Feedback on rejected images

WOW! Thank you everyone for all the helpful input! I sincerly appreciate all the comments! 

I do tend to underexpose my images, its my understanding they hold the detail better than on overexposed image, so I will work on getting it right! As well, I will work on my focus and overall coloring! 

THANKS AGAIN! 

1950: nice colours, great action, but out of focus. I also would guess that the image is underexposed. The girl's head is cut off, that's unfortunate, as some potential use makes using this asset difficult. There is a certain noise level, that will make it difficult to correct the exposure.

2066: the rendering reminds me of old colour prints. Detail is gone in the girl's t-shirt. Whatever you cleaned up to the right and left, you need to do that in a manner, that the editing is not seen. It's obvious here. You need to train your photoshopping ability. The sky is noisy and deep blue, I would think that you pushed the saturation. The shadow on the left is strange in colour and exposes also noise. Overall focus is missing, that adds to the old colour prints impression. 

2219: Nice pets, but the contrasts are very hard. Highlights are overblown, shadows are very pronounced. You have chromatic aberration in the reflections: 

It looks like you used a direct flashlight. The highlights are also quality issues on it's own, even without the aberration.

Generally speaking, I like the pictures. You have an eye for the situation, and your framing is great, except for the girl's head. But you are, IMHO, combining camera setting and postprocessing errors. On social media, you will get many likes but for general stock use, they are not good enough. 

Hello,

Regarding the girl in the sand, for me,  it is quite obvious what she intends to do. No explanation is needed.  A sled for sliding down snow, in this case, sand dunes. It's called tobogganing in the UK. I think the photo is too over saturated, somewhat under exposed. As there is a lot of light reflection, you have to be careful about exposure.

The girl jumping, generally speaking, it's too dark. You should include the girl's head I think.

The alligator photo, again too dark, too contrasty.

Hi @Chantal31180276uvo1 ,

The first image is not very sharp. The color is not smooth. It's grainy. It's too dark in the shadows and some details are lost.

The second file highlights are much too high causing detail loss. The sky is too saturated.

The third file is a little dark and noisy. Your focus seem not to be deep enough.

Best wishes

Jacquelin

IMG_1950.jpg - the picture of the girl is just too blurry; and as @George_F mentioned, you've cut off the top of her head. There is something about the toe of the girl's left boot which is typical of Generative AI images...

IMG_2066.jpg - again, the main subject of the frame, the girl, is just too blurry. The blue object behind her is distracting.

IMG_2219.jpg - not in sharp focus, artifacts that look like chromatic aberration around some of the bright spots.

Are these AI generated images?  When zooming in on the details, I see a lot of changes of texture and some odd structures here and there.

With the girl in the rain boots, her head is cut off at the top. This image is also a little dark.

For the person walking in the desert, there's a very odd red structure at her feet that doesn't make any sense and there's a lot of blurriness around the person. 

The alligator photo looks dark to me, and shows underexposure on the histogram.

Cheers!