Cabbage White Butterflies Feeding on Showy Milkweed

[jamesn77628587]

This image was rejected for Technical Issues.  I rarely have rejections, and when it happens I have been able to isolate and corret the problem.  This one has me stumped...any duggections or input?

The original file posted was 14.58 megs, and I had to reduce the size to half that to post on this forum.

[Jill_C · Accepted solution]

It's a lovely image; I'm assuming it was rejected because of the soft focus on the front wing of the left butterfly. Also, I don't know if it was your intention to darken the surrounding area, but the upper left part of the image shows some streaking. 

[J E L · Accepted solution]

@jamesn77628587 It's a very nice shot, indeed! I think @Jill_C is right about the focus being soft on the left wing and body, seen here at 100%. It's also just a thin hair too dark to my eye at the center but that is easily fixed.

[jamesn77628587]

Thanks to both Jill and Jain!  I do tend to the darker side in my photos, and as noted I can address that.  I am surprised that the un-focused area would have solely caused the rejection....but your observations are well founded, and I will clarify that as well.  These challenges to our work product keep me busy, and forces one to pay attention to detail.

[Abambo]

It may not be the sole rejection reason, but it may well be the main rejection reason. Both of your butterflies are out of focus. That's one problem. Even if you tend to the darker side, please note that you are posting for stock and the more information is in your picture, the more use the picture may have. I would aim for a more equilibrated histogram. And the third reason for rejecting this picture could be the noise level, which is quite high.

[jamesn77628587]

There was no discernible noise in the photo, and the right butterfly was in focus.  I did make adjustments to the left-hand butterfly focus, and brightened the photo, as suggested by Jill and Jain.  The photo was accepted by Adobe today.

[Jill_C]

Great !  It's very satisfying to be able to rework an image and get it accepted.

[J E L]

@jamesn77628587 Hey, that's great news! Thanks for letting us know. 

[Abambo]

This is noise:

[jamesn77628587]

In my reply above, I used the word "discernible"...meaning there was no noise that existed to the point that it would bar my butterfly photo from being rejected by Adobe.  The whole point of my posting was to pass Adobe's rigid requirements for both noise and focus, among other factors.  It passed.  At this point further discussion is pointless.  I am now checking out.