What was the reason Adobe gave you? Technical Issues/Quality? Intellectual Property? I'm guessing Technical Issues
The lighting in this photo caused some noticeable shadows and bright spots that I think detract from the photo. At 100% view there is also noticeable noise and some artifacts around the seams of the wrapping paper.
At the bottom of the image, it appears like the small square is reflected? But it also looks like half of the box is left out of the frame and I think this also added to the rejection.
I hope you have better luck with future submissions 🙂
Thanks for the reply. It was 'technical' so what you said makes sense. The image was an editorial for the New York Times so maybe not up to Adobe Stock specs.
Shiny foil surfaces are very challenging. Sometimes they work, often they don't.
Also I'm not a big fan of tightly clipped images. IMO, customers are more likely to buy something when the composition is pleasing to the eye and they have more image to work with.
Better luck next time.
Yes I agree often enough they don't work. This was an image for theNew York Time magazine so probably not of the calber needed for Adobe Stock. Thanks for your advice.
The composition is odd; the background is indeciperhable with distracting highlights and shadow. The shadowed end of the large box has digital noise, idnicating that the lighting was inadequate or the ISO was too high.
Thanks for the advice. This was an old image commisioned for the New York Times magazine so it makes sense it is not in the same world as Adobe stock where there are rigid image requirements.
Nothing in this image shocks me terribly. Even the narrow crop is quite pleasant. Customers choose assets on the cropping, so it makes sense to include narrowly cropped assets and more generously cropped assets so that the customer can make their selection. The picture contains however a lot of noise for a 100ISO picture.
I also see some areas in the picture, where I would suspect quick and dirty clone stamping.
Noise, focus and overexposed highlights.