Fake transparent background images

[Ismail30734032ltqu]

How is it that the approval process has allowed numerous fake transparent background images from a single account, and yet, the account has not been banned? This account is even appearing in the 'Recent Top Sellers'. One might argue that those who approve images could make a mistake and let one image slip through, but it's hard to believe when more than 10 images have a fake background. 

[oleschwander]

What do you mean by fake transparent backgrounds?

[Ismail30734032ltqu]

The titles of the images claim they have transparent backgrounds, but this is not the case. Each image features an object with a supposedly transparent background, seemingly designed to deceive people. You might download an image under the impression that it has a transparent background (typically indicating a PNG file), only to discover that the background isn’t transparent at all. Instead, it’s merely a checkered grey-and-white pattern.
Take a look - the file type is JPEG, not PNG :
https://stock.adobe.com/ma/images/psd-fresh-apple-tart-on-a-transparent-background-4/711675697

[oleschwander]

Oh, yes - and I see now that the checkered background is not even ... what a huge mistake from the reviewers ...!

[Abambo]

Oh, yes - and I see now that the checkered background is not even ... what a huge mistake from the reviewers ...!

By @oleschwander

Yes, that should have been easy refusals.

[Jill_C · Accepted solution]

I'm not sure whether any Adobe Stock representatives frequent this forum, but perhaps @Contributor1  can refer these back to the Moderation team for review/removal.

[RALPH_L]

You should report this to contributor support. The title and the keywords are misleading and are being only used to generate downloads. 

[daniellei4510]

How bizarre. Especially since the contributor would have needed to cut out the objects in order to PUT them on the fake background. Unless they were prompting the AI bot in some manner to give the impression these are on a transparent background, as might be indicated by the sloppy job of the checkerboard pattern. I don't think this contributor is being purposely deceitful. They just don't know understand how transparencies work and they have no Photoshop experience whatsoever.

[Abambo]

How bizarre. Especially since the contributor would have needed to cut out the objects in order to PUT them on the fake background. Unless they were prompting the AI bot in some manner to give the impression these are on a transparent background, as might be indicated by the sloppy job of the checkerboard pattern. I don't think this contributor is being purposely deceitful. They just don't know understand how transparencies work and they have no Photoshop experience whatsoever.

By @daniellei4510

Anyhow, this should not be on Adobe stock and the contributor should not be allowed to put items like this into the database. It may well be that these assets have been created, uploaded and submitted without human intervention.

[Ismail30734032ltqu]

The term ‘cut out’ and 'transparent ' can lead to this situation. I’ve observed people using it in their prompts at Midjourney. It appears to be an automated process, possibly implemented by someone aiming to profit from it. The title includes the words ‘transparent’ and ‘PSD’, likely intended to generate a high number of downloads. You can see for yourself here : https://stock.adobe.com/in/contributor/211857586/hong

[Abambo]

Yes, it looks like we have a candidate to get locked out!

[oleschwander]

He must have prompted it.

[Contributor1 · Accepted solution]

Hello @Ismail30734032ltqu, I see the issue you're referencing and I've sent these details to be reviewed internally. Thank you for the report and sorry for the problem with the images.

[Ismail30734032ltqu]

Thank you for your attention. I was unsure of how to report it, which is problematic as it creates a negative experience for customers. I hope that Adobe Stock will incorporate a ‘report’ button for each image on their website in the future. This would simplify the process for users to report such issues.

[Abambo]

Making it too simple to report will increase the fake reports!

You can make your voice heard in the stock forum under ideas! 

[Ismail30734032ltqu]

The concept of fake reports has occurred to me. Perhaps they should consider allowing only major contributors or actual customers to submit reports. This approach would prevent new accounts from being able to report issues. Furthermore, if an individual has submitted more than one report that was determined to be false, they could lose their reporting privileges. Alternatively, they could implement a system similar to Twitter's, where a reported issue is made visible to others, allowing them to upvote the report if they believe it to be valid. Ultimately, Adobe experts would review the reported image and make a final decision. This method could reduce the burden on their team.

[Jill_C]

Indeed, it's a difficult program to implement. Amazon allows users to upvote or downvote reviews, and post "fake reviews" such as a negative review for a book they haven't even read. This practice makes star-ratings on products unrealiable. There could be many "fake" 5-star reviews, just as there could be many "fake" 1-star reviews. Amazon also used to have Reviewer Ranking, based on number of reviews posted and the ratio of positive to negative votes on those reviews. Other reviewers formed "review circles" to upvote each other's reviews, and downvote competing reviews. It got pretty ugly, and made highly rated reviews untrustworthy. Eventually, Amazon dropped reviewer ranking altogether. 

I assume that Adobe has evaluated various methods of allowing bad assets to be reported, and have just decided for now to investigate only if they receive a direct report from a Buyer or other Adobe user. The effort to figure out how to report bad assets ensures that "bad actors" aren't going to take the time to abuse the system just to bury another Contributor's assets.

[Abambo]

One might argue that those who approve images could make a mistake and let one image slip through, but it's hard to believe when more than 10 images have a fake background. 

By @Ismail30734032ltqu

But it is so. Moderators make errors and some don't do their job correctly.

[photorebelle]

The most problematic were the clients who bought these images to integrate into their project and who must have been very disappointed.

[Jill_C]

Hopefully, they requested a credit !

[Abambo]

Obviously, someone was doing pass-through moderation.

[RALPH_L]

I opened a ticket with contributor-support, which was quickly closed, or maybe @Contributor1 took some action, the user is now offline.

Thanks for reporting.

[Abambo]

Contributor1 is the one taking care of those things. His team has checked the account and closed it, and in a few days we will have someone here whining that his account has been closed.