Known Participant

Question

rechazadas por falta de calidad

Forum|Forum|6 days ago
January 27, 2026
3 replies
76 views

Jill_C

Community Expert

Too many images to comment on each one, but the first one suffers from a very shallow DOF, rendering most of the image out of focus. The second image is not well composed - too many distracting elements. The third and fourth images are too tightly cropped and not well composed.

Jill C., Forum Volunteer

alejandrom6594753Author

Known Participant

No estoy de acuerdo, cuantas fotos hay en el stock con la profundidad de campo baja, además que el enfoque se centra en el primer plano que es lo principal de la foto. En cuanto a la composición es muy subjetiva, cada uno lo interpreta de una forma, (como es posible que otras agencias si me admitan todas esas fotos y adobe no?). Permítanme pero no entiendo nada. Saludos

Jill_C

Community Expert

You have disagreed with each of the Contributors who have provided their input here. We all have significant experience in Adobe Stock and backgrounds in photography, and we have provided useful input. You can argue about our comments if you wish, but you can’t disregard the opinions of the Adobe Stock Moderators; their decisions are final. Adobe Stock is known to have higher quality standards than other agencies. Acceptance at other agencies cites is no guarantee of acceptance by Adobe.

Jill C., Forum Volunteer

Ricky336

Community Expert

Hello,

I think the white balance could also be improved, as well as adding a bit more contrast. I think the photos are a little flat looking. Also, not sure about the soft focus.

alejandrom6594753Author

Known Participant

¿Poco contraste?, creo que tiene suficiente. ¿Fotos plana? ese es su criterio no el mio. ¿Enfoque suave? no lo que ves es que no hay ruido. No me parece una respuesta acertada. Saludos.

Ricky336

Community Expert

Perhaps,

For example:

after some curves correction

and yours:

it is a subtle difference, but it can make a difference.

However, it is indeed my opinion, and of course opinions can vary!

The moderators have their opinion as well!

daniellei4510

Community Expert

Generally speaking, depth-of-field is too shallow on some of these and the cropping is much too tight. It also appears you might have added a soft-focus filter to one of these. If buyers want soft-focus, they can add it themselves.

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

alejandrom6594753Author

Known Participant

No estoy de acuerdo. No hay ningún filtro, la profundidad de campo se centra en el primer plano, y es lógico que el fondo este desenfocado. Y el supuesto enfoque suave no lo es, simplemente no hay ruido. No entiendo nada, otras agencias me las aceptan todas y adobe no. (No entiendo nada). Saludos.

daniellei4510

Community Expert

You’re welcome to disagree. And to continue having your assets accepted on other platforms; but not here, if you don’t wish to take our suggestions into consideration.

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

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