Hello, I'm new to Adobe Stock as a contributor. I've submitted a couple hundred photos over the past few months and none of them have been selected. I can understand if it's a formatting or quality issue, but the consistency in what photos are selected leaves me scratching my head. I submitted this image of Thun, Switzerland that was rejected. I thought maybe it isn't large enough, but other similar photos at larger sizes I submitted were rejected.
Then I see photos on Adobe Stock that look like this:
So I'm wondering what specific criteria I'm missing? Are the photos I'm submitting too saturated? Are they too small? Thanks in advance.
26
Replies
What was the rejection reason? Technical issues?
Your picture does not meet the quality requirements for Adobe stock:
- No details due to excessive (in-camera) noise reduction.
- White balance issue, the picture is too cold (bluish).
In addition, if the picture would nicely focussed and sharp, you would probably need model releases for the persons here:
And you may need to edit out the logo here:
The picture you showed, that has been accepted, is not a good picture, and I wouldn't buy it, but is technically correct and technically in a better shape than yours. And I see that even on the preview.
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
You seem to just want to say my picture is bad.
By @Nick27953846pa5m
Your picture is great. Posted on social media, you would earn my like. But it is not good for stock.
I'm not here for being charitable, however. We are not social media here and the second picture is (I can say it a third time) bad enough, that I would not buy it, and I would not see commercial appeal in a picture like that, even when not having technical issues.
I see a lot of commercial appeal in your picture, however. But the technical issues need to be cleared first, and the painterly look is not correctable, when you do not have access to the raw file.
I hope, this gives you more information on what I think of your picture. You asked why it got refused, the reasons of the refusal are clear. I do not know why the other picture got accepted, and I really do not care. Stock is not a competion. I submit now, my picture gets accepted now or refused now.
I feel like a little more in depth feedback would help prevent people like me from dumping a bunch of unacceptable photos into the review stream.
By @Nick27953846pa5m
I never "dumped" more than 5 in a row. Chances are high, that you have the same errors on all, if there is an error. And chances are even higher that the same person is looking at your pictures and if they are picky, all will fail. Some moderators are more picky then others, but you will see some consitancy in refusals.
Moderators only choose generic reasons for refusals and they refuse on the first error they see. Your picture was a matter of less than a second to refuse for quality issues. They could refuse hundreds of assets in the time it takes me to describe one error in your picture.
That is a reason, why I'm thankful, you did not post 10 refusals. It would probably not change much to the reasons and I would probably refuse to check on more than 3 images.
@Abambo So you're saying they don't carefully review the submissions. Good to know.
By @Nick27953846pa5m
No. The refusal of your picture is correct, and it took the moderator less than a second to decide.
And most of my refusals, after having a second look, are correct. For one or the other, I simply let it go.
No one is going to post here if they send in a "bad" image, and it gets approved anyway 🙂
By @Jill_C
There are currently a lot of erronous generative ai assets in the database. Moderators were simply no trained to detect them. A lot of customers complain to get them out of view when searching for assets.
And there are pictures that got refused, where OP proudly proclaims that after a second submission, the asset got accepted. It's rare, however.
That being said, the second photo (The one on Adobe Stock) is far from world class commercial photography.
By @Nick27953846pa5m
Agreed!
I had a feeling some of the issues you raised were likely a cause of the rejection
By @Nick27953846pa5m
No, they were the cause of the rejection.
Some people submit a second time, and they are lucky and get accepted, but not on a picture like yours. And if it gets accepted, the first buyer with the need of a higher resolution picture for print would get angry at Adobe stock and post a quality claim.
It really does take quite a bit of time to thoroughly review a photo, 5-10 minutes wouldn't be surprising to me.
By @George_F
A trained moderator needs maximum a minute to check the quality. When you do not need to justify your refusal, you are fast. And for most of the pictures you are very fast to refuse.
AdChoices