Update to metadata requirements for generative AI content

[MatHayward]

Hi everyone,

I am announcing a big update in the workflow for those of you submitting generative AI images to Adobe Stock. With the successful launch of the search filter and generative AI display in the customer facing site, we are no longer requiring you add "generative AI" to your title or keywords. Effective immediately, you can stop adding "generative AI" to your title and keywords if you prefer.

It is VERY important you continue to select the "created using generative AI tools" checkbox and that you submit your generative AI content as an illustration. Let me know if you have any questions.

thank you,

Mat Hayward 

[josé30730956ginr]

I understand that it is my responsibility to develop the titles and keywords for the images I send, however, considering the massive amount of images I have to submit (there are thousands of images), the task of individually creating each title becomes extremely time consuming. Nothing against it if the financial return is equal to that absurd time invested. Does the average price per download on Adobe Stock reach at least three dollars per download for AI-generated images? But regardless of whether or not this question of return compensates for the time invested, it is perfectly and technically possible for Adobe Stock to use a program that automatically generates quality titles. I believe it would be technically feasible and beneficial for everyone if Adobe Stock used a program that automatically generated quality titles. Importantly, contributors are an integral part of the Adobe team, and optimizing our work process should be a shared concern. By using a program that generates titles with quality, we could significantly speed up the insertion of images and raise the level of titles in general. I am requesting, as a team member, a mutual collaboration to improve our business. Together, we can achieve even better results.

[sixhaunt]

There are a large number of services for that out there although none is 100% perfect. Right now I'm using Astica to title and tag mine, but you'd still want to give everything a quick 2 second glance over to make sure it's right and you might have to correct like 5% of the titles. Other stock image sites like freepik and 123rf have those auto-title and tag features built right in but I think AdobeStock wants to try to ensure higher quality titles and tags which is why they only offer suggestions for titles and tags rather than auto-applying them.

If you use a third-party like Astica to generate the titles and tags, you can easily output them to a CSV so you can easily apply the tags and titles all at once. I find that the titles are far better than I would come up with most of the time and it's uncommon that I even need to fix a title. Also keep in mind there's a fee involved in these services. I pay about $4 per 1,000 images to tag and title them.

[Martyn Grey]

Hello! I am a new contributor and I'd like to know why the illustrations that I submitted 7 days ago are still not verified on Adobe Stock Contibutors? Could you please tell me what the problem might be?

Best Regards, Serhii.

[sixhaunt]

7 days isn't very long for the review times nowadays. I upload often and some images get accepted the next day while others take up to 2 months. It seems to be based on factors about you as a contributor as well as the images themselves. So if you submit new images in the meantime, there's a chance they will get reviewed before the older ones, so just wait out the old ones but dont let it hold you back from uploading more.

[Jill_C]

If your submissions are Generative AI it could take up to 2 months, perhaps longer, to be reviewed due to the huge influx of such assets.

[peachiemango]

Is there a way you separate reviewing generative AI and original artwork submissions? It's already taking too long for original artworks to be reviewed because many artists upload generative AI works more that it's also affecting the review time for those submitting original works.

[sixhaunt]

From what I understand there is a user rating system and so if you have a higher score from stuff like your images doing well, having a high acceptance rate, etc... it affects both your queue limit and your priority in the queue. For example people talk about having a month or more to review their AI work but my AI work is usually reviewed within a few days. I have over 40,000 accepted images, a higher than 93% acceptance rate, and in weekly ratings im top 300 so they review mine probably a lot faster than most people based on that.

[peachiemango]

But this is my first time experiencing longer reviewing process and I'm talking about the review time for vector works. I always get approved within 2-3 days but now it's already been weeks that's why it's also my first time asking here. My acceptance rate is also high and I got no problem before so I just thought they don't have separate reviewers for AI and vectors yet.

[Abambo]

Reports indicate that vector files now take about 15 days.

[Abambo]

Is there a way you separate reviewing generative AI and original artwork submissions?

By @peachiemango

You are talking to fellow contributors. There are separate queues for photo, illustration, vector, video and probably also templates.

(I'm locking this, as this thread is about metadata requirements)

[Abambo · Accepted solution]

Adobe is now accepting generative AI in vector and video art.