Hi there! I'm a photographer and Adobe Stock contributor for many years now and have been dipping my toes into AI. I'm noticing it's much tougher to get AI images approved and would love some help if anybody has a workflow that works best for them, I'd love your thoughts. Below are just some of the rejected images ( I upscaled upres'd each image to 300DPI). Does anyone have a workflow for AI images that Adobe seems to consider best for AI image quality? Thank you!
7 Correct answers
The workflow is simple. View your images! At best, at 200%. Look at the hands and anything with detail. All of your images that you posted here have deformed fingers and toes.
Underexposed. Watch the fingers.
I'm quite certain that the first place Moderators look is hands. If they find a fault there, they press "reject". These images look good at first when viewed at screen size, but when zooming in, rendering errors are easier to find.
Again, watch the fingers. She has no fingernails.
There was surely a rejection reason.
Upscaling to 300dpi (dots per inch) is nonsense. First it would be ppi (pixels per inch) , and second, digital pictures are measured in pixels. I can put the same image in 100 ppi, 2000 ppi or whatever value you want, without changing the picture. Dpi is only important when you want to print a picture, as the size of the print and the pixel density give you an indication of the quality of the print. And newspaper prints do need less dpi as high-quality pho
...
20
Replies
The workflow is simple. View your images! At best, at 200%. Look at the hands and anything with detail. All of your images that you posted here have deformed fingers and toes.
Underexposed. Watch the fingers.
I'm quite certain that the first place Moderators look is hands. If they find a fault there, they press "reject". These images look good at first when viewed at screen size, but when zooming in, rendering errors are easier to find.
Could you please use inline pictures? That's easier to handle:
When your posting your assets, that have been refused, you should use attached pictures, because for those, the quality will be better.
Again, watch the fingers. She has no fingernails.
There was surely a rejection reason.
Upscaling to 300dpi (dots per inch) is nonsense. First it would be ppi (pixels per inch) , and second, digital pictures are measured in pixels. I can put the same image in 100 ppi, 2000 ppi or whatever value you want, without changing the picture. Dpi is only important when you want to print a picture, as the size of the print and the pixel density give you an indication of the quality of the print. And newspaper prints do need less dpi as high-quality photo prints.
If you are a seasoned stock photographer, simply check your generative AI assets like you would do with your photographs, but add another check for rendering errors.
Just looking at the histogram of your third asset:
It's underexposed. But you also have rendering errors like these here:
Additionally, you have aliasing and an outline, as you can see on the hand.
I did not check the other assets, they probably have similar issues.
Here are some fixes I would have made prior to submission. Some are subtle, so I've marked changes on the original. (Since the majority of my assets are being marked as too similar, I might just as well spend more time doing stuff like this.)
AdChoices
