Hello, I would like to complain or contact Adobe Stock support. 75 images were rejected at once, even though I did everything required and added that they were using artificial intelligence and did not add keywords that were far from the topic.
I was tired for days and put a lot of pressure on myself to complete these photos, only to be surprised that they were not accepted, even though several months ago I had published a smaller quantity and with worse quality, and in fact they were accepted.
Imsges size were 4096×2304 for width:height, the ratio was 16:9
thanks for reading.
16
Replies
to
Your assets were refused on quality issues. Post one of those as submitted.
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
By @Abambo
I don't understand what you mean exactly by "post one of those as submted" but if you mean posting some
of refused images here.
But I was really tired of them and it took me days to prepare them. It's not good to reject them all at once, 75 imsges!
Another small size copies of some refused images
In fact, if some of them do not meet the standards, this does not mean that in all the 75 photos, there isn't only one acceptable. In fact, those who publish are not bots that can publish instead of one image thousands. I was really tired of publishing this amount, even if you saw it alot or no.
Another small size copies of some refused images
(...)
In fact, if some of them do not meet the standards, this does not mean that in all the 75 photos, there isn't only one acceptable. In fact, those who publish are not bots that can publish instead of one image thousands. I was really tired of publishing this amount, even if you saw it alot or no.
By @Worker404
You didn't read the instructions (again): no reduced size pictures. Indeed, the first batch is enough. You should check the rest of your assets at 100% and if you see similar problems, you know why they got refused. If you can't detect the reason, you may post again ONE asset, and someone will look into that. It's a lot of work to check and to critique the assets, and you should not abuse of the experience of the voluntaries to point out the obvious.
In fact, you are supposed to submit correct assets as a professional, and if you submit 1000 erroneous assets, to protect the potential buyers (and Adobe), they all need to get refused. I believe that it is a lot of work to submit 75 assets, but you should do that work only if it is worth the effort.
None of the assets I have looked into met the criteria. You are confounding the technical criteria (like pixel size, marking as AI etc) with the quality criteria. And even so, you were in violation of one required technical criteria: your assets are not colour profiles as sRGB.
Post one of those as submitted.
Means posting ONE (1) picture only, not all 75. That is really nonsense, and shows that you do not read instructions! And I suppose that is the major problem of your submissions.
As submitted means, post the same file here that you have submitted to stock, not a size reduced file, as most defects are not detectable on size reduced files.
But I was really tired of them and it took me days to prepare them. It's not good to reject them all at once, 75 imsges!
By @Worker404
Don't submit 75 assets, if you do not like to have 75 refusals in a row. It's also tiring for the moderator to see 75 assets to refuse. Submit only perfect pictures, you will experience much fewer refusals.
Your assets are full of artefacts, and the upsizing did enhance those:
Easy to spot, if you check your asset at 100%. In addition, they lack the necessary sharpness.
(
(1) colour noise, (2) aliasing
Aliasing, compression artefacts… Not an inch of your pictures is without multiple artefacts, and errors. And I did not look very deep into your pictures. They were easy and fast refusals.
Compression artefacts, colour noise, aliasing...
You really should first read the instructions. Create a good asset. Correct the flaws in that asset. Upscale. Check again for flaws and correct and then submit. It's not worth, creating 75 bad assets and then submitting those and complaining that they get refused.
If the images were made with artificial intelligence from the beginning, it is difficult to modify them except by simply changing the sharpness, shadows, and so on.
By @Worker404
Oh, no! You need to be a Photoshop wizard to correct some errors. If you can't correct, do not submit. You are supposed to submit perfect pictures.
As for the noise in the image of the apple: it is supposed to be fine water droplets.and I don't realy love to make it very sharp.
By @Worker404
You did again not read what I wrote (you should really learn that words have a meaning! At least, you are lucky that you are not one of my wife's students!): I talked about colour noise. That is noise in the colour, not in the luminance. Incidentally: I noticed that there are droplets. They are sharp enough.
I do not deny that there is confusion
By @Worker404
There is no confusion. Artefacts are errors, not confusion. There is no need to argument on this. I didn't criticize luminary noise, but colour noise (colour changing at a high frequency back and forth). In most cases, colour noise is an easy fix.
Thank you for your reply, but man, if you are the one reviewing the pictures, try to give everyone a chance.
By @Worker404
It's worse. I'm a fellow contributor and I apply those standards to my assets. I'm also a stock buyer, and if I spend my time on such an asset, searching, selecting, designing, getting my design approved, licensing and complaining to Adobe, going back to my customer, telling them that the design can't be done like this because I selected a bad asset, missing a deadline, … Your apples or your exploding lights could cost me easily $1000 and more. No, supply me with correct assets. This is not a preschool project, where everybody will be happy and tell you how nice it is.
You see, if I would have licenced your asset, for the $.33-$0.99 that you would have earned, I would have been outraged with you, and I would put your designs on my personal black list. So yes, you have one chance.
I understand what you mean. I wanted to understand your point of view as an older person in the field.
By @Worker404
I prefer wiser, I don't like to be referred to as old. 😂
In short, what you mean is that the image cannot be measured merely by its external aesthetic appearance. It must be scrutinized and corrected,right?
By @Worker404
Yes, aesthetics is important. But if I put your asset in an advert or in an annual report, it needs to be good enough for print. As thumbnails, your pictures are fine. You really need to check the assets in all stages at 100% to detect artefacts, and you must correct what can be corrected. Not all assets can be corrected.
And you should also note: refusals are not personal. A moderator checks around 2000–3000 assets a day. They refuse at the first issue they detect. And it's not sure that your 75 assets were refused by the same moderator. But as the errors are obvious, they did not need to spend a lot of time with your assets.
Firstly, the members of this forum are not Adobe employees, and we're not the ones who are reviewing and rejecting your assets. We have no contact with the Moderation staff. Adobe has provided this forum for you to receive a second opinion from fellow Contributors. We have looked at a LOT of AI images, and can usually spot the errors easily.
I'm not sure what the attached image is supposed to be, but the lines are not drawn consistently, and it's noisy.
Some AI images are fixable, and some just have to be discarded. In addition to upscaling, you'll need to learn editing tools, such as Adobe Photoshop, if you want to correct the images.
You said "I was tired for days and put a lot of pressure on myself to complete these photos, only to be surprised that they were not accepted." I would say don't push yourself to exhaustion just to be able to submit a large batch of flawed images. Submit them as you get them done, after carefully reviewing every inch of the image and editing out the errors. A slow and steady approach to submitting stock images will be more successful in the long run.
AdChoices