Can anyone explain why this has failed content guidelines??

 

Sometimes it seems automated image reviews systems have no logic to them at all. Shame

By @Andy3368441189e1

Reviews are done by humans. That has been said here multiple times. The “AESTHETIC OR COMMERCIAL APPEAL OF IMAGE” refusal is sometimes difficult to understand, as it normally means that a technically correct picture has little chance to sell. I do not know, how Adobe stock comes to that conclusion, but occasionally, you get such a refusal. It's normally not a big deal. You move on and submit the next one.

Composition, as @Jill_C and @daniellei4510 mentioned, is part of the technical issues. The moderator could have also easily rejected this on those issues, and I think that would have been easier to understand for you. Check your picture at 100%, and you will see many defects that have been introduced by your camera, due to the small sensor and noise optimization or the fake blur.

Example:

Those errors are not correctable.

Stock Reviewers are human. Your image was rightfully rejected because it's too niche.

If you're sentimental about it, hang it on your wall. 

Compared to 2.3 million road signs in Stock's database, this one falls short of expectation

https://stock.adobe.com/search?k=road%20signs

This isn't something I would buy and use commercially.  It might have more appeal if the text was removed and the sign was cleaned up in post editing. At least then I could add my own message. 

Better luck next time.

Fair enough👍

Power lines, vertical composition, leaves intruding on the left side - as @daniellei4510  indicated, it's not a pleasing composition, which limits the commercial appeal. Search the Buyer portal for "Camino Santiago sign" if you want to see the type of images that are accepted.

The image review is done by humans. It is not automated.