Known Participant

Question

image rejection for technical reasons

Forum|Forum|5 years ago
July 20, 2020
4 replies
646 views

Adobe has started rejecting images seemingly at random. When I first started at the end of last year I didn't have anything rejected for months even when submitting regularly. I just cannot see why this photo for instance was rejected. There's no way I want to pixel peep (looking at more than 100%) it hurts my eyes. Surely looking at 100% is fine.

1st photo: Maybe the depth of field wasn't enough to get the inside of the flower in focus even though I stopped down a lot but the main part of the flower is in focus.

2nd photo: pink rose rejected. maybe due to small D.O.F but it was intentional I see a lot of out of focus stock pictures with just a little part being sharp.

I use an old manual vintage lens with focus peaking on a Sony camera. Note this and others were accepted was accepted on other sites.

This topic has been closed for replies.

giovannid74675258

Inspiring

Gdod morning,

I'm not really an expert but I always do my best for reaching the better quality of image and it happens that some of them are refused, but this fact help me to improve more and more and to be critical of my own pics and video. I usually pay attantion to the time of exposure, focus, colors and so on. I don't loose heart.

Have a good day.

Bye

Vences

Inspiring

Hello dunstun,

Nice work overall. But probably not "Adobe enough" lol.

Reading 2-3 years old posts, I found one where an Adobe employee said that, reviewers make mistakes, simply put. It means that they can reject good work and/or accept bad work. I tested out, and submitted 1 "clearly" poor cell-phone photo and got accepted. The thing we have in common, is that, that submission was also a flower. Perhaps flowers have certain privileges? 😛

I found all of your work too dark (under-exposed). And increasing focus/detail in shots while doing macros "is king". I assume you are using reverse rings, extension tubes "technique" for that vintage lens?, if so, I've seen that photos taken like that tend to result under-exposed. But doesn't mean that is a bad one. Practice makes perfect I think.

@ricky336, you just broke my heart, most of my work are flowers ;(

but, that's ok, I will stand out from the crowd... someday!

Cheers

V

jacquelingphoto2017

Community Expert

Hi Dunstun,

The lily is not completely in focus. You needed about a stop more depth of field. The file is also noisy. There is blue color fringing, and a slight blue cast.

The blurred rose is blindingly distracting. The main subject is too small in a corner, thus extremely poor composition. Too much of the main subject is out of focus. That file too is noisy.and has color fringing.

I inspected your files at 50%. If I am able to identify all that faults at 50% zoom, they must be much more pronounced at 100% and would not be suitable for use on large monitors if the buyer wishes it for that purpose.

Best wishes

JG

duns12317219734Author

Known Participant

The pink rose was shot with the camera at 100 ISO but I underexposed to stop flower highlights clipping if that creates noise I don't know.. I cannot see any grain at 100% (I started photography & design in the analog film era) but if noise is those blotches of random color in the background then it could be due to adding color to the photo via saturation in my software.

A lot of photos of flowers on adobe have their backgrounds removed which I may be able to do on software as I used to be an artist but found it virtually impossible to adapt to digital.& find the computer mouse difficult to manage.

I emailed the adobe moderator & they said my rejection rate was very good but sent me here.

Below are some of my other photos that were accepted recently. The rose below was the one out of focus on the 1st photo rejected above. The orange Lilly below was out of focus apart from the middle but was still accepted.

above.

jacquelingphoto2017

Community Expert

Hi Dunstun,

ISO, shutter speed, and aperture settings all work together to produce the right exposure, and depth of field when correctly set. No matter where you set the ISO, noise will produced. You need to use the photo editor to remove it. If you set the ISO at the lowest and your frame is underexposed, you will get a lot of noise - the same as if high ISO is used. The idea is to have sufficient exposure, correct depth of field, and adequate lighting. You telling us the parameters here does not help except we were there with you taking pictures. Also there is no ideal settings except the correct setting at the moment, and place you are taking the picture. Many of my photos accepted are taken between 800 and 2000 ISO. Sometimes when I set high ISO for a particular low light setting, I end up forgetting and use it for highlight settings. It is only when I take note that I am taking a still picture at very high shutter speed that I realize that my ISO was left high.

Closeup with shallow depth of field will give a pleasing blur background. If your subject is the reproductive part of a lily, then when you focus closely at it, it is likely part of the petals will gradually go blur in a pleasing way as you should have observed with your own work. That does not excuse you blurring a part of your subject producing a blinding distraction. It is better not to blur any part of your picture using an editor. Either remove the unwanted part completely, or let it stay. If you choose to let it stay, once your main subject is in focus it will be accepted as shot with the necessary correction of white balance, noise reduction, and so on.

If your software is producing noise, then do noise reduction adjustments last. The Adobe products do not produce noise, hence that is the standard the moderators will follow. Therefore the performance of your software will not be taken into consideration. It is expected if you have a poor performing editor, then you need a Photoshop or Lightroom editor. Your software has to meet those standards or excel beyond.

Do not remove your subject from the background you take it in. The buyer will decide if he/she wants this to be done. Do the necessary corrections and submit as is.

There is always room for improvement. The photos that were first accepted, I hardly want to look at them now. And just as I though I was doing well, I came across another site that told me how terrible my shots are. I am now striving to reach their level. My suggestion is to see what blurs are accepted as against your photos that are rejected. You will see the mark difference.

Please take a look for more helpful information: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/how-to/tips-stock-image-acceptance.html?set=stock--fundamentals--adobe-stock-contributor

Best wishes

JG

Ricky336

Community Expert

Hello,

I think you have cropped too close to the flower as well as having distracting elements in the frame such as the out of focus leaves. The background is messy.

There are many flower photos now, so it needs to stand out from the crowd. This one doesn't I'm afraid.

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