Regarding Ai illustration review problem

[RomanMax]

I uploaded more than 120 ai illustration arts on last 6-7 days ago.
How does it usually take until a contribution is reviewed/approved? Maybe there are problems - file ID = 567384048

[File ID corrected at the request of the OP]

[Jill_C]

That asset number is for a pair of women's boots:

https://stock.adobe.com/images/black-stylish-women-s-boots-vintage-photo/211270347

Submitting so many assets at one time is not something I would recommend, particularly if there are many similars among the set. It's best to submit smaller batches, wait for feedback, correct those if they're rejected and resubmit if possible. I'm starting to think that Generative AI assets are going through a different queue and the Moderators are overwhelmed with the volume - just a guess on my part...

[George_F]

I suspect that as well @Jill_C.  I think there is a tremendous volume of AI content being submitted currently.

[Abambo]

I'm starting to think that Generative AI assets are going through a different queue and the Moderators are overwhelmed with the volume - just a guess on my part...

By @Jill_C

You need to count fingers, hands and different other things. That takes time. Furthermore, I won't have 120 photos to submit in one rush, even after an extended shoot.

If every generative AI art submitter submits hundreds of assets in one rush, I suppose that they are not cured, which most probably will lead to refusals due to errors. And it will take time to check, even if checking is fast. This is a guess on my part.

[Nancy OShea]

I wonder how many "Generative AI" are purchased compared to human created assets.

[Jill_C]

It contributors are submitting 200+ AI images at a time, I suppose they are spending a minute or so generating them, and little or no time reviewing them... which creates a huge logjam for the Moderators!

[Test Screen Name]

Yes, I think there is a real chance Adobe will stop accepting AI files because the cost of reviewing them exceeds any reasonable return from licensing them. I think the avalanche may have just started - there are almost certainly AIs out there setting up accounts and submitting the images, and there is no limit - they could crank out a million a week and kill the putative golden goose... there is a cost to generating them in the better engines, though, as has been pointed out, and this might be the restraining factor. However, it's almost certainly cheaper to generate an AI, even at highest quality, than to pay the reviewer.

[Abambo]

 I suppose they are spending a minute or so generating them, and little or no time reviewing them...!

By @Jill_C

<Sarcastic>

They still need some time to upscale!

</Sarcastic>

[George_F · Accepted solution]

Here is what the Help Article  had to say about review times.

"We review files in the order we receive them. Wait times vary, but you usually get a response within one week. "

[Nancy OShea]

I have a feeling there is a glut of "Generative AI Illustration" in the queue.

Did you submit, title, keyword and describe as "Generative AI Illustration?"

[Abambo]

If you are a new contributor, you should notify us, and guidance may be different.

If the assets are in the review queue, they will get checked.

It may well be that the sheer number of generative AI is currently clogging the system. However, 7 days is no exceptional delay.

[Test Screen Name]

An interesting possibility follows. If contributors are generating many images (something AI is good at) and submitting them, then logjams are just the start. Adobe will know the cost of moderating all these images ("investment") and they will know how many are licensed ("return on investment"). If the return on investment is inadequate - or negative - then Adobe may just close it down and refuse all future AI - not a legal or moral issue, not a quality issue, just unprofitable when the creator can make unlimited automated demands on the salaried human moderators. Even now, I suspect someone is trying to AI the whole process of AI generation, keywording, submitting - making millions of submissions, with automated generation of contributors as needed. A storm is coming. 

[Abambo]

You need to pay the CPU time to produce high quality, high-resolution assets with AI systems. There is no free ride…

People are trying to circumvent by upscaling, but that does not work (in most of the cases).

So, contributors are paying basically the AI operator to get many pictures that will be refused here. Not very profitable for the contributor and Adobe.

Shutterstock is offering the customer (stock buyer) access to AI. I wonder which approach will prevail.

[Jill_C]

There will indeed need to be changes to the current asset ingestion system; it doesn't appear to be sustainable. However, I predict that, with time, a lot of the opportunists who are currently flooding the stock providers with AI "stuff" ( I say that in quotes because the word I actually want to use isn't acceptable here...) will conclude that it's not worth the effort, and will drop out of the game.

[Nancy OShea]

A storm is coming. 

By @Test Screen Name

=========

I think so too. 

The analogy I used a while ago was the California Gold Rush.  The only folks who struck it rich from the Gold Rush were the shopkeepers who sold supplies while miners & their families lived on the brink of starvation.

High-resolution diffusions aren't cheap to process. And 200 Stock-worthy  illustrations would entail many, many upscale diffusion cycles. I'm not sure if royalty fees alone can sufficiently recoup that investment.

When Stock becomes overwhelmed by AI art,  they're apt to put a cap on how many one can submit.  Or hold AI submissions in a review queue for weeks on end.

[Fabiobtex]

The current average is at 9 days

[George_F]

Where did you find the info on average times?  That would be extremely helpful to post a link to.

[Abambo]

As the file ID has been corrected: the current ID is up for sales: https://stock.adobe.com/lu_fr/images/sunset-view-in-a-drop-of-water-on-the-beach/567384048?prev_url=...

Looks even nice, but:

• IT DOES NOT FOLLOW THE RULES FOR AI GENERATED ASSETS.

Sorry, for pointing that out, but I strongly recommend correcting that.

https://community.adobe.com/t5/stock-contributors-discussions/generative-ai-submission-guidelines/td...

[RomanMax]

I uploaded some ai illustration art on last 11 days ago.
How does it usually take until a contribution is reviewed/approved? Maybe there are problems.

It's one of my uploaded file ID = 567388420

This is my In Review illustration. See them, I have submitted them successfully last 11 days but any image cannot be reviewed why?

I think it's a technical fault plz check it.

I informed adobe stock 2-3 times plz solve this problem.

Here is a screenshot of my uploaded In Review "Generative Ai Illustration"

[Moderator moved the thread to the correct forum]

[Anastasia2184306386mp]

Yeah, mine are the same, in review for 9 days now...

[Abambo]

See my answer here.

[Angela Micheli Otwell]

For what it's worth, my recent batch of NON-AI images also seems to be in a slow queue, perhaps because SOME of the images I submit are AI.  A little frustrating.  I've never had reviews take more than a week, and my traditional art media batch I uploaded has been sitting there unreviewed for 9 days now.  

[Jill_C]

You might be right. I submitted a small batch of photos ( non-AI ) last week and they were approved in 4 days.

[Abambo]

First, you didn't follow “à la lettre” (verbatim) the requirements for AI content. https://community.adobe.com/t5/stock-contributors-discussions/generative-ai-submission-guidelines/td...

• Include “generative AI” as a single keyword (in English regardless of language you are keywording in)
• Include “generative” as a single keyword
• Include “AI” as a single keyword

You should change that. I suggest to add those keywords at the end of the keyword list.

Second, there are reports that checking generative AI files takes its time, as they are probably routed to a different queue with trained moderators. Due to the number of submissions, there is a backlog. You need to wait more than the usual time for acceptance/refusal.

As a side note: you also posted in the wrong forum, and you checked all topics, instead of only the relevant ones.

[RomanMax]

Tell me which Guideline I do not follow in a particular post.