Skip to main content
3
3Days2Go
Known Participant
August 8, 2018
Answered

Can 'Non-Compliant Image' mean = we just don't want your photo?

  • August 8, 2018
  • 3 replies
  • 5706 views

Some photo submissions are rejected due to Model/Property Release issues or Intellectual Property issues.  These are -for the most part- understood and make sense...  But, then there are photo submissions rejected due to "Non-Compliant Image".  These rejections seem a lot less clear to me.  I've read the Contributor Guide, and per its guidance it seems that a "Non-Compliant Image" can be the result of something as innocuous as a keyword the moderator did not like, but it apparently could also mean 'we just don't want your photo'.  Am I correct? 

If so, those are BIG differences.  A keyword problem is worthy of trying to correct and re-submit.  A 'we just don't want your photo' problem isn't worthy of further pursuit.  But how is a contributor to know whether it's one or the other (or even something else), from the vague form-letter 'Non-Compliant Image' response provided by the moderation team?

Please advise.

This topic has been closed for replies.
Correct answer MatHayward

Abambo said >The most pertinent answers are from MatHayward as he could look into the rejection history. Next time we should ask him to jump in at an earlier stage.

Keep in mind that the original question asked was, "Can 'non-compliant image' mean = we just don't want your photo?"  Mat's input didn't really address this broader question, but he did let us know, specifically, that Adobe hadn't rejected my image for that reason.  It was actually you who were the first to state that Adobe does not, in a general sense, use the 'non-compliant image' objection to reject a photo for what are really commercial value reasons.  So, as to the original question, your answer was the most direct. 

Don't be so humble, Abambo​!


To answer the question about "non compliant" meaning we just don't want your picture. It's theoretically possible but that isn't the intent of the rejection reason. There is a "lack of aesthetic appeal" rejection reason that would more likely result from the shots that simply aren't up to the standards we have in place.

Non compliant rejections are most often the result of an image being submitted with either an incorrect release or missing a release entirely then being resubmitted without the necessary change.

Non-compliant can also be used if an image is submitted with a watermark or time stamp on the image. Same for borders or excessive post processing special effects. I'm sure there are other examples when it's used but those are the most common that I have seen.

-Mat

3 replies

3
3Days2GoAuthor
Known Participant
August 13, 2018

After much back and forth discussion with input from many individuals (Thanks everyone!  Particularly Abambo), I am going to summarize the answer to this question myself, as follows: Though the "non-compliant image" rejection can mean a variety of different things, one of the possible meanings is not "We just don't want your photo."  If that is the sentiment of the Adobe Stock moderator reviewing your image, the proper rejection notice you should receive in that instance is "Lacks Aesthetic or Commercial Appeal".

That being said, there do appear to be black hole regions within Adobe's definition of 'image compliance', where your image or its supporting documentation could get trapped, and you won't know why, even though you've followed Adobe's guidelines to the letter (as I had done).  A more thoroughly documented explanation by Adobe as to what constitutes image compliance (or non-compliance) would be helpful in reducing this kind of chaos in the future.

    Abambo
    Community Expert
    AbamboCommunity Expert
    Community Expert
    August 13, 2018

    This is a really interesting aspect of the discussion and effectively needed some insight from Adobe. I have to say that I have learned a lot on model release with this thread. This gave me some thoughts for different scenarios.

    • succession rights
    • a collective of photographers. It's more interesting, when you are a collective, to submit your pictures together in one account as this will help to grow your stock faster and accelerate to built your reputation.

    I understand however also Adobe to prefer to deal with  the individual photographers because any break-up etc would involve costly interventions for Adobe.

    You need to clear now this with your photographers and contractually bind the photographer to you filing the pictures as photographer. I as a photographer would not like this. (In Europe, even if you have done work for hire, you retain certain rights to your work)

    ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer
    3
    3Days2GoAuthor
    Known Participant
    August 11, 2018

    MatHayward​ Thank you for the explanation; however, I remain confused for the following reasons: I work with a photographer who does the shooting.  So he signed as the artist.  I add my name next to his in the “printed name“ area, since the contributor account owner’s name (me) needs to also appear on the form.   Which part of this is not correct?  That the photographer signed it?

    Please advise how the release form should appear when the photographer is a hired hand.

    Patrick

    jacquelingphoto2017
    Community Expert
    jacquelingphoto2017Community Expert
    Community Expert
    August 11, 2018

    Hi 3Days2Go,

    The files would thus belong to the photographer and therefore be protected by copyright. I believe in this case you'd need a property release for those photos if they were to be used. However, I'm not sure that would be acceptable since Account Creation and Regulation says "You must own or control all the rights to files you submit to Adobe Stock. Don’t submit files that don’t belong to you (for example, photos that your spouse took) or that incorporate items that are not yours, such as content found on the internet." Account and submission guidelines at Adobe Stock . I am not sure if that would be applicable in this case. Therefore to be on the side of caution, I believe submitting photos you take is the better way.

    Photography is fun, and it helps you to see your surroundings in various interesting perspectives. Being able to take your own photos helps you to be in a position to capture many opportunities, true life activities that you might otherwise would have missed.

      3
      3Days2GoAuthor
      Known Participant
      August 11, 2018

      Thank you jacquelingphoto2017.  If the photographer wasn't working for me, then your suggestion would be applicable.  However, I have hired the photographer to shoot the session, so I own and control the rights to the material.  And I am asserting that on the release that I provide with each photo.

        Abambo
        Community Expert
        AbamboCommunity Expert
        Community Expert
        August 8, 2018

        Could you post one of your non-compliant pictures.

        ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer
        3
        3Days2GoAuthor
        Known Participant
        August 8, 2018

           Abambo Here is an example of a submission that received the "Non-Compliant Image" rejection.

        Abambo
        Community Expert
        AbamboCommunity Expert
        Community Expert
        August 8, 2018

        Did you file the model release?

        ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer
        Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
        Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices