I am submitting better and better quality AI images and more and more are being rejected.

[Z_I_B]

This has been going on for months: as the image generators I use become more sophisticated and I become more familiar with their use, I dare say I am submitting better quality images than I used to: yet more are being rejected. Is this my individual case or has anyone else experienced this?
I have a feeling - I cannot prove it of course - that they are just making excuses and actually want to discourage the submission of AI-generated images. In recent months, images that used to be accepted have been rejected with quality objections.
Now, the latest objection was to my images of Native Americans, "Similar content in our collection".
I wonder if, in the past, when images of people bathing in the sea, for example, were accepted, they did not have similar images? I have a feeling that the judging is not fair: at least tell the truth, say openly that you don't need AI-generated images anymore!

[Moderator cured the topics. Please do select only relevant topics.]

[Abambo]

Adobe does not need to refuse your assets to say that they do not want generative AI assets anymore. They would simply prohibit submissions. Genereative AI is good business for them, even that customers are complaining and asking for a permanent filter to exclude generative AI from their searches. Check the growth of the database and you will see that it is steadily increasing. 

What I learn from your posting is that you submit images without checking them for defects, and that you do not correct the defects. Adobe, however, is getting better at checking for quality issues. That may be your increased refusal rate.

As for the similar-refusal, .Adobe issued a note here in this forum, that they think that their new system is working well. https://community.adobe.com/t5/stock-contributors-discussions/update-on-similar-refusals/td-p/152984...

Most contributors, even the most experienced, would not agree. My guess is that they installed a new tool, checking submissions for similarity, and that moderators just look at the magic number, without further checking for real similarity. Whatever the cause of this is, the database grows, so some assets pass even this barrier.

[Z_I_B]

Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately, this is not my personal experience. According to my critical image editing colleagues, there is no problem with the quality of my images.
But this is not my problem: I repeat, I do not like the answer "Similar content in our collection". In comparison, they have previously accepted several of my images that have a lot of "similar" content in their collection.

[Abambo]

Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately, this is not my personal experience. According to my critical image editing colleagues, there is no problem with the quality of my images.

By @Z_I_B

Quality issues are to a high extend warrented. I do not know about your experience or the experience of your critical image editing colleagues, but if you get a quality refusal, I would bet that in 99% of the cases we would detect (easily) quality issues. It is even so, that too many images pass with very obvious quality issues, since Adobe accepts generative AI. Generative AI added multiple other quality issues as thos you would experience from photography.

But this is not my problem: I repeat, I do not like the answer "Similar content in our collection". In comparison, they have previously accepted several of my images that have a lot of "similar" content in their collection.

By @Z_I_B

The similar refusal is not based on quality. You can submit the greatest quality and still get that refusal. Your subject of the post is about quality, not similar. refusals, so that is your main subject. Yes, the subject of your post matters... 

Adobe changed or added a tool checking for similar assets. You, as all of us, have to live with that. As you could read from the post from Adobe, you will have to live with that refusal. Some contributors stopped or paused contributing because of that. The only advice I can give is to contact contributor support on this. https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/Need-Help-Contact-Us.html

BTW: images about Native Americans are very controversial. But that is an issue appart.

[Z_I_B]

I would also be interested in other people's answers. I see in your previous comments that you always praise Adobe's activities and show no understanding for the problems of contributors.

Once again and for the last time: "Similar content in our collection" is a qualification that can be used to reject everything. I looked at the complaints about similar content that you first linked. What happened to the other contributors was that they submitted very original images, which a primitive algorithm classified as "Similar content in our collection".
Sorry for my poor English, it's not my native language.

[Jill_C]

Read some of the other recent posts in this forum. There is indeed an increased level of rejections for similars, some of them apparently not justified. Quality rejections have also increased. As Adobe's database now exceeds three quarters of a BILLION images, it appears that they are focused on slowing down the acceptance of new images and incentivizing Contributors to focus on submitting only their best work. There is absolutely no evidence that Adobe is discouraging AI, and in fact 80-90% of the hundreds of thousands new assets approved each day are AI.

[Z_I_B]

Thanks for the answer. I'm reading... My only problem with this - and maybe others too - is that without such undefined criteria, there's no point in working on new images. It was an honor to work for Adobe, but it's impossible like this.

[Jill_C]

I agree and have dramatically reduced my new submissions. It's just too time consuming to put in the work knowing that so many will be rejected.

[Paul_RNRS]

How many AI images did you get accepted before most of them started getting declined?

[Z_I_B]

I can't boast about my previous performance either. At first they accepted about 12 out of 20, then about 16 out of 20. And that's how it went, now I have 207 images in total.
But lately they only accept 1-2 images, and not even one from my last upload.
And it's absurd that a stock agency would reject images saying "Similar content in our collection".
Not to list only my own complaints: I look at the complaints at this link https://community.adobe.com/t5/stock-contributors-discussions/update-on-similar-refusals/td-p/152984..., and for example, the guy who made the mouse in prison uniform has a really original image, and it's just stupid that they respond with "Similar content in our collection".
It was a really nice hobby for me, but it became pointless.

[Nancy OShea]

Adobe doesn't make money from rejected images.  They make money when customers make purchases. 

I won't sugar coat it. The competition is fierce.  And it gets more competitive each & every week as Stock accepts more content into inventory.  AI is a very challenging space.

Before you submit, compare & contrast your BEST work with similar content in Stock's current inventory.  If yours isn't as good or better than what Stock has, don't submit it.  Strive to create something that nobody else has thought of.  Be the big fish in the small pond. 

Good luck.