Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I routinely find images that are clearly generated by AI image generators, but there is no indication in the description that they are. Generally it's missing fingers, or lighting or something else that gives it away, but my concern is that Adobe's team is not filtering all of these images well enough. I definitely see value in AI images, but I don't want to be downloading something that I think is a real image, when it is not. This is misleading at the least.
Example https://stock.adobe.com/images/santa-cooking/550542006?prev_url=detail
Hello, thank you for the report we appreciate the feedback. We are constantly evaluating our collection looking for ways to improve. I've recently sent a request to the search team for an AI generated filter from similar discussions.
The suggestion for now is to use “-AI” in the search terms. That helps as long as the contributors obey the rules, that were published on December 5th. Those rules ask for an “AI” keyword and for “Generative AI” as part of the title.
By @Abambo
This advice is now outdated, as there exists a filer to filter for generative AI assets (include, exclude).
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
It is probable that these pictures were uploaded before the instructions for generative AI assets were published. This said, the asset also has quality problems (eg. hands) that should be checked.
Edit: report them here. That is the correct place, especially if they have quality issues.
I suppose @Contributor1 will comment on this.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hello, thank you for the report we appreciate the feedback. We are constantly evaluating our collection looking for ways to improve. I've recently sent a request to the search team for an AI generated filter from similar discussions.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
This was the first thread I found about where to report images that are very obviously AI and not marked as such, so here goes: I very specifically have "Exclude Generative AI" checked, and when looking for images of coffins, this came up despite being immediately apparent it is AI.
FILE #: 559071699
When you go to the contributor's page, one of the first images you see is this one: FILE #: 555651040 A mountain lion head on a grizzly bear body with ... canid feet? And one too many legs, also does not look like it is tagged as AI. I would just really prefer not to have any AI come up with I specifially ask for it not to.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Yikes. I'm starting to very much dislike AI designers and I AM one.
These might have been uploaded some time ago, when moderators weren't fully trained on what to look for and what not to accept when it comes to AI. Although from the very beginning, Adobe has made it clear to mark AI images as AI images in one way or another.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
These might have been uploaded some time ago, when moderators weren't fully trained on what to look for and what not to accept when it comes to AI. Although from the very beginning, Adobe has made it clear to mark AI images as AI images in one way or another.
By @daniellei4510
They have been uploaded between December 15th and January 15th. Probably more in December than in January.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
This was the first thread I found about where to report images that are very obviously AI and not marked as such, so here goes: I very specifically have "Exclude Generative AI" checked, and when looking for images of coffins, this came up despite being immediately apparent it is AI.
FILE #: 559071699
When you go to the contributor's page, one of the first images you see is this one: FILE #: 555651040 A mountain lion head on a grizzly bear body with ... canid feet? And one too many legs, also does not look like it is tagged as AI. I would just really prefer not to have any AI come up with I specifially ask for it not to.
By @thomascc
They are (now?) flagged as generative AI. That doesn't mean that they were correctly marked and submitted.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
The suggestion for now is to use “-AI” in the search terms. That helps as long as the contributors obey the rules, that were published on December 5th. Those rules ask for an “AI” keyword and for “Generative AI” as part of the title.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
can you check if these are AI images?
like this one: 559953430
This contributorАнастасия Птицова has published a huge series of slight variationsof the same image, none tagged as AI and most def look and feel like it.
TBH the time investment to find nice quality images for fantasy works on Adobe Stock is too high at the moment because of "art" like this.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
here is another example, if you look at the right hand and the red blade by the hip: 557776270
@Abambo has anyone considered allowing artists who really draw to tag that (handmade, or made by a human) instead of asking AI generators to mark their word. I think the incentive for artists who draw by hand is different?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
@Abambo has anyone considered allowing artists who really draw to tag that (handmade, or made by a human) instead of asking AI generators to mark their word. I think the incentive for artists who draw by hand is different?
By @DeltaDelta010101
Artists are allowed to put in any (reasonable) keyword and title. Generative AI is required to put in specific keywords, allowing to filter for those assets or filter out those assets.
But there is, to my knowledge, no recommendation for standard craft artists.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Can monsters also have monster-like hands? I assume from this picture that the series is generative AI.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
The suggestion for now is to use “-AI” in the search terms. That helps as long as the contributors obey the rules, that were published on December 5th. Those rules ask for an “AI” keyword and for “Generative AI” as part of the title.
By @Abambo
This advice is now outdated, as there exists a filer to filter for generative AI assets (include, exclude).