Image rejection

[Chris30281789ah3j]

I submitted image of a dog and was rejected because of a previous image of clouds I had submitted for being too similar. How can a dog and clouds be similar?

[George_F]

I've never seen a specific image referenced when I've had a rejection for "Similar Images".  How are you sure it was an image of clouds that caused your dog photo to be rejected?

I believe if you don't have anything similar in your portfolio, that it was other images in the Adobe Stock database that were referenced.  There are quite a few pet photos.

[EzyRider_II]

Not sure if I follow. In both images there was a dig and there were clouds, or only a similar scene in the second one, but no dog? In any case, if you submit similar subjects in one upload batch, chances are that Adobe will only accept one if them. And probably rightly so. Just my humble opinion. Space is precious and while we may like both photos and wish they both could be stored, well. Adobe will pick one for us. And not always the preferred one. Just life I suppose. Better to upload only your preferred one. 

[Jill_C · Accepted solution]

The rejection reason code for similars is misleading because it states that the image was rejected based on similarity to other images in your account; hiwever it has been stated by Adobe employees here and in the Discord channel that similarities to images already in the database from other Contributors may also cause rejections.

[Abambo · Accepted solution]

Images may also be vetted against the complete database for popular subjects. The refusal message is badly worded, however.

[EzyRider_II]

Wow! Now that's a shocker! So this means that one or a few lucky people who
posted at the right time in any particular subject can monopolize that
subject? First come, first served? Late-comers: you snooze, you lose? Wow,
wow, wow.
Even if a more recent upload attempt in that subject is an improvement and
would serve customers better? That is some very thin ice in my view.

[Test Screen Name]

Well, we don't know what Adobe really do, but we have various guesses. It isn't that Adobe say - "no we have a dog already". In fact, if you search Adobe stock for "dog" you'll find they have 4,603,016 images matching. So, if you are just sending a neat picture of your favourite pet, the chances are quite good that there is already a similar picture - similar breed, location, behaviour. We're pretty sure that reviewers don't look through all 4 million. So, I speculate they do one or two of these things

1. Search on the same subject as you, or same keywords or whatever. See if your picture is visually similar to another one already there.

2. Do an image search of the entire database for something similar, with or without human review.

So, why do Adobe do this? Frankly, for the customers. The customer does not want to search for "dog on cushion with treat" and see a lot of similar images. It wastes their time. They expect a wide range of treatments, settings, and styles. 

So -- did you do a search on your proposed subject? It's not enough to just go into your photo library and choose favourites: this is a commercial exercise and you have hundreds of thousands of rivals you are competing with. Many people say that pictures of dogs, cats, trees, flowers and sunsets (among other subjects) are not worth submitting anyway - too many great images already, just too many images - so yours won't even be seen, still less licensed. Instead, imagine you're a customer, think of a commercial need, do searches, see what is under-represented, and seize that opportunity!

[George_F]

I think that is exactly the question one should ask themselves before submitting.  "How does this image serve customers better than what's there already?"

I think this is the answer to not only getting images accepted, but also to making sales.

[Nancy OShea]

that means a few lucky people who posted at the right time in any particular subject can monopolize that subject?
By @EzyRider_II

=========

Monopolize?  No.  But with 300+ million assets currently, whatever you submit to Stock must be extraordinary to stand out from all the rest.  Finding subjects that have little to no representation is much harder.  Supply vs demand dictates what subjects Stock is accepting.  They have to be selective because that's what paying customers expect.

Back when Adobe first acquired Fotolia, there was much less inventory. It was easy to get dog & cat photos accepted.  Now it's futile because there's 3 times the inventory and not that much demand for dogs & cats. 

During the COVID pandemic, everyone wanted pictures of people (and pets) in PPE face masks. Go figure!  Now that COVID mortality has dropped, there is less current interest in PPE.

Stock is all about trends.  Successful contributors anticipate trends and give customers what they want.

[Abambo]

So this means that one or a few lucky people whoposted at the right time in any particular subject can monopolize thatsubject?
By @EzyRider_II

What is your subject? Red roses? 1,920,652 results for red roses in all 

Sunrise, sunset? 18,250,857 results for sunrise in all

Your pet dog? 4,585,627 results for pet dog in all

Anything else?

You can still submit, but your image needs to “impress” the moderator.

[EzyRider_II]

Fair enough ! No red rose, no bee on flower, no dog, no cat, no cows in the
green hillside in the Alps, no beautiful mountains reflecting in the lake
in the Rockies! My forte is bus shelters : ). Have maybe 160 on line. And
actually wouldn't mind if new stuff in that subject could not be added. Be
tough Adobe!

[EzyRider_II]

just one more thing. it would be so nice (and more fair to us) if the reviewer said clearly why the submission was rejected! this "quality issue", most of us interpret as photo technique quality (exposure, sharpness, white balance, colors, what have you...) and after such a rejection some of us may start pixel peeping, trying to figure out if our lens is poor, the light sensor dirty or poor, didn't sharpen in PP,... you get my drift. and the stubborn ones (like I am) may go out again and shoot the same subject again, just a little better. hoping that this time it will get accepted. where as the reality is that I have no chance in that subject matter! so Adobe would do us (and itself) a big favour if it stood behind the rejection and said: look dude, at this point we are not accepting more dog photos! how difficult is that? actually Shutterstock surprised me a day ago by rejecting one photo and said outright that they no longet accept of that type of subject! and I give them credit for that. harsh, but it serves me just fine. 

[Abambo]

it would be so nice (and more fair to us) if the reviewer said clearly why the submission was rejected! this "quality issue", most of us interpret as photo technique quality (exposure, sharpness, white balance, colors, what have you...) and after such a rejection some of us may start pixel peeping, trying to figure out if our lens is poor, the light sensor dirty or poor, didn't sharpen in PP,...

By @EzyRider_II

That's precisely what quality issue is. And the moderator refuses at the first error they see. There is no need to continue. And as you are submitting only perfect pictures, refusals will be very rare for you.

so Adobe would do us (and itself) a big favour if it stood behind the rejection and said: look dude, at this point we are not accepting more dog photos!

By @EzyRider_II

But they still accept such subjects. You just need to be better than the crowd.

There is a lot of discussion, why moderators don't give a detailed analysis of pictures. There are several reasons for not giving that:

• Analysing the pictures and writing a critique takes a lot of time. Pictures would wait years in the moderation queue.
• Moderation is not to make you a better photographer, but to protect customers from bad assets.
• You should check your assets before submitting and submit only the best of a range.
• You should check your assets after a refusal and resubmit only if you have corrected all your errors. Generally, after a refusal, I'm pretty fast in spotting the error that I did not see before submitting.

[Nancy OShea]

it would be so nice (and more fair to us) if the reviewer said clearly why the submission was rejected!

By @EzyRider_II

==========

If you want a detailed critique, join a photography club. 

Stock doesn't give detailed feedback on every rejection because that's not their job.  Their job is vetting submissions and connecting customers to highest quality assets.

As a Stock Contributor, you enjoy exposure to millions of potential customers worldwide. And you recieve royaltiies everytime your assets sell. 

[EzyRider_II]

Yes, yes, yes. We know that! And thanks for the advise about the photo club
but I will pass on that. Been there, done that. Too many "experts" give you
advise there about things they know less about than you.
What I meant about providing the real reason for rejection was, that if
Adobe doesn't need more dog and cat photos, that's perfectly fine! Just
don't bundle the rejection under the "quality issues" umbrella, rather say
it out loud that too many dogs already. That would be fine. Thank you all
for the replies. I am personally done with this subject, so as far as I am
concerned, might as well be closed. Thanks again.

[Nancy OShea]

Adobe Stock contains millions & millions of dog images and even more clouds. 

Best advice, find other subjects to submit and stay away from low percentage sellers like flowers, plants, trees, sunsets, clouds & pets.  Compare yours with current inventory.  If Adobe Stock already have 12 million of them, it's a sure bet they don't need more. 

Whatever you submit to Stock must be of highest visual & technical quality and useful for commercial content creators to use in their own projects.  Put yourself in the customer's shoes.  Be creative and think outside the box.

Hope that helps.

[EzyRider_II]

my bestseller (by far!) is a tree : ). but that was a "lucky shot" and seems to be an exception. for the rest (dogs, cats...) you are most likely correct. best to stay away from those. even if hey are dear to you.  

[Abambo]

my bestseller (by far!) is a tree : ).

By @EzyRider_II

Stock works in such a way, that recent sales have more weight in searches. If the asset has many sales and a recent sale, it will come first, as there is a chance that it will earn another sale. That's basic sales tactics.

[jacquelingphoto2017]

Hi @Chris30281789ah3j ,

You get similar rejection if you submit multiple of a subject that does not have significant variation, or if there is an identical or one close to what you submit already in your portfolio. You do not get similar rejection because others have dogs in their portfolio or because Adobe things they have too much dogs in their database. You are allowed one each at different angles, close-up, wide angle, portrait and landscape - a max of six photos of the subject.

Best wishes

Jacquelin

[EzyRider_II]

as a matter of fact Jacquelin some people commented here contrary to what you wrote. i.e.: a photo can get rejected because there is a too similar photo (not youurs) in the database. I have no idea if it is correct or not, but I did read this several times here. I just thrown it in there. again, that's what I read! and supposedly it comes from trustworthy sources. I agree, that it's not fair, because your new (and rejected) photo may be better than the old one in the database, yet...!