1 Reply Latest reply on May 22, 2017 12:08 PM by Szalam

    Artificial "intelligence" has no aesthetic or commercial appeal


      I signed on with Adobe Stock a while ago, I wasn't that optimistic but whatever, I'll try anything. They have some idiotic artificial "intelligence" checking over the photos uploaded to their system which recently said "after careful consideration" (yeah, right) my photo of a fountain in Paris lacks aesthetic or commercial appeal, go figure. Is something broken? I'd say so. Will it ever be fixed?


        • 1. Re: Artificial "intelligence" has no aesthetic or commercial appeal
          Szalam Adobe Community Professional & MVP

          Since you've posted in the critique forum rather than the support forum, should we assume you want critiques?

          There are some good things one could say about this image. You've got nice sharp focus and the exposure is as good as can be expected in the circumstances. Fast shutter speeds with moving water like this can produce some cool stuff.


          However, I agree with the rejection of this image. If I worked for Adobe, I would reject it too.


          You have to remember, you have context for this image. You were there! You felt the warmth of the sun and the spray on your face. You smelled the café around the corner. You heard the conversation of people walking by blending in with the bubbling of the fountain. YOU know all about the context of this image, but nobody else will. The image does not capture any of that context at all. It just looks like part of a spray of water. On top of that, it's not a very artistically composed image and it's not very sellable to my eye either. I shall try to explain further:


          Artistically, there's not a good point of focus. I don't mean focus as in blurry vs. sharp - I mean, we're just looking at a mess of squirting water. It's not making any interesting shapes; it's just a mass of water droplets. The lighting is somewhat interesting, but the lack of anything to look at just loses any interest immediately. The things the eye wants to focus on (the sun, the spouts) are just fighting for visual prominence against the splash. The lines in the sky made by the jet trails and the lines made by the building rooftops are also pushing the point of view every which way. Also, you've got distractors in the water too - pipe on the right and...something on the left (intake?) - basically, the eye tries to look everywhere and ends up nowhere.


          As far as commercial appeal goes, there are no interesting elements to this image. I mean to say, there is nothing to mark it as Paris, France, or anywhere specific. It's just some random part of a fountain next to a building with a TV antenna. There's nothing particularly compelling about the image. It's framed and shot like a big explosion or volcano or something powerful, but it's obviously just a small fountain. So the image has no message either.

          Heck, there's not even anywhere where it would be good to lay in any text besides kind off to the side by that jet trail midway up on the left in the sky.

          It doesn't say wet visually despite being water because of the lighting. It actually feels really dry.

          It doesn't say power because it looks like a small fountain.

          It just doesn't say anything to me.

          You couldn't even mask out the fountain to add a spray of water to some other image because the water is cropped off on the sides.


          So, think about it as a stock company - what could a potential customer do with this image? How could it be used in an ad campaign? How could it be used in packaging? How could it be used in a brochure?

          I can't think of any uses.


          Also, think about it as an art gallery - is this artistically appealing?

          It isn't. It's too abstract to be an interesting subject, but it's not abstract enough to be an interesting image.


          Again, you've got nice lighting and sharp focus, but the subject and composition are just not compelling to me and apparently not to whoever works at Adobe that reviewed the image.