Limits on Number of Assets In Review Now in Place

Thanks for the update. I have been assuming that garnering some sales history is one of the factors that influences the account cap, so it's good to have that confirmation. I think that acceptance rate may also factor into the account cap formula. Adobe has not provided any details, so we're all just guessing.... 

I've read on the Discord channel of some contributors having maxed out at a few thousand, but I suppose it's possible that they already thousands in the queue when the cap was put in place...

It is clear that Adobe is now segregating Illustrations, including Generative AI assets, into a queue separate from photographs and videos. That queue has now grown so huge that the wait for review is now 1.5-2 months. Your photographs should still be getting reviewed in less than a week. Is that what you've experienced? If I were you, I would just concentrate your energies on editing, titling, keywording and uploading photographs! 

 

I imagine the adaptive limit might depend on several factors  -- type of assets, acceptance rate, sales history, etc..

 

By @Nancy OShea

That would be cool and you could do a lot with acceptance rate or sales history but looking at their other (very pragmatic) solutions for contributors I kinda doubt it. They had to roll it out as a hotfix with little time so most likely its just the global queue and then MAYBE some soft factors like age of account or acceptance rate. Most likely they set some internal time frame of like 10 days and then when global queue goes above that they adjust the max number. 

This surely helps the waiting times but I'm not sure if this is the right approach. Because who reaches high numbers? Generative AI people who know the rules and have a proper workflow to release high numbers (and spammers but they are easy to detect). I know you guys say that high numbers equal bad quality or duplicate content but it really isn't. You could grind 8 hrs / day and handpick 1000 high quality images easily that have a rejection rate of almost 0%. And people who do this know Adobe's portfolio well and generate stuff that is needed and that sells.

Now who are the people who don't get affected by this limit? The ones that "heard about midjourney" and now try to make some money on Adobe Stock. The ones that submit 30 images of "a robot in a futuristic city" and then after 24 hours ask in the forum why their pictures aren't live yet and if it's a problem that it's tagged as "photo" instead of "illustration".

So I don't know... I would look at people who don't even check their images but instead let Adobe do the culling (ok you kinda deal with that now). Then maybe do some stricter pre-filtering with Sensei so similiar content doesn't clock up the review process (if you need more animals in suits you can adjust the filter in the future). And 3rd maybe increase the bureaucratic obstacles for new users. Make tax forms mandatory, let them sign property releases or just overall increase the queue times (or decrease q max) for new users. Check if they're really interested in generative AI and make clear that it's not some Discord meme but actual business and taxes. If they have a small queue in the first 45 days they'll learn how to handpick. Same for the all-out-spammers who haven't seen their own images before.

tldr: a hard cap on good images is suboptimal if you want to sell images.

Adaptive can be simple, like the global number of assets waiting for moderation and the number of submitters. There is no need to adjust more than that.  I suppose they take in account the daily number of submissions and the daily moderation capacity. That will give you a nice number, where you can still add magic numbers to keep the queue in a stable state of 5 to 10 days of moderation time.