Image Rejections

[MrGeoff1F]

Hello, I have recently submitted several AI-generated images of women with their Golden Retrievers. For over twenty years I have been a designer who has been using stock photography of people and their pets. I believe these images have plenty of marketing value, but I don't know the reason for rejection, or how to avoid repeating the problem.

[Jill_C]

In the first image, the dog's snout is blurry and the hairs in the woman's forehead are unrealistic. In the second image, the snout is blurry. In the third image, the woman's teeth are odd - too large?

[daniellei4510]

All the images, in addition to what @Jill_C mentioned, could use some touch-up with the fly-away hairs.

[Ricky336]

Hello,

 I would also add white balance, and the skin tones aren't quite right! Try to correct these issues as well.

[MrGeoff1F]

Thanks for the image improvement tips. Much appreciated. I still, however, don't think these items justify "rejection."

[Ricky336]

As these are 'photo-realistic' images, look at them as photos. The tone, contrast, skin tone, and colour balance needs to be corrected. Also, from a portrait perspective, the lighting is wrong! The pictures are also very dull!

[Abambo]

You didn't tell us the reasons for the rejection. Adobe gave you a reason and a stock text. I can only assume that it was “Quality Issues”.

At a first sight, your images are charming, and I suppose that they also could have passed.

Third image:

You have different sharpening planes.

The dog's left eye is sharp, the right eye isn't. The snout is unsharp, the whiskers are oversharp. There is also an oversharpened hair above the right eye.

The woman's eyes are not sharp, but several hairs on her head are oversharpened.

The oversharpened hair would be considered as artefacts.

There are no such geometric transitions than with the other two images, but I see errors in the blurring that are quite obvious:

Second:

I see the same artefacts in the hair of the woman and the dog, and the same inconstancy in the whiskers.

Check also the eyebrows for artefacts due to oversharpening.

And then you have this drawing error:

First:

Your first shows a black border on the right, that is even a “Non-compliant Image” refusal.

And you have a region around the head with a rather high noise level and a sharp border where you have no noise:

Around the dog's right eye at the bottom, you have a white line that makes no sense.

[MrGeoff1F]

Thanks everyone. I touched up the flyaway hairs and resubmitted - and all the images were accepted! So either that was the problem, or this time I got a reviewer who was having a better day!

[Jill_C]

Wow, that's great to hear. They are nice images, and will hopefully generate some sales soon !

[Abambo]

Great news. I wish you much success with those assets.

However, if you just retouched the flyaway hair, then you still have other flaws in the picture. (see my message https://community.adobe.com/t5/stock-contributors-discussions/image-rejections/m-p/14349676#M76371, the second and the first image, my last screen copy each time)

[Festive_epicness157F]

Good news. By the way I think the images are great, but in my view the colors are dull - a bit underexposed. They the to be lightened up and pop up ..! It's a pity because they could be even more attractive to buyers.