image rejected

[Jon2322]

can anyone please enlight me by assesing this image and the reason was rejected? 

of course it says techincal reason - it was taken on tripod, 100 ISO,  f/16 - sharpen reduced to 0 zero from raw file 

[reedesign1912]

Is the file you posted the original you uploaded to Adobe Stock?  I only ask because this one is only 1.5 MP and minimum requirement is 4 MP.  Sometimes you can only see the issues at 100%-200% magnification of the original image.  But, what I do see is that the image is slightly underexposed and has a white balance issue (too blue.)

I hope this helps.

[Abambo]

In addition to what @reedesign1912 says, it could get a small contrast boost.

[George_F]

The landscape photo is underexposed, both by my eye and reflected in the histogram.  When pulling the exposure up, I think it really highlights where the information was poorly recorded.

I like the blue on the sky, but I think the buildings are too blue and a bit more neutral would be better suited.  

This is taken at such a wide angle that some of the buildings are noticeably skewed.

I'm sure you did at least some of this purposefully, it just doesn't work well for commercial use.  That's my opinion at least.  But with some slight tweaks in shooting and processing I think there is potential.

Better luck with future submissions 🙂

[Jon2322]

Hello George, 

First, the images shouldn’t be assessed based on your personal taste, that’s unproductive, the images submitted sgould be assesed from a neutral point of view, we all have different taste and preferences.  

1. Underexposed? I definitely disagree, it’s not the case here 

This image was taken at almost night time (367 seconds) and it is showing exactly the real situation, it's in fact a bit brighter than the reality, and this is how it should a photograph be, showing how the scene was at the time it was taken and express the real mood / feelings. 

Histograms are very useful but they must be understood properly in order to be used to asses photographs, and also  

A mid tones (info built up in the middle) histogram is equivalent and it matches the amount of light of daylight time, not night, dusk, dawn, magic time or other situations 

My histogram has 3 areas and it is well distributed in relation to the subjects: darks (blacks), mid tones and brights (highlights) as there are 3 main areas (types of subjects) in the image and each is very well exposed: sky, the lights of the city and the unlit parts which were quite dark and they should stay like that. 

Also, what screen are you using for assessment? I am editing my images on a 5k iMac 27” and image looks perfect, that might be a problem especially if you are using a windows computer 

2. If you look again properly at the image, and if you understand the colour tones, colour balance, etc. you will realise: 

That’s exactly how the image was in reality, There was a lot of mist amongst the buildings, which has lots of blue in it. Also, because of the yellow / red in the lights of the city and the sky the blues tend to become even more blue, it’s the basic rule in colour balance in a photograph: if one part its warmer the other part it becomes colder 

3. Here you are very wrong, the image was taken at exactly 50mm from long distance!!!! There is zero distortion in this image!!!! 

Also, adobe should post individual feedback per rejected image so that people know what the problems “you think” are so we can save a lot of time contacting the website. 

By the way, this image was submitted to another 4 big stock websites and it was approved by all 4. 

Cheers 

[Jill_C]

Dismissing all of George's very valid comments isn't going to get your image accepted by Adobe Stock. We here on the Community Forum are other Contributors, and many of us have developed an eye for what is acceptable to the Moderators. It is also my assessment that it is underexposed, soft and hazy and the buildings are slightly tilted. The Adobe Stock Moderators will reject the image if just one flaw is detected, and they simply don't have the time to advise in detail every flaw that they see. It is not their jobs to make us better photographers; it is their job to accept images that are technically superior and have commercial appeal to their Buyers. Other stock agencies have different criteria for acceptance, so the fact that they've accepted your image is no guarantee that Adobe will accept it.

[Test Screen Name]

It's also important to realise that (in case you did not see this)

- there is no point arguing with us, because we are only trying to report what we see as Adobe's wants

- you CANNOT contact Adobe to argue or appeal in any way; time is money and moderators have to process hundreds, maybe thousands, of pictures each week; Adobe would prefer to lose some good pictures to giving up valuable time to arguing

- Adobe's rules are often driven by complaints from the Stock customers, who are not photographers, but who have clear simple wishes.

[Abambo]

Hello George, 

First, the images shouldn’t be assessed based on your personal taste, that’s unproductive, the images submitted sgould be assesed from a neutral point of view, we all have different taste and preferences.  

By @Jon2322

George's comments are not driven by personal taste, at leats not the first lines. The picture is missing blacks and that causes a lack of contrast. You could also increase the whites a bit. As you said, you need to understand the histogram:

Getting acceptance with other 4 big stock companies does not earn your acceptance here and vice versa. Each company applies its criteria, and from what I see from the customer side, the criteria weren't stringent enough at the time.

Thinking that a 50 mm lens has no distortions is a bit naive. All depends on the quality of the lens: https://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/round-ups/50mm-12-way-lens-test-8669. Don't understand me wrong, I am not convinced that there is much correction needed, but distortion is visible.

[ricky336]

Hello,

I don't think it is underexposed exactly, but rather more brightness (brightness is different from exposure) could be added as @Abambo mentioned. The blacks and whites need to be increased. The sky could have more light added to it. Increasing the whites would do this. There should be a full range from whites to blacks rather than just mid tones.

I don't think there is any distortion that is worth mentioning. 

Maybe, just maybe white balance could be altered just a wee bit. A tiny bit less magenta/blue.