photos vs generative al

[Juliakaye63]

while the interest seems to be focused on this 'generative al',  I have photos that have been in review over 3 months. are the old fashioned pics gone out of style?

[daniellei4510]

Have you had any newer images reviewed while the older ones seem overlooked? Or has it been that long since you've had anything reviewed at all? There have been reports of images being reviewed within 24 hours while older ones still remain backlogged (though they get reviewed eventually).

[Juliakaye63]

I have photos that have been in review for over 3 months while some were
rejected less than 24 hrs after i submitted them. btw, i have 121 in review
now, most from 3 months ago.

[Abambo]

I have photos that have been in review for over 3 months while some wererejected less than 24 hrs after i submitted them. btw, i have 121 in reviewnow, most from 3 months ago.
By @Juliakaye63

Uploded 3 months ago or submitted 3 months ago?

[Juliakaye63]

submitted

[Abambo]

submitted
By @Juliakaye63

Did you upload and submit nearly the same moment (in hours…)?

[Juliakaye63]

No, I didn't Submit all 121 at once. This has been over a three month time
period, with the last 4 being about a week ago. However, within 24 hrs one
of those was rejected. I'm not so much wondering about the rejection as
much as why are all the others just sitting there?

[Jill_C]

None of us here knows why these non-sequential reviews are happening. Adobe does not reveal their internal business processes so we can only speculate.

[ElenaFragoso]

Of everything i've submitted, with oldest submission of 27 days, I've only had reviewed and rejected 3 immages, which was fast, but none of other 50 images were reviewed and none were approved. Does it seem like they only review what they will reject? Isn't it a bit odd?

[Abambo]

Does it seem like they only review what they will reject? Isn't it a bit odd?

By @ElenaFragoso

From a business point of view, it would be logical to review assets they accept, no? When they are in the database, they may sell. If they sell, Adobe makes money. 

But how to know in advance, what assets get refused or accepted? You need to do the review for knowing that. 

[ElenaFragoso]

hey, I'm with you on a logic) just saw someone mentioning rejected pictures reviewed faster too. In my case they somehow picked one picture from a series to reject) other got accepted by "other stock" so I thought maybe for some weird reason they rejected first, maybe it got flagged by something automatic as bad quality, although other two got rejected cause in their opinion didn't fit illustrative editorial guidelines... 

I'm just trying to see a pattern while waiting  :')

[Abambo]

maybe it got flagged by something automatic as bad quality, although other two got rejected cause in their opinion didn't fit illustrative editorial guidelines... 

I'm just trying to see a pattern while waiting  :')

By @ElenaFragoso

Were the other assets also “illustrative editorial”? Illustrative editorial are a specific subgroup of submissions. They may well get be checked by different moderators. 

But yes, out of bound moderation does not astonish us anymore.

[Juliakaye63]

The submissions were basic photos that I had taken with my camera. As I
had pointed out in an earlier comment/reply; it wasn't the rejection that
had me concerned. I understand and expect it to some degree. But to have
one rejected that I had so recently submitted while others from three
months ago are still in limbo??? Therein lies my confusion. But thank you
for all the responses and suggestions. It does help to know that I'm not
alone.

[Abambo]

There is currently nothing special with out of bound moderations. For some reason, unknown to us, it happens. 

[ElenaFragoso]

they rejected all illustrative editorial, but one commercial use also got picked out from a bunch of the same ones and rejected, while everything else was not reviewed. so all reviews were rejections editorial and commercial

[Jill_C]

We do know that Illustrative Editorial submissions go through a separate queue, so there is a logical explanation for why those get reviewed fast. However, there is no logic to one asset being picked out from another batch for rejection...

[Abambo]

It would be logical to have specific moderators looking at Illustrative Editorial, as they have special rules. Specific needs need specific training. It would be logical that not all moderators would handle all assets. 

[michaell37417133]

I can verify this issue with my own photos. The length of time for review is discouraging. I'm not sure if I should pack the review queue with lots of photos for when my time comes up, or that I should reduce submissions for quicker review. Any suggestions? 

[Abambo]

I can verify this issue with my own photos. The length of time for review is discouraging. I'm not sure if I should pack the review queue with lots of photos for when my time comes up, or that I should reduce submissions for quicker review. Any suggestions? 

By @michaell37417133

You should submit regularly. In theory that will lead to continuous moderation.

Unfortunatly, Photos and generative AI "photos" are in the same queue and should take about 2 months of waiting time before moderation. The same is true for illustrations.

[Jill_C]

The conventional wisdom here is that submitting small batches of dissimilar images regularly, say 4-6 per day, is best and will result in a steady stream of reviewed assets. Small batches will also allow you to learn from rejections and reduce the sting of rejections.

[Juliakaye63]

my last submissions were 4 days ago.