1 Correct answer
I am looking at your account @mrooke and I don't see the long wait on images you called out. Currently, you have 5 images pending review. Four of the five were uploaded and submitted on March 14. They were all reviewed 10 days later on March 24 and found to be non compliant with indexing,. At that time, they were all placed in the Remind To Complete section so you could make the necessary corrections. The images sat untouched in the reminder section until you re-submitted them on July 11. They h
...
33
Replies
Totally irrelevant, if you car dealer tells you two days, then a year is too much, and their story is totally different from this.
they write two days, then I don't expect to wait for months, all I ask them I to write the correct response time, or as code as possible.
By @mirrormanxx
The car dealer said 2 months if I remember well. And yes, I agree, a year is too much. But what do you want to do, if the car is what you want, and cancelling and buying from a different source would just get you at the end of the queue.
And the story is different, yes. You are a supplier, not a customer. So, that is different. But getting to the end of the queue is the same if you delete and resubmit. So wait the time it takes!
The message may be changed, probably. 8 months ago, it was still true. You now know your waiting time is longer. It's not a big deal.
it's interesting to notice how other contributor sites speeded up their reviews (and they are a "bit" more relaxed in heir reviews) while at Adobe it got much extended and tougher. maybe others try to stay competative (with AI images) by quickly increasing their volumes?? not sure but they have become noticeably quicker. it never happened to me before that Getty would accept a photo in a day! now it is doing that! just funny to see the contrast.
By @EzyRider_II
The database at Adobe stock fills very fast with new stuff. On the other side, customers are complaining about asset quality, very often of older stuff. I've seen complete portfolios disappearing because of (real) quality issues. In addition, despite adding more stuff, I see (with my account) increased sales numbers. As I do not contribute that much, I suppose that there are many more customers buying assets. The subscription possibilities have rapidly expanded. The integration with Adobe software is an additional asset.
And I doubt that fast approval is giving Adobe an advantage. They are adding more stuff than ever to the database. It's really at a very fast pace.
Hi. What you are suggesting seems a bit of a conundrum to me that Adobemust be facing. Or several to be exact. If buying customers complain aboutquality, especially stuff in the library that "aged" and would not stand upto today's reviews and expectations, I long hold the view that Adobe should"force" contributors to comb their ports. Delete 5 (10-15-20?) % of theirold (dead) material. Of stuff that has never sold and has little chance ofever selling.
By @EzyRider_II
A contributor to one of those accounts simply blew up their assets. Even in those times, the asset was not suited to meet the quality requirements. However, the process of checking proved ineffective.
I've got assets that I haven't sold yet. One of them started selling a while back, and now it's my current top-selling item. My guess: Most of my assets would pass today's quality control. I have deleted one or two assets after acceptance because of IP violations that the moderator at the time did not see, and I was not aware of as a rookie.
out of my top 15 most popular photos 7 were taken with a small pocket camera several years ago. the size is O.K. (4300x3200), colors are fine, no serious noise or other "problems" with them, yet I wouldn't want to delete and re-submit them today if I made some improvement on them. just not worth the risk, since they sell the way they are. though I am tempted to jazz them up a bit. I actually doubt that many users would want to print these out at a 40"x30" size. though I printed a couple of them in such size and they are fine. I tend to believe that most of my photos are used probably in smaller size and likely on-line as reference.
By @EzyRider_II
That's correct. Most assets won't be used for billboard size prints. And I would hate to delete any of my accepted assets. It's not worth, if you do not detect a major defect.
AdChoices