Drone photos and their quality

[ACHIMmoto]

Hello from Germany,

I have a general question about drone photos and their quality.

Today, drones have cameras on board, at least in the price range of up to 1500 €, which roughly correspond to the technical standard of normal cameras from 10 years ago. In good light, however, this must mean that the photos are bad (especially since photos bought from Adobe Stock are usually only shown online and therefore in a smaller format).

It should also be clear that drones do not drag large and, of course, higher-quality SLR systems through the air.

But I was able to reproduce these raw photos in a photo book in good quality up to DIN A4 (20x30 cm).

I have a drone and last year I was able to submit the first photos here in the stock for the offer without any problems.

Now I have submitted more drone photos - guaranteed no worse than last year's.

But these were rejected. Now I wonder why?

Greetings from Munich, ACHIM 

[@MNiessenPhoto]

Hi,

I don't know about your general comments regarding drones and of course have no idea how your other pictures look, but this one is not sharp and has blown out highlights.

There is aso a lot of noise as well as a magenta hue in the sky, while the rest of the picture looks too warm.

Hope that helps,

Michael

_____________

Michael Niessen - Photographer, photo-editor, educator

[RALPH_L]

I agree, the problem is the luminance- and color- noise. Also thge photo needs to be sharpened.

[Abambo]

Drone pictures as cell phone pictures are vetted using the same quality requirements as the most sophisticated cameras. Pictures must be usable for all needs, you can't assume that they will be only used on a website. The is no discrimination or preference for one or the other.

As for the photo, it does not need sharpening, but it has a lot of different artefacts and noise. Especially the missing details in the trees disturb. The buildings don't show details and are very cleanly white, so that I suspect blown out whites. All in all, the picture shows typical small sensor artefacts. 

[ACHIMmoto]

better?

[Abambo]

No:

[Nancy OShea]

Hi @ACHIMmoto 

Regardless of equipment used, ALL photos & videos are judged by the same criteria. 

Adobe Stock customers expect the highest visual and technical quality for use in their own projects.  Read these links.

• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html
• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html
• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/user-guide.html/stock/contributor/help/photography-illustr...
• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/how-to/tips-stock-image-acceptance.html

Better luck with your next submission. 😁

[ACHIMmoto]

Hello,

of course I can recognize the imperfection of the photo (that's why I mentioned the technical standard of drone cameras at the beginning; I've worked long enough as a photo editor, among other things).

But I wanted to bring in my thoughts that sometimes 'motif could come before 1A quality'.

Motifs like the one shown are rather rare and will become even more in the future - the drone market is as good as dead due to legislative measures in the European area. The market will probably only be professionals, and then with motifs on behalf, (see here at Stock.adobe: a similar motif is offered by an agency, but the picture is around 600 €).

Hobby drones with acceptable sensors from 1 inch are still rare today and are probably no longer bought due to strict regulations.

---- But now the end of the thread ------

Greetings, ACHIMmoto 

[Abambo]

But I wanted to bring in my thoughts that sometimes 'motif could come before 1A quality'.

By @ACHIMmoto

No, your pictures have too much technical faults to be accepted. My experience in stock is, that the stock provider does not judge the picture, but only the technical issues in the picture. Very rarely, you get a "Lack of aesthetic or commercial appeal" refusal. And by experience, you wouldn't get one with such motives like yours. But still, a buyer may get your picture returned, because of a lack of quality. That's the saddest issue, a stock provider has. Customers invest a lot of time in researching the picture they need. If it turns out that it is not good or requires a lot of corrective editing, they get angry.