A Property Release? Seriously?

[Sherwood_Martinelli]

I fully understand the need for a property release when you are shooting a well known and/or iconic building or location.  That said, if one is driving down the side of a side road in VERY RURAL upstate NY, and you spot a beautiful ABANDONED Barn/Barn styled building out in the middle of nowhere, with trees growing up around it since when do you need a property release?  Old rotting barns, abandoned dilapidated buildings are not Iconic...so what gives.

I'll not hold my breath for an acceptable answer.  Just another in what I am sure is a never ending inquiry into why certain of our works are rejected, and why there seems to be so much subjective personal tastes involve depending on who is judging/looking at our work.  IE...I've had plenty of shots rejected for being out of focus....I do a lot of bird photographs where the back ground is out of focus deliberately...meanwhile, admiring other photographers work, I spy an ACCEPTED (emphasis added) shot of an old piano keyboard that was/is way out of focus, not one sharp edge on any single key.

It is what it is, but think rejecting a picture  of a random red barn like building with your basic white trim and windows because I need to submit a property release from a property owner who probably died 50 years before I was born seems lubricous. 

[joanH · Accepted solution]

Sorry for your rejections, I can not always understand them either. I have an old barn photo too and wonder if I can use it without a release simply because the owner of the property is unknown.

I am interested in having more specific information about rejections. Don't give up on Adobe yet. Things change so fast, my brain spins with overload often. Ask - More later.

Best regards.

JH 

[Sherwood_Martinelli]

Hello and thank you for the reply.

Not going to give up on Adobe Stock...was reading online that these endeavors are more a marathon than a sprint, and not for the faint of heart.  Just find their criteria far to speculative and subjective at times...photographs accused of noise or attract issues are pieces I have sold and or won awards with.   Others rejected for being out of focus...I could go on, but so could all of us.   Just found it more than peculiar to have an old random barn picture rejected on grounds I need a property release for a picture I took of an abandoned building, said picture taken from the public road...complete with pot holes and gravel verse pavement.

Just think Adobe should consider providing more in the way of lessons/suggestions that would help us newbies as it were learn the ropes and perhaps in the process be more successful in putting some change in our pockets.

[sanvandur]

I've had the exact same experience with rejected content. I've wondered if Adobe's selection process is actually automated. A lot of my rejected images I wonder, "really? out of focus?", etc. Such bs... which is why I suspect it's automated and their algorithms or whatever just aren't as developed as they should be for the task.

[oleschwander]

Adobe Stock’s reviewers are much more selective than on other sites. Must be a huge benefit for the customers who don’t need to go through hundreds of bad images ... imo.