Images Rejected

[SHRINIDHI22309717i342]

I got my images rejected..Any experts who can provide any opinion?.....

[David W Cox]

Were the reasons for rejection the same. Did some call out no commercial intent? This would help the experts answer better

[RALPH_L · Accepted solution]

Commercial value is not the problem. 

Each photo has some technical issues. Several have White Balance problems.

Meaning some are too yellow, some too blue.

Focus (depth of field) is also a problem in some of the photos.

Fringing between dark and light areas is also noticable in some of the photos.

The skies are all burnt out with no detail.

Also, watch your cropping. Parts of branches or other objects lcut off on the side must be removed. 

Be careful of framing. Turning the camera at an angle when it does not add to the photo is not accepted.

[SHRINIDHI22309717i342]

Thanks much!! Happy holidays..

[Abambo · Accepted solution]

0003: some faults:

Under exposed: 

Painterly look:

Clearly the refusal reason was technical issues.

The picture is out of focus.

(...)820:

The picture should be level, to have it like this diagonally does not help the viewer and does not enhance the picture.

The automatic post-processing did take some fur detail as noise and optimized it out.

The white balance is utterly wrong. This happens when having either the wrong lighting or if the colours are dominated by one colour.

(...)536:

Shadows and mid-tones to dark, whites to dominant, painterly look due to in-camera post-processing for probably noise reduction.

(...)706: Shadows to dark, there is no structure in the trees' bark. The overall image is underexposed.

(...)627: Shadows to dark :

Noise and other HDR induced artefacts.

(...)205: Wrong white balance (too cool), underexposed, no blacks, missing contrast and more defects:

The right side is the quick and dirty corrected image, but it's by far not yet acceptable. Details have been optimized out. All in all, a typical small sensor camera image. However, the white balance on such an image could be correct.

My opinion: All of these images have been refused because of technical issues, and that's probably the reason you should have given to us. You should examine critically your potential submissions for technical issues on a big screen where you can set the magnification to 100% and 200% in your image viewer. Don't assume, what is looking good in small is usable for stock.

If you are new to stock, you should consider these resources: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/tutorials.html
Please read the contributor user manual for more information on Adobe stock contributions: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/user-guide.html
See here for rejection reasons: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html
and especially quality and technical issues: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html

[SHRINIDHI22309717i342]

Thanks. Appreciate your response..Please...next time..use a humble
tone....can see some attitude...

[Abambo]

?

[Test Screen Name]

Perhaps you can suggest specific word changes in the reply, which will cause you less offence. Or you can be happy that people volunteered perhaps an hour of their own time to help an aspiring commercial artist. 

And, in future BE SURE to give us the rejection reasons. This is important, because guessing may waste your time as well as ours.

[SHRINIDHI22309717i342]

Sure Master.....even better would be for "Volunteers" to perhaps not waste their hour and just jump to the point....but.. .hey....there are plenty out their willing to give free advice....thanks for your "precious " time sir....you have a nice day...