Clarification on “Similar Images” Rejection Need Guidance

[Aarthy Vijay]

Hi everyone,

I recently received multiple rejections with the reason "Similar Images," but I'm confused because I uploaded only one image in each category. I would like to understand how Adobe Stock determines similarity. Are they comparing my uploads with images from my own portfolio, or are they also checking against other contributors' images?

Also, since many of my recent submissions were rejected, I'm concerned. Will this affect the health or standing of my contributor account in any way?

I would really appreciate it if someone could clarify how this works and whether there are any long-term impacts from multiple rejections.

Thanks in advance for your help!

[daniellei4510]

A number of contributors have been seeing this reason for rejection, and we're as confused as you are as to why this has been happening. Despite how the rejection text reads, they are not comparing your own assets to being similar but comparing them to the entire database. But even that is not necessarily the case, as a few subjects being rejected are rarely represented in the database as a whole. Many contributors have slowed down or have stopped submitting entirely until the issue is either explained or fixed.

[Aarthy Vijay]

Thanks a lot for the reply! That actually helps me understand things a bit better. I really thought they were comparing only with my own uploads, so it's good to know it's probably being checked against the whole database.

Still, it’s kind of confusing… especially since some of my rejected topics don’t seem common at all. It would be great if Adobe gave more clear examples or explained what counts as “similar.”

Really appreciate you and others sharing your experience here. I’ll keep an eye on the forum  hoping we all get some clarity soon!

[serendipitous_dream0401]

I'm having the same issue. The images that were rejected are not already added to my portfolio, and those are not common. Is it wrong to follow the same color palette and the same graphic style? I'm so worried; I need a good clarification on this. 

[Festive_daydream5C2B]

I asked the same question to the support service yesterday, but unfortunately they can answer for a month. I uploaded 1 photo per topic before checking if this photo is in the database of the site itself. He wasn't there, but I was rejected for the same reason. I do not know what to do. wait or try to re-upload

[daniellei4510]

Many are waiting until this issue is addressed. Meanwhile, I'm keeping track all of my similar rejections in hopes I can resubmit them when this is corrected.

[Festive_daydream5C2B]

will we be notified that everything has been fixed?)

[daniellei4510]

We have no way of knowing that. But since they haven't come forward with an explanation as to why's happening in the first place, it's doubtful.

[Jill_C]

We don't even know if Adobe acknowledges it as a problem that needs to be "fixed"; they don't often provide any info at all about changes to internal business processes and procedures. So the answer is "we'll see".

[Abambo]

We don't even know if Adobe acknowledges it as a problem that needs to be "fixed"; they don't often provide any info at all about changes to internal business processes and procedures. So the answer is "we'll see".

By @Jill_C

One of the answers posted in a different thread, let's think that they are persuaded that it is the correct method. I think, they should be more stringent with generative AI in terms of obvious quality issues, instead of bothering good old photographers.

I have never seen someone complaining that there were too many assets of something in the database, but plenty of people are complaining about the bad quality of generative AI. And if they have too many assets in the database, they can purge the bad generative AI assets...

[Jill_C]

Unfortunately, it seems that more non-AI assets have been purged instead of AI. The number of AI assets in the database continues to grow, while the number of non-AI assets actually decreased in the past week.