Hello community. Received a refusal due to AESTHETIC OR COMMERCIAL APPEAL OF IMAGE. I thought the photos were quite interesting. Thanks everyone for the answers.
The compositions are good. The birdhouse picture has a white balance issue and is also underexposed. It has a blue cast. It would be more interesting with a bird, but that should not prevent it from being accepted since the buyer can add a bird if desired.
The second file is underexposed.
The third file is too white. It is either overexposed or too much highlights. It has a strange look and most of the details are lost.
The second and third photo has to do with weather/season so I cannot say it is because they are not wanted. I believe it is because they are not looking interesting.
Your birds house is lacking an inhabitant. Your path/snow image is somehow uninspiring. Bot images lack an interestingness factor. They may be nice pictures, but why would someone spend money to acquire a licence of those, if there are many others, better ones.
The fog image could get interesting, if you enhance the processing.
As @Jill_C said,, the refusal is kind of difficult to assess. Best is as to consider it as if Adobe does not think that it adds value to their database. Other stock providers may accept the assets and there may even be sales from such assets.
ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer
This is one of the most difficult reject reasons to understand, and we just have to trust that the Adobe Moderators have a good feel for what is saleable on their platform. "Interesting" images don't necessarily have a use in a commercial application. Ask yourself for each of these images how you imagine that a Buyer / designer would use it in an advertisement or blog post, or magazine article or book, etc.
AdChoices