Poor moderation team of Adobe stock

[AbdulWahid126]

According to the Adobe Stock team, files are reviewed manually in the order they are received, and the typical review time is 5 to 7 business days. However, in my case, it has been 10 days, and only one photo out of 50 assets has been reviewed. This is quite surprising, especially when compared to other stock sites that review AI content files within 2 days. It's disheartening to see that a reputed company like Adobe has a poor moderation team. I understand that they receive a high volume of submissions, particularly with the rush to post AI content, but it's unfortunate that there have been no improvements to their process. This delay is affecting the quality of service, and I've had non-exclusive stock photos and illustrations approved on other sites with over 40 assets in a more timely manner. I am new on Adobe Stock please share your valuable experience. Thank you 

[Abambo]

Welcome to Adobe stock and the fora.

You are talking here to your fellow contributors and not Adobe.

Before the arrival of generative AI, things were better, and I think there will be some improvement in the future. But I doubt that the moderation times will come back to the 2 to 5 days that we had before. Anyhow, Adobe is moderating countless assets per day, and it's really not a problem, if your assets get moderated today or tomorrow or in three months. If you submit seasonal assets, you should just consider the delay. It is also better to submit small chunks per day then once a month 200 assets. That will provide a steady growth to your portfolio.

The delay is irrelevant, since once your assets are approved, they will be in sales for an indefinite time.

[AbdulWahid126]

I submitted a total of 50 assets 10 days ago. If their workers are currently overwhelmed with moderating assets, it would be more reasonable for Adobe management to increase the number of moderators instead of placing a heavier workload on a small group of individuals. It appears that Adobe management might be trying to save some money by overburdening their workers. Hope things will be better

[Jill_C]

Moderation is a big expense for Adobe. If a large percentage of those queued up assets were acceptable and saleable, Adobe probably would hire more Moderators; but if the Moderators are rejecting many of those, it's an expense with no benefit since the assets aren't added to the database and don't become saleable.

[Abambo]

I submitted a total of 50 assets 10 days ago. If their workers are currently overwhelmed with moderating assets, it would be more reasonable for Adobe management to increase the number of moderators instead of placing a heavier workload on a small group of individuals. It appears that Adobe management might be trying to save some money by overburdening their workers. Hope things will be better

By @AbdulWahid126

They don't place a heavier workload on moderators. And I suppose they added more moderators. But moderation is not a task, you do, without training. Even moderating photos is different from moderating illustrations is different from moderating vectors is different from moderating video… You see the difficulties. Even without adequate training, they can't shift moderators from one section to a different one.

And then, as a supplier, you are not entitled to make demands as to when your delivery will be assessed. They are not a customer, they are a supplier. Adobe can run moderation as fast or as slow as Adobe likes. Adobe aims to fill their database with images, and they do, and very quickly. Adobe didn't anticipate that contributors would submit thousands of assets at once, where the classic route only produced dozens of assets in the same time frame.

So, your options are to wait, as we all do, or not to submit. That's it. Adobe is aware of the problem and is looking for solutions. They also want to fill their database with a diverse kind of assets instead of thousands of Easter bunnies in chocolate and thousands of generative AI racing cars etc. So they are working on solutions. But until those solutions are installed, your option is to wait. That's it.

[Jill_C]

Review time for certain classes of assets is still running 5-7 days, however AI is much longer, perhaps 2 months or longer. Adobe's moderation team is approving millions of assets every week. I assume that if the large backlog of assets waiting to be approved had a high percentage of useable/saleable images, they would hire more Moderators, and perhaps they have already done so.  They have made numerous, significant improvements that benefit AI Contributors. In what way does the delay affect quality of service? 

[AbdulWahid126]

Do the assets in the "New" section have an impact on the approval process?

[Jill_C]

I don't understand your question. Assets under Uploaded Files/New haven't been titled or keyworded yet, so how can those affect the Moderators ?

[Abambo · Accepted solution]

Do the assets in the "New" section have an impact on the approval process?

By @AbdulWahid126

No, they are not in the moderation queue yet. Only the assets “In review” are considered.

[George_F]

Before the acceptance of AI, it was commonplace for contributors to submit just a handful of assets at a time.  Contributors who submit AI can submit thousands per week or even thousands per day.  Assuming that my speculation is somewhere in the ballpark, that's a workload increase of 10x or 20x. 

If that is the case, then I think review times could be much worse honestly.

[Natalie@misfitimages.com]

8 weeks is crazy... i also upload on to shutterstock and istock normally take about 3 to 5 days and i have an answer.. Adobe pays more, but not sure the wait time is worth it. Very disappointed in adobe stock.

[Nancy OShea]

Review time varies by how many other assets are ahead of yours in the wait queue and the number of Reviewers available to examine them.

1-3 months is the average await time, thanks in part to the flood of Generative AI assets that Stock receives weekly.

[antonymatthews]

I have stills that are beyond a month in review now. But I've noticed aerial videos are viewed (incredibly poorly) within 24 hours now. But they're clearly not viewed fully. I'm getting some rejected for made up problems. To the point where I refuse the rejection and resubmit or contact support over it. 

Moderation here is definitely atrocious, to the point where Adobe Stock is the last agency I upload to.

[Abambo]

I have stills that are beyond a month in review now.

By @antonymatthews

Because of the high submission rate, moderation waiting time is now typical 8 weeks and beyond, so your month of waiting is still good.

But I've noticed aerial videos are viewed (incredibly poorly) within 24 hours now. But they're clearly not viewed fully. I'm getting some rejected for made up problems.

By @antonymatthews

Rejection is at the first issue seen. As soon as there is reason to reject, your asset gets rejected and that means that checking stops. Why should they continue for "a full review"? Rejection reasons are not made up, but if you refer to the text they show with the rejection: that is stock text of the most common issues. By no way, that is targeted to your asset. Submitting assets again, without properly addressing the defects in the asset, may lead to account blocking.

To the point where I refuse the rejection and resubmit or contact support over it. 

By @antonymatthews

You might not agree with the rejection, but you cannot reject it. You are, however, free to contact support over that. Does that help?

Moderation here is definitely atrocious, to the point where Adobe Stock is the last agency I upload to.

By @antonymatthews

If you are unhappy with Adobe stock, you may stop entirely submitting. That helps others to get faster moderation. And it will give the earnings to other contributors.

[antonymatthews]

I think you have too much time on your hands to be defending a stock photography company this hard. 

Anyway, contacted support directly about it and the submissions were approved and removed from the rejected tab because, guess what? They had nothing actually wrong with them!

Anyway, please go outside and stop wasting your time so much here. Adobe isn't gonna hire you.

[Abambo]

Good for you.

Anyway, please go outside and stop wasting your time so much here.

By @antonymatthews

If you don't want to read my answers, do not post on this public forum.

I did in no way defend Adobe stock in my answer.

As you did not publish your submission here, we can neither confirm nor infirm your assertion. Experience shows, however, that when I check assets "with no errors in", that I find some of them.

Have a pleasant day and good luck with your submissions.

[Nancy OShea]

I'm getting some rejected for made up problems. To the point where I refuse the rejection... contacted support about it and they were approved...  they had nothing wrong with them!

By @antonymatthews

============