Found out my "AI art" piece got flagged by a stock photo site for being too realistic

I was messing around with Stable Diffusion last Tuesday, trying to make a simple landscape for a blog header. Nothing fancy, just a forest path with some fog. I uploaded it to a stock site to see if I could make a few bucks, and they rejected it saying it "violated their realism policy." Apparently they have a rule that AI art has to look obviously fake or they won't take it. So now I'm stuck with a piece that's too good for the AI crowd but too artificial for the photography crowd. Has anyone else run into this weird middle ground where your work doesn't fit anywhere?

2 comments

2 Comments

pat_schmidt603d ago

You know, I was actually one of those people who thought "if it looks good, it should be accepted anywhere." I used to roll my eyes at sites with strict AI rules. But then I tried uploading a portrait I made that had this soft, natural light - looked just like a photo from my old Canon. They rejected it too, and at first I was mad. But after sitting on it a while, I started seeing their point. If every realistic image on their site could be AI, buyers would have no way to tell what's real photography anymore. That foggy forest path of yours probably looked amazing, but I get why they have to draw that line somewhere even if it stings.

ben_nguyen3d agoMost Upvoted

Wait wait wait, @pat_schmidt60 you had a portrait rejected for looking too good? That's wild. I mean I guess I see their logic but still, must've stung getting dinged for making something that actually looked real.