community Expert

With the wooden table image, the shallow depth is too shallow. I would expect the table to be completely in focus in this photo.

With the model photo, there are generation errors along the shoulders and the histogram is reflecting underexposure which would be important in this photorealistic image. If you correct the generation errors and lighten the photo I think this has a chance of getting through.

George F, Photographer & Forum Volunteer

Abambo

Community Expert

No conspiracy theories here. If your assets get refused for quality issues, the have quality issues. If bad assets get accepted, they get accepted by error.

Your first is the ~~swallow~~ shallow DOF. The second has artefacts in the hair/hair cover, and if you look at the eyes, you see irregularities. The eyebrow base is unnaturally straight.

You could have gotten a pass for this one, but it seems that Adobe increased the quality of their moderation.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Nancy OShea

Community Expert

I think you mean SHALLOW depth of field. Not SWALLOW. 😉

Nancy O'Shea— Product User & Community Expert

Abambo

Community Expert

Correct! 😂

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded