I had some of my submitted photos rejected for allegedly being Generated with AI, but they were not!

[giorgiog89706945]

Hi there,

Recently I submitted around 50 photos. Ten of them were refused because evaluation considered them as "Generated with AI (artificial intelligence)", although none of my work ever used AI. I´d like to know what can be done in order to change this evaluation, because I don´t want to have problems later with my account for not checking the AI box and allegedly breaking the rules when I didn´t. I accept the pictures to be refused, but I expect a true reason to be presented. Below I show you the rejected photos, which I assure were taken by myself without AI help or the use of other artists production, and I´d appreciate to get help from some Adobe employee in order to acknowledge that there was a mistake during evaluation since my content didn´t broke any rule:
- 647732807
-647732434
-647732370
-647732360
-647732281
-647732278
-647732239
-647732238
-647731971
-647731839

In addition, I want to say that an Adobe employee told me through chat that I should present this issue by sending an e-mail to contact us, which I did, but never got an answer. It´s the third time I present this issue in this community and I´d really like to get some official statement about my rejected photos above with the acknowledgment that AI was not used to generate them.

[George_F]

Adobe employees mostly don't monitor this forum., this is a community forum of fellow contributors for the most part.  These appear to be small thumbnails and we won't be able to properly evaluate them.  For the best advice, upload the same files you sent to Adobe.  What are was the exact reason Adobe stated for the refusals?

[giorgiog89706945]

Hi, thank you for your interest! Adobe stated the following reasons for the refusals:

- Non-conforming use of another artist´s name.

- Undeclared AI generated content.

- Content that does not comply with general guidelines:

All refused photos were landscapes that I took during a trip in a brazilian national park. I didn´t use AI or other artists content and I don´t see why the photos wouldn´t comply with general guidelines since other similar ones were accepted. It seemed an unfair evaluation and I only want to prevent that this causes me trouble in the future.

Thanks again for your help!

[George_F · Accepted solution]

What national park did you visit?  Is the name included in the keywords or title?  That could be the non-compliance part.  

I really can't seem much of anything with the small thumbnails, feel free to upload the originals with title and keywords included if you'd like additional advice.

Perhaps browsing through the Adobe User Guide might be helpful.  Although I've contributed for years, I still check there when I'm unsure about something.

Cheers!

[daniellei4510]

Unless the moderator incorrectly assumed otherwise, I don't think that's the reason, either, according to this. So it would help to see larger examples of the images.

"The NPS will not require a permit for photographers, commercial or non-commercial, to go anywhere or to do anything that members of the public are generally allowed to go or do without a permit. Therefore, a photographer, regardless of the amount or types of equipment he carries, is not subjected to any particular restriction other than those which apply to the general public. If you need to go to an area closed to the public, or be there at a time when an area is closed, of course you need a permit, but so would you even if you were not photographing."

[giorgiog89706945]

Hi again, George!

I think you solved the puzzle! Indeed the national park´s name was in the photos´ titles! I guess this was the problem! I thank you very much for your help! I feel much more relieved now I know what probably caused the whole problem!

Wish you a great week! Cheers!

GiorgioG

[Abambo]

Indeed the national park´s name was in the photos´ titles! I guess this was the problem! 

By @giorgiog89706945

Where they in the reminder tab before the refusal. That would indeed be then the correct refusal reason. Rge review tab allows you to correct issues with the asset, not correcting results in a Non-Compliant Image refusal.

[George_F]

Your welcome!  Let us know if you are able to resubmit with a different title/keywords and have them accepted.  The non-compliance rejection reason could be many things, some of them just are easy to overlook like keywords being in different languages, etc so more troubleshooting may be needed.  There is the slight chance of the reviewer chose the wrong reason as well.

@Abambo, would an issue with the title go into the reminder tab for a chance to correct first, or just get a non-compliance rejection?  Either way I think you can resubmit if you feel like you've corrected the issue.

Good luck!

[Nancy OShea]

What you received was a generic rejection reason the same as most people get.   I wouldn't put too much emphasis on Generative AI if you didn't submit AI graphics.  More than likely, the images were rejected for IP or compliance violation reasons. 

I can't tell much from the images you posted.  They are too small to critique.

[Abambo]

Get us the correct refusal heading, not the content. The text that gets send with the refusal is always the same and enumerates only some possible errors. The non-conforming refusal text recently changed to include AI as a possible error. That does not mean that you have used AI.

6 years ago, nobody did talk about AI. 🤫 Refusals are coded, and the text they display in different languages is pre-defined. It does not mean, that the refusal is necessarily one of the bullets. The text says possible reasons!

[giorgiog89706945]

Thanks for your answer! The reasons you showed above were the ones I got, but it seems unfair to me since I didn´t use AI or other artists content and I don´t see why the photos wouldn´t comply with general guidelines since other similar ones were accepted. It´s kinda confusing to me. All I want is to prevent this kind of evaluation will bring me problems in the future. Anyway, thank you again for your help!

[Abambo]

No, the reason is Non-Compliant Image. That refusal reason is an old one, the AI text is new. Six years ago, there was no generative AI, which proves my point. The text only suggests some comon issues, but not all issues with non-compliant assets.  For your case it's the third point that is relevant: content not compliant with overall guidelines. You only saw the 2 first points. 

Having other assets that passed may have passed by error. And still there may be differences between the assets.

[George_F]

If I'm reading this right, Brazilian National Parks are included in the Known Image Restrictions.  I perused them when I saw this initially, but I think I overlooked these.  Cheers!

https://helpx.adobe.com/lv/stock/contributor/help/known-image-restrictions.html

[Abambo]

If I'm reading this right, Brazilian National Parks are included in the Known Image Restrictions. 

By @George_F

Again, that would mean that it was in the review section to get a release. Resubmitting without that release is a Non-Compliant Image refusal. (Else it would be an IP refusal!)

[George_F]

@Abambo that makes sense, thanks!

[giorgiog89706945]

And thank you for your interest too, Abambo! 🙂

[Abambo]

You're welcome.

[giorgiog89706945]

Thank you again, George! You´ve been really helpful! All the best for you! 🙂