Please advise on quality issue

Most Adobe Stock Customers want natural looking images for use in commercial projects.  If their project calls for colorized or stylized graphics, they can apply those effects after purchase.   You'll reach a wider Stock audience with good photographic technique, natural colors and neutral white balance. 

If you're new to Adobe Stock, read these links.

• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html
• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html
• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/user-guide.html/stock/contributor/help/photography-illustrations.ug.html
• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/how-to/tips-stock-image-acceptance.html

==========
Generative AI:
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/generative-ai-content.html

Hope that helps.

Damien, unfortunately Adobe Stock contributors may never get to find out what “the specific issue” is with a photo that has been rejected but I think Jill_C has highlighted the most likely problem.

Be careful about advice saying that a photograph’s histogram should always indicate some level of whites or blacks. A perfectly exposed high key photo may show little or no blacks in the histogram – the opposite applies to low key photos https://www.photoshopessentials.com/photo-editing/understanding-histograms-low-key-and-high-key-images/

However, for many photographs a full histogram is desirable – having said that some professionals avoid brightness values 0 to say 5 and from say 250 to 255 to avoid clipping the highlights and shadows (especially when the intended output is for print).

I’ve had a look at the histogram from your photo and the RGB graph shows that the shadows are clipped. When looking at the individual channels it shows that the reds and blues are clipped but the green channel lacks brightness values from 0 to 20. By bringing the green channel slider in from 0 to 20 it does improve the colour balance slightly in my opinion (viewed on a calibrated high-end monitor).

As Jill_C has mentioned, the main problem is likely to be the area of sky in the top righthand side – I don’t think this area is adding value to the image even if it was technically perfect – so one option would be to crop it out.

Apologies for pointing out a further problem, but in my opinion the green tones in the bottom lefthand side are very similar over a fairly large area, i.e., no contrast or ‘blocked up’. Noise is also visible in this area (made more obvious due to the lack of detail and similar tones in this area).

[moderator: corrected text as of poster's follow-up post]

This picture with good focus and natural processing and correct exposure would be a nice asset.

You should look into your histogram. You should find information all along the axis. Your picture has no blacks, no whites and little highlights.

When you post into the stock database, strive for a natural look. The over processing can be done by the customer if they need that. But they can't get back the natural look, as a good deal of information required for this is gone.

If you are new to stock, you should consider these resources: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/tutorials.html
Please read the contributor user manual for more information on Adobe stock contributions: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/user-guide.html
See here for rejection reasons: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html
and especially quality and technical issues: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html

If you are a generative AI contributor, please look into these instructions and follow them by the letter: https://community.adobe.com/t5/stock-contributors-discussions/generative-ai-submission-guidelines/td-p/13549435

It's an interesting abstract, but the bit of very noisy sky with chromatic aberration and artifacts in the upper right corner is a clue as to how over processed the image is. When I zoom in between 100-200% I can also see that's it not in sharp focus.