Participant

Question

47 out of 48 rejected upon submission - this does not make sense

Forum|Forum|10 months ago
May 27, 2025
3 replies
1355 views

Dear Adobe,

I just have 47 out of 48 pictures rejected - for which i worked for over an hour and a half to get the proper descriptions in and tags - set aside that i am proud to have taken them all. The only one that got approved is one out of the 2 almost identical pictures of white peacocks (of which both have identical lighting and settings).

Again here - perhaps aside the intellectual property items - a lot of them got rejected on the reason of quality. Which i think is not fair.

As an example i am attaching 2 pictures of the rooftops of Bangkok (DWM_3558.jpg and DWM_3558.jpg) - others can follow. Can you please let me know what the quality issues are with this?

If there is a capacity issue to govern the influx of new stock content - please let that not affect the quality gates and the gatekeepers to simply start rejecting everything - as this is really not nice.

D

Dorus MarchalAuthor

Participant

So @Abambo @yamato713108855 first off, thanks for your (quick) replies, LOVE it! 🙂
If you would be so kind to review a bit more, maybe ill be pushed further into my own corner 😉

- DWM_3363 - Giant Rooster for good luck, supposedly already similar content in the collection, therewith not allowed. Really? Is there really already such an awesome zoomed in picture with this car right alongside it - showing the significant size of the GOLDEN rooster - somewhere in rural thailand. Really?

- DWM_3346.jpg - My best friend, running away from being attacked by a goose. How funny is this? 🙂 Rejected due to intellectual property, what is the intellectual property here? Is it the scooter license plate?

- DWM_3272.jpg - Statue in front of big white buddha in phuket - rejected due to quality issues - i think it's a unique item taken with a special wide-angle lens, to really make it pop out. What is the quality issue here?

- DWM_2964.jpg - so i've got this awesome picture of these boats on Kho Phi Phi - but it is rejected due to intellectual property. Because of what? Because there are boat-type numbers written on the boats? Is that it?

- DWM_2668.jpg - then we have this AWESOME long-exposure picture of this fireshow in Koa Tao. Really one of my favorite pictures. But... Rejected due to quality issues. Please also point out the quality issues here (aside from the awesomeness of the picture).

RALPH_L

Community Expert

3346 -- IP release needed for the motorcycle because the license plate can be read. The photo is also overexposed and has cropping issues. Also model release is needed.

3272-- Not sharp and underexposed shadows.

3363 -- exposure issues and several IP issues and mybe model release issue.

2964 -- IP issue because of the boat markings.

2668 -- underexposed and needs model release.

Your photos are fine for personal use. However, for commercial use you need to improve your exposure and composition. Your photos need, as do most photos, post processing improvements. Identifiable people need releases. Identifying logos, labels advertising or markings must be removed or you have to provide property releases. Here, notice the difference. I cropped out unwanted obects and reduced the foreground. I corrected the exposure. I added details to the sky. I removed the plate on the motorcycle. I sharpened the photo. The editing took about 5 minutes to make. Compare it to your image.

Abambo

Community Expert

Why is the quality rejection not fair?

3558: missing contrasts, noise and chromatic aberration:

The refusal is correct. Selling this to potential buyers would no be fair!

3554 is better. I would edit out this bird:

For an ISO 100 picture, there is a high noise level and the sharpness could be improved. There would be left the IP issue, that I cannot judge here. I would not expect issues with that for such a picture, but I did not check the local laws.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

D

Dorus MarchalAuthor

Participant

Also here: i did not expect a response, let alone this fast - and such a good response 🙂 On the Chromatica abberation and contrast/noise - i think it is fair to observe and therewith valid reason(s) for rejecting. I love the picture myself though 🙂

On the bird - i was actually thinking the same thing hehe.

Nice catches!

Abambo

Community Expert

Selling on stock and loving a picture is different. Depending on your use, the chromatic aberration is no issue, as isn't the sharpness. And IP is no issue neither. On the IP, Adobe needs to be overly careful, as they are operating worldwide.

You're welcome.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

yamato713108855

Community Expert

There is dust on the sensor.

Please remove the dust in Lightroom or Photoshop.

Dust on the sensor can be seen by taking a photo of the sky, a white wall, etc.
If you submit your photo with this dust still on it, it will not pass the review.

Abambo

Community Expert

Sure, I did not check that. Good catch @yamato713108855. That would probably disqualify most of the pictures submitted, as these nasty sensor dust stains are visible in many situations.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded