Participating Frequently

Question

One picture was accepted and the other, with some quality, was refused due to quality problems.

Forum|Forum|1 year ago
July 17, 2024
4 replies
1047 views

HI,
I took some photos of a cup of espresso. As a variation I inserted a different national flag into the mug for each photo. I didn't upload the whole pack together, I first downloaded the flags of USA, Italy and Sweden and everything worked fine, all photos were accepted. Some time later I tried to upload others, for example Norway, Denmark and so on. The quality was absolutely the same, the colors and resolution were the same, without A.I. usage, the only thing I changed were the flags, but Ad Stock rejected them saying there were quality issues. I fear that some algorithm did not notice the difference between the flags and rejected the images due to a misunderstanding.
Other photos of mine were rejected but the reason was clearer and I had nothing to say, but in this case I can't understand it.
However, I have pasted one of the accepted photos and one of the rejected ones below. Judge for yourself.
I hope the decision to reject them can be changed.
Thank you for your attention and best regards,
Francesco

Contributors

This topic has been closed for replies.

Ricky336

Community Expert

One thing to point out is the white balance. You could correct that on both of them. It has a slight magenta tone.

Correction:

Also, it looks better with the most obvious reflections removed.

daniellei4510

Community Expert

I hate, hate, hate having assets rejected, and while it still happens on occasion, I do my best not to give moderators the opportunity to do so. In addition to what others have mentioned, here are some issues I would have removed or improved upon before submitting. All very minor and relatively easy fixes.

This probably doesn't answer your question as to why one was rejected and the other accepted, but I gave up long ago wondering why this sometimes occurs. Humans make mistakes, moderators and contributors alike.

Adobe Community Expert | If you can't fix it, hide it; if you can't hide it, delete it.

Abambo

Community Expert

There are issues that are common to both cups:

And then you have issues that are only present in one file (red) and not in the other. But both files have issues:

The flag pole also has a white border that should not be there. There is also a strange dark colourization out of the cup.

Based on this analysis, all assets should have been refused. It is difficult to say what finally brought the moderator to refuse the asset, but both, the handle error and the editing errors at the cup, near the pole are quite visible, and should have been seen by the moderators. Other issues are more kind of appreciation. They do not disturb me much.

And yes, as @Jill_C said, moderation is done by humans, so you may have, depending on the time of the day, the experience, the mood etc, more or less luck with your assets. Adobe tries to get consistency in the moderation, but I think that they fail miserably in the field of generative AI. Not so much with assets like these. But it happens...

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

F

francescom5326621Author

Participating Frequently

Ok, thanks also for your directions.
Honestly, I hadn't looked at the photos at such a high level of magnification. I'll observe them bigger from now on.
For example, I also checked the photo with a pine cone that Ad Stock rejected. It's strange because years ago I uploaded it to a well-known stock archive that published it without problems and I sold it many times. In any case, when I ended the collaboration with the stock archive I was talking about, I reposted some photos here. In fact, if you enlarge the pine cone to 200-300% you notice some small graininess, but perhaps enlarging low-cost stock photos to 300% isn't even a fair claim, or am I wrong?
Best regards, Francesco

Abambo

Community Expert

Honestly, I hadn't looked at the photos at such a high level of magnification.

By @francescom5326621

If I remember well, I used 300% magnification, but the errors are visible to the trained eye at 100%. I use magnification to check the true nature of defects, not to detect them. They are just easier to see at 200 or 300%.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Jill_C

Community Expert

The Norway flag has a bit of chromatic aberration. The second flag has some issues along the edges with the cutout. Assets are checked by humans, not an algorithm.

Jill C., Forum Volunteer

F

francescom5326621Author

Participating Frequently

OK, thanks for the info. But human beings also make mistakes or have some inattemption. For example, you explained to me what's wrong with the photo with the Norwegian flag and with the second one. The second one is precisely the one with the Swedish flag, so you didn't read my post well where I explained that the Swedish one was accepted, so for humans who have tested it has no problems. Furthermore, the Swedish flag has not undergone any retouching or contouring, probably the edges have some grainy spots because the flags are printed on slightly rough paper.
However, I hope that Ad Stock will review its decision, just to draw stable references.
Best regards,
Francesco M.

Abambo

Community Expert

However, I hope that Ad Stock will review its decision, just to draw stable references.

By @francescom5326621

No. That won't happen.

It is always difficult to say exactly what error caused the refusal, as the first error seen triggers that. But simply the fact that none sees the errors does not make them go away. Obviously, with the different pictures you touched the cup and that caused in both cases errors to pop-up.

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