Hey there everyone,
I’ve been a contributor since 2021, so it’s been more than 4 years now. In that time, only a few of my images were ever rejected, and usually for reasons like “Similar content already uploaded by you” (or something along those lines. I don’t remember exactly since they later changed the rejection message to “Similar content already in our collection”).
Earlier, the Adobe Stock moderation team used to carefully review submissions and only reject images that were genuinely too similar. But nowadays, especially in the past few months, they’ve been rejecting a lot of content on this same ground. As I read in this link: Adobe Help - Submit Distinct Content
So, in this case, I searched for an illustration of an avocado, and only 24 results came up. Now, you might think that if an avocado is already uploaded, I could try a line art style. But let me tell you, it will still get rejected. just look at the image below.
On the same page, if you scroll down, you’ll see an outline style. So you might think of uploading a line art avocado but that will also get rejected as 'similar content in our collection.' Do you know why? Because of the keywords. Check this screenshot from the policy page below.
"It’s because he might have used 'line art' or ' 'avocado' in his keywords. And as we know, according to Adobe Stock policy, we cannot use repetitive keywords otherwise the image will be flagged as a similar one within Adobe’s entire database. Here’s the proof, for example: an illustration of an avocado in line art.
20,778,020 results in total that’s a huge number, man. So your image is already set up for rejection without you even realizing it.
And here’s one funny thing too, check this screenshot:
Well, you wouldn’t be able to guess what it is until you expand it, because it doesn’t even look like an avocado and after expanding, it turned out to be a mango. For real? How does this even remotely resemble a mango? Anyway, what I want to say is that if the title has 'mango' and no mention of 'avocado,' then how is it showing up as the second result when I specifically searched for a line art avocado?
It’s all because of the keywords. For example, the contributor must have added 'avocado, line art' in the keywords, so Adobe Stock’s algorithm thinks this is what should be shown and that’s just wrong.
Now take a look at an another example:
On the same page, I tried adding 'avocado' in the search bar along with 'avocado line art image .' But all I’m getting are real avocado images, not line art ones. So now, let’s try adding the text 'line art' to the search.
Now it’s showing line art, but can someone explain how an avocado toast ends up in the second spot? It’s not in the base image or even in my search. Instead of what I actually want to see, I’m getting irrelevant results. So now, let’s add 'illustration' to the search term and see what happens.
I’m still not able to find the exact same image.
So here’s the issue: if your title has “line art,” your category is “line art,” and your image is clearly line art it’s still doomed by Adobe Stock’s moderation AI (or whatever algorithm they’re using). A real human reviewer would instantly see that nothing else is actually similar to that image. And you know what’s the funniest part? The line art avocado image I’m using is itself downloaded from Adobe Stock! Yet their algorithm can’t even detect it properly when searching by image. That shows the system is broken.
Now you might ask: Why is Adobe Stock’s moderation team doing this? Don’t they care about their contributors?
Well, the answer is a bit longer. It all started with the boom of AI image generators. Once Adobe Stock began accepting AI-generated content, suddenly everyone became a “digital artist.” An image or illustration was now just one prompt away. Most people didn’t even know about this at first it spread mainly because of YouTubers.
And not just any YouTubers I’m talking about those “hidden hustler” channels that keep making videos on “How to make money with AI,” “Ways to earn passive income,” etc. They promoted uploading AI images to Adobe Stock as a quick money-making hack. And as we know, we’re all human if someone sees they can put in less effort but still get artist-level results from an AI generator, of course they’ll try to monetize it. And what’s the easiest way? Upload it to Adobe Stock.
That’s how thousands of new contributors flooded in. But here’s the catch not everyone was skilled. Many were just uploading generic, low-quality images with lazy prompts. Basically, they were spamming. They weren’t dedicated contributors; they just wanted quick cash. This led to insane competition. For genuine contributors who treat this as a serious income source, it’s been the worst.
These spammy uploaders were pushing out hundreds of images every day. Adobe had no choice but to start approving most of them, and in the process, their moderation algorithm got overloaded and broken. And that’s how we ended up with today’s strict “similar content” policies.
My Take: How to Survive Adobe Stock’s Similar Content Rejections
To be honest, there are only a few practical steps you can take:
1. Use Google’s Image Search Tool
For example, take the same avocado image. Upload it to Google Image Search, and you’ll get “Visual Matches.” By clicking on those, you can see exact or near-exact matches. This helps you figure out if the type of image you’re trying to upload already exists in large numbers.
Most of the time, what happens is one image gets uploaded across multiple microstock websites (since Adobe Stock doesn’t demand exclusivity). The same contributor uploads the same image on different platforms. That’s why you need to double-check before submitting.
My second tip would be to focus on providing images that have low search results on Google Images. Let me give you an example:
For example, in the image above I searched for “flying paper clip illustration.” As you can see, even Google’s algorithm can’t find a single proper flying paper clip illustration. That means you could be the first one to create such an image and Adobe Stock won’t flag it as “similar,” because nothing like it exists in the database.
Of course, “flying paper clip” is just an example. You’ll need to do your own research to find under-represented subjects if you want higher chances of approval.
3. Just Pray After Submission
Even if you do all the research and create images that don’t exist anywhere else, at the end of the day, all you can really do is pray whichever god you believe in. And if you’re an atheist, then pray to evolution 😂. Because honestly, there’s no 100% guarantee that your image will be accepted. A lot still depends on the moderators, and sometimes your work can be rejected for “quality issues.” In those cases, there’s not much you can do.
Suggestions for the Adobe Stock Team / Moderators
1. Gatekeeping for New Contributors
For new contributors uploading AI-generated images, Adobe should introduce a test system like Freepik. On Freepik, if you want to become a contributor, you first have to upload 25–50 of your best works. Only if they approve your quality do you get access to upload regularly.
So why can’t Adobe Stock do the same? Unless you put a gatekeeper in place, spammers will keep flooding the platform. This filter would help ensure only genuine, unique creators get through.
2. Hire More Moderators
Why stay understaffed and rush through moderation? If you don’t have enough moderators, hire more people! Heck, give me a chance I’d happily work as a moderator.
3. Fix the Search Algorithm
As I showed in my previous screenshots, Adobe Stock’s search system is broken. Please improve it and fix the algorithm so that results actually match what contributors and buyers are searching for.
Conclusion
In the end, genuine contributors are the ones getting affected. But don’t lose hope. Be consistent, work smart, and stay brave. Don’t let anyone define who you are your work is unique, your images are different, and it’s not you who is broken… it’s the algorithm.
Peace out ✌️
1 Correct answer
Your search for "Illustration of Avacado" is incorrect! You misspelled "Illustration" you wrote "Illustation". A correct spelling would have brought 227,000 results and not 24. Also searching the genre "Images" for "Avacado" brings 1.800,000 results.
2
Replies
AdChoices