This image was flagged for Quality Issue.

Hello,

Generally speaking, I would stay away from this type of style. It will properly never pass muster. There are too many faults.

White balance, artefacts, scratches, blurriness, and so on. Even if this was intentional, it's best not to add filters. Anyway, you shouldn't add filters to your asset, as it can be added individually.

Have a read of this. It's a brief guide on quality:
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html

You can't fix the defects up to the point that Adobe accepts this type of image:

Don't try to be too artistic. I could take a standard well exposed picture, throw some filters on it and get this as a picture. I can't do the inverse. If they are photographs, submit the well exposed, sharp image of this one.

Speaking as a Stock customer, this is not something I would purchase. The quality is poor (intentional or not) which makes it unsuitable for commercial use -- print, digital or textile.

Stock is NOT an art gallery.  It's a commercial Stock image business.  Content creators come to Stock to source highest quality images to use in personal & professional projects. 

As a graphics artist myself, I have no trouble adding grunge style effects to a pristine image if my project calls for that.  But I can't remove grunge once it's been added. 

Hope that makes sense.

Abstract, conceptual images such as this are always difficult to determine what quality issues are involved. They could involve anything from the random white lines that are scattered about to what I believe are rare but possible biases on the part of the moderator. Is it a color cast issue? The weird fold in his jeans? The two white specs on his head? Hard to say. Did you submit this marked as an Illustration or Photo? If the latter, that could also be the reason.