Known Participant

Answered

persistance

Forum|Forum|3 years ago
July 14, 2022
4 replies
1080 views

I recently submitted 30 deer hunting-related images. Apparently, I got an anti-hunting reviewer because they were all rejected except for two that were not even among the best of the lot. I waited a week and resubmitted the same images. I must have gotten a more impartial reviewer because about a third of the images were accepted- the same images. I waited, sent in the balance again, and got another half dozen approved. Don't give up. Beauty, and rejection, are in the eye of the beholder.

Contributor critique

This topic has been closed for replies.

Correct answer Jill_C

While there is definitely variability in the moderation process, I don't believe there is any particular bias. Moderators are paid to get good images approved and into the database. If there was a company-wide edict to turn down images featuring dead animals, the contributor guidelines would say so, and none would have been accepted. In the attached image I see focus, noise and exposure issues. By the way, continuously resubmitting your previously rejected images without having re-edited and repaired them is considered spamming and can get your account closed.

Nancy OShea

Community Expert

As previously stated at various times in your other discussions, this is not a reviewer's problem. It's a photographer's problem.

I understand that deer populations must be controlled for survival of the herds. If left to over-populate, the majority will starve to death. I think you underestimate people's intelligence when you say everyone is biased against hunters. It's just not true.

Adobe Stock customers expect images of highest visual and technical quality for use in commercial projects. Either you have high quality images or you don't. It's as simple as that. Examine images closely at 100-300% magnification. Correct problems if you can & discard the ones you can't. Don't ruminate over rejections.

Nancy O'Shea— Product User & Community Expert

VerbbaitumAuthor

Known Participant

Trust me. I'm not.

jacquelingphoto2017

Community Expert

Hi @Verbbaitum ,

If all your files were as the one you upload here, they were correctly rejected in the first place. In any case do not be too happy. While your files are on line you are not completely out of the woods. If a customer complains, the affected file will be reviewed and rejected. Otherwise the saleability of your files are reduced.

You need to pay specific attention to the technical issues outlined by @Jill_C and @reedesign1912. Also you need to pay close attention to the Contributor Guidelines. You will get some further tips regarding what is required to produce good quality stock photos and also where you can go to improve your photography skills here.

Please do not re-upload a rejected file without finding and correcting the reason for rejection except you do not care to maintain your account. There is always a legitimate reason for rejection even if you do not find it. If you cannot find the reason for rejection, let us help you identify same.

Best wishes

Jacquelin

VerbbaitumAuthor

Known Participant

--

Mike Gnatkowski
[Moderator deleted private information. Please do not post private information like e-mails and phone numbers]

Create your own email signature
<>
Customer complains? Wouldn't they just not buy it? And after all, Adobe
approved it!

VerbbaitumAuthor

Known Participant

--

Mike Gnatkowski
[Moderator deleted private information. Please do not post private information like e-mails and phone numbers]
Create your own email signature
<>
I regret posting. My sole point was not about my terrible images. I was
about how I submit an image and its rejected. I submit it again and it's
approved. Same image or images. I'll keep trying unless you want me to go
elsewhere.

Jill_C

Correct answer

Community Expert

While there is definitely variability in the moderation process, I don't believe there is any particular bias. Moderators are paid to get good images approved and into the database. If there was a company-wide edict to turn down images featuring dead animals, the contributor guidelines would say so, and none would have been accepted. In the attached image I see focus, noise and exposure issues. By the way, continuously resubmitting your previously rejected images without having re-edited and repaired them is considered spamming and can get your account closed.

Jill C., Forum Volunteer

reedesign1912

Inspiring

Unless the reviewers rejected your images for "Lack of aesthetic or commercial appeal" I think you are assuming motives of the reviewer that probably aren't there. In the example you posted above, there are technical issues with the photo including a lot of noise, underexposed and lack of blacks / contrast.

Rob R, Photographer

VerbbaitumAuthor

Known Participant

--

Mike Gnatkowski
[Moderator deleted private information. Please do not post private information like e-mails and phone numbers]

Create your own email signature
<>
My point is they had all those so-called issues the first time and not the
second. Either they're not acceptable or they are.

VerbbaitumAuthor

Known Participant

--

Mike Gnatkowski
[Moderator deleted private information. Please do not post private information like e-mails and phone numbers]

Create your own email signature
<>
My beef is that I've had images approved that I scanned from 40- year-old
slides and had quality hi-res digital shots rejected. I'll keep scratching
my head and submitting.

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