Similar images already submitted!!!

[Sobhy_AI]

Hello there,

I went from a 95% acceptance rate to 20% or less. Almost all of my submissions are being rejected for the "similar image" reason.

The quality of the images is really good and doesn’t have any issues.

I am uploading at most 2 or 3 variations of each object ,PNGs only and a variety of different items across many categories. I also make sure not to upload similar content that I’ve previously submitted. I am 100% certain that my entire account doesn’t have more than three variations of any given item.

Sometimes, I upload the same object in different styles.

for example, a car in a 3D style and another version in watercolor or clay, so they are still distinct. (2 to 3 variations for each style)

Is this a general issue that will be resolved soon, or is it only affecting me?

[Nancy OShea]

As part of the new Stock Experience, buyers can refine images with generative AI that's baked into the Stock system.  This gives customers greater flexibility from a single image.  You can read the announcement about it below.

https://community.adobe.com/t5/stock-contributors-discussions/adobe-announces-the-new-customize-expe...

I think it's fair to say that Stock no longer needs Contributors to create similar images with different backgrounds & color variations now because customers can do that with AI. 

[Abambo]

As part of the new Stock Experience, buyers can refine images with generative AI that's baked into the Stock system.  This gives customers greater flexibility from a single image. 

By @Nancy OShea

Yes, right now, you can trade high-quality variations generated “by hand” for assets that are full of artifacts.

[Nancy OShea]

That may be true. But the grand poo bah decision-makers are salivating for uniqueness. Similar content isn't making the cut.  

Customers vote with their purses.

[Abambo]

That may be true. But the grand poo bah decision-makers are salivating for uniqueness. Similar content isn't making the cut.  

By @Nancy OShea

Sure, all pigs are equal...

Customers vote with their purses.

By @Nancy OShea

Adobe should then higher the quality standard for generative art assets. 

[Jason37175475psxg]

Has anyone seen a change in acceptance latley so I stop doing 5 at a time?

[serendipitous_dream0401]

I'm experiencing a really slow acceptance rate now, 1 or 2 files at a time.

[AmandaYuyi]

Same here. Recent experience is if assets are not reviewed in weekdays or review within 2 or 3 days, they are likely to be rejected as similarity during the following weekends.

[Doris29946646fvw0]

For me, everything's back to normal. 
Especially with nature and wildlife photography, I expected that I wouldn't be able to get any more photos through. 
But I suspect that there's now a difference between uploading max. three photos that are clearly not AI or dozens of AI photos.
 Perhaps my portfolio, with its insects, wildplants, fruits, and garden, is just right. I gratefully accept it.

Approval is also very quick. However, only new photos are approved. I have 11 old ones, that are on hold for four months.

[Decadence 30]

I'm experiencing exactly the same situation — I went from having almost everything accepted to now having nearly all of my submissions rejected due to the "similar image" reason. Any attempt to discuss it with support is completely pointless; they just refer me to the guidelines. Right now, they can reject any image simply because it might be considered similar to another one. Unfortunately, it feels like this has become the new normal 😞

[Nancy OShea]

Do your research.  Compare your work with current Stock inventory to ensure that Stock actually needs what you're selling.  It's silly to submit assets for content that Adobe already has millions & millions of. 

Also, under-represented content is more likely to come up in searches. The big fish in the small bowl.

[stanislava_5223]

Some interesting news about the impact of acceptance rate 

[filby99]

I got the same thing, prolly many others did too I assume

[kirkandmimi]

Got it too -- I'm sure it was sent to everyone. While some of the issues with rejections lately have been frustrating, I only see this as a good thing.

[Vision350771902ejx]

This is bulls-hit. Whatever I upload, it says it has found similarities; it rejects every single image I try to use. It's clear they need to fix this problem, and if they don't, nobody will post anything anymore. I don't know what program or artificial intelligence they are using, but you can't just reject every image randomly for no reason.

It's stupid to wait 1-2 weeks only to have all my images rejected... seriously... I can't figure out what similarities they find... in their sick minds. Sometimes I just want to delete my account entirely... it's a waste of time to take pictures for $0.001, just to make $1 every 3 months... It's too much work, and it's not worth it.

[Nancy OShea]

You're preaching to the choir here. This user-to-user community has no influence over Adobe's internal procedures.

Review the TERMS of Agreement:

• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/submission-guidelines.html

Reasons for Rejection:

• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html

Voice your concerns directly to Contributor Support:

• https://contributor.stock.adobe.com/contact

[robertm49297337]

Here are my observations, FWIW:
Things like closeups of desserts almost ALL get through. I submitted 300 different desserts and candies and I think basically all of them made it.

Generic background images like asbtract watercolors, gradients, or textures do pretty well. If I submit 10 variations, 5 to 9 will get through. I submitted 15 creative variation of an abstract creepy eyes Halloween wallpaper and all but 3 were accepted. There are millions of gradient backgrounds on the site, but they still get accepted.

This is also true for graphical stuff like Halloween backgrounds, but to a somewhat lesser extent. 

Pictures of people are hit or miss, sometimes brutal. Minories seem to get through better, perhaps because they are underrepresented. I submitted a set of elderly people and they all got rejected for similar.
 
Anything with a concept or a relatively unique subject is hard to get through. I submitted picture of an Elizabethan woman with scientific equipment and books around her. Nuked. I submitted a refrigerator filled with gold bars, with carrots and cabbage (get it?). Nuked. I looked at what comes up when you search for that, and it's all pretty generic or even wildly off-topic. A bear and a bull hugging to comfort each other (financial crisis)? Nuked because bear & bull. Nevermind that there's no other image with that concept. There are 27 images on the whole site of an astronaut riding a dolphin. Evidently there is no room for. One of mine got through. Two got rejected for similar. Even if your image has a unique look, take, or concept, if it even *remotely* approaches a recognizable concept it's often considered similar.

In short, from my experience, the more distinctive and identifiable the subject of an image is, the more likely it is to get rejected. Which seems to me to be the opposite of what makes sense or is good for Adobe Stock's users.

I'm not complaining. I've found some niches that work so I'm doubling down on them. Some are easy to get accepted. For subjects that aren't, I just make sure they're as high quality yet generic as possible, and that seems to do well. Generic woman at sunrise? Good. Woman in haut couture dress made of flowers? Big no.

[Nancy OShea]

I'm fairly certain Adobe checks metadata with AI. And keywords are a likely pain point for "similar content" rejections.  Using synonyms might be a path forward.

• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/how-to-submit-distinct-content.html

[Tan_Tin]

If they reject unique concepts like an astronaut riding a dolphin (with only 27 images in the database), I think it means that another parameter comes into play here - particularly, the demand factor. Have you tried to click on "undiscovered content" search option for those astronauts? If none of them ever got sold, then this concept is absolutely not interesing for the stock in terms of their business. Thus, they conclude that 27 non-salable pics are just enough. There is a calculated ratio between sold and unsold similar content, this needs to be taken into account as well, I guess.

UPD: I've found 25 pics of a dolphin with astronaut, of which only 2 pics got sold since the very first image with this concept was uploaded August 10, 2021. This makes only 8% of this concept gets sold in the span of 4 years (roughly). Business-wise, this is a loss. Probably the costs of keeping these images didn't even make to it be compensated by the sales.

[Nancy OShea]

...another parameter comes into play here - the demand factor.

By @Tan_Tin

==========

I also think that's true. If success was measured by uniqueness alone, we could select random words from a dictionary to create new concepts. That might work sometimes, but not every time. 

[Abambo]

This makes only 8% of this concept gets sold in the span of 4 years (roughly). Business-wise, this is a loss. Probably the costs of keeping these images didn't even make to it be compensated by the sales.

By @Tan_Tin

10% of assets sell, the others don't. But you need to have the 90% that don't sell to give the users a choice. Moderation for new stock assets is a cost factor. As soon as they are moderated, the assets cost near to nothing.

[Tan_Tin]

I am not an Adobe employee, I am just trying to find logic in rejections from the contributor's POV. Apparently, Adobe thinks that 8% of pics sold in 4 years is too low and a poor result  overall, and they just don't need more of that. If only moderation was costly, then it's not clear why they delete duplicates and similar images at all during account audits to clean up the database.

[Abambo]

If only moderation was costly, then it's not clear why they delete duplicates and similar images at all during account audits to clean up the database.

By @Tan_Tin

Duplicates and similar assets make customers angry. Angry customers are never good. 

I am not an Adobe employee

By @Tan_Tin

We know that. Employees are marked as employees.

[Tan_Tin]

Duplicates nd similar assets make customers angry. Angry customers are never good. 

Sorry, I don't your get your point on keeping these items in the database. Earlier you said that there must be some "choice".  Okay, items with similar theme sometimes do provide some variety (nevermind extremely low sales, choice is more important), but now you say similar items make customers angry. Confusing, isn't it?

[Abambo]

Duplicates get removed. I suppose you are ok with the fact that duplicates do not improve the diversity.

Similar assets get refused (except in very rare cases of spamming, accepted similar assets do not get removed). IMHO, refusals here are to agressive, but I'm not Adobe. And you accept it or not. However, really similar assets do not provide variety. Adobe clearly describes in their manuals how much pictures they accept from a series. Some accounts managed to submit hundreds of assets that are similar. I've seen some of them, because customers complained about them. 

Pictures that don't sell, but which are not similar to others provide the customer a choice. They will probably chose the picture that sells, because it's better, nicer, has more appeal. But getting presented only with that picture would make the customer think that they have no real choice. Supermarkets don't sell well, when they let go their shelves nearly empty. People like to have a choice of full shelves.