Hello, all. I'm hoping for some insight, as I'm a bit frustrated trying to figure out what makes Adobe accept some of my photos and not others. I always post 12 at a time. With my past several posts Adobe has accepted 10 of 12, so I thought I was getting the hang of it. My last two posts were unusual in that 1) they were assessed within 2 days of being posted, which is much faster than usual and 2) half or more were rejected. All of the rejections were for "technical issues" which tells me nothing.
I've attached four photos that I did not expect to be rejected and would love some insight as to why. Is there any way the reasons for rejection could be made a little more specific? I'm sure I'm not the only person frustrated by this.
Thank you for any help you can offer.
Hi Lilli. Indeed it is frustrating. If I were you, I would submit again picture 1. For picture 2, I would erase the electrical cables and submit again. I would forget about picture 3 because of the bad lighting. And finally, I would also forget about picture 4 as only parts of it are in focus. Keep shoting, keep posting, keep having fun. Don't let the rude comments minimize your pleasure.
Thanks so much for your help. I wasn't sure whether it was permissible to re-submit the same photo. Is it in the hopes of having a different reviewer look at it? One of the things that confuses me is that there are photos of mine that I know are not of the best quality but were accepted. Do different reviewers have different guidelines? It certainly seems that way.
Anyway, thanks again. I really appreciate your advice.
The guidelines are the same, but some moderators are more demanding than others. I suppose also that if you are tired, you are more inclined to let pass an image than when you start freshly.
Be very careful not to spam the system.
Images that are bad should not be submitted. If a buyer acquires them and complains, it will be retrieved anyhow. Check your images critically at 100% and only if they are flawless, correctly framed and the white balance is correct you can submit.
Thank you very much for your advice.
OMG ! Abambo!
the system can be spammed ??😳 baby Jesus! I better delete those ugly things I submitted to test moderators/reviewers !
so much to keep learning from the Masters 🤯
thanks a lot
Image one: It looks like you applied agressive noise reduction. The white balance is incorrect. It's to bluish. Also the logos on the kites will probably make the image fail.
Image two: there is noise in the sky and typical for phone images it's missing detail, especially in the background.
Image three: Only the outside of only one flower is sharp. The heart of the flower is unsharp. This image is basically unsellable.
Image 4: The insect is not sharp, blossoms in the foreground seam to be sharp, but that's not enough. The insect should be the point of interest.
If the error is correctable (like photoshopping logos), you may resubmit. It may also be that a resubmit image will pass without modification as the moderation process is human based and sometimes errors happen (refused but should pass or passed but should be refused). I had an image where my iPhone was visible 3 times refused, before I had the brilliant idea to photoshop out the round button. Before that I tried to photoshop different elemts that I thaught would disturb the moderator. But you shouldn't take advantage of this. Excessive resubmitting will be considered as spam.
Some pictures like sunsets and flowers or pets will be refused very often on minor flaws that do not disturb on rarer subjects. The problem is that such images are abundantly represented, so Adobe can afford to apply the most stringent quality requirements.
Just as a point of information, I looked at the original of image one and I had not adjusted the color at all. That's what the sky and water looked like in Portugal when I was there. 🙂
I wouldn't submit these images again. It's not worth the effort to correct and would probably be rejected again anyway.
The kite photo, I think the white balance is fine, but the logos on the kite will be a problem. When enlarged you can see the pixels - it's a bit 'blocky'.
The tree, well, what does it show - a tree! Commercial appeal is lacking.
Flower photo nothing special - sorry, and as mentioned the focus isn't good.
Also the flower and insect picture - dosen't actually show anything, and the focus isn't good.
Overall, the composition of the photos is not so good, and there are quality issues which have been pointed out...
Move on and keep taking pictures. Learn from the ones that aren't accepted.
Have a read of this from Adobe about how to create better photos.
Thanks very much for your advice. I can see that there is a lot of subjectivity even among the experts. I am trying to learn from the ones that aren't accepted, but it would be helpful if they would say something more specific than "technical issues" so I can know what I did wrong.
I can see that there is a lot of subjectivity even among the experts.
There is not a lot of subjectivity in the in the evaluation proces at least not Ricky's and my advice. Focus is a technical issue, and we all pointed to that. I still think that the white balance is a little off and that does not mean that Ricky is wrong. And that you did not change the colour is also not a good argument, because sometimes you NEED to adjust the white balance.
Commercial appeal is a refusal on its own and means that Adobe does not see an incentive to add the picture into their database. But Ricky is right here too. Adobe may refuse the picture on those grounds, if they are perfect from a technical point of view.
Also the logos would be an intellectual property refusal.
Yes it would be nice if moderators would be more precise in their refusal reason. But first, they don't have the time, second the refusals are standard texts, so the same refusal gets issued in multiple languages and third it would make people complaining that they corrected what the moderator was ponting out and now they got refused on a different ground and third the moderator refuses the picture on the first ground he or she finds. And with experience you will get better in those things and you do not need help anymore.
Ask yourself if the image is technically perfect and worthy of use in a million dollar ad campaign? That's what people buy. If it's not that good, then probably not ready for Adobe Stock although other image houses might accept it.
Nancy, thanks for your advice. It makes perfect sense.
First I must say I like the composition of your files. The subjects are easily identified. I especially like that of the tree. I will however weigh on the technical issues.
DSC1031 has multiple vertical line streaks that should not be there. The colors should be smooth.
Image 2173: There is a wide band of blue color fringing in the highlights of the tree that should not be there. If you view the histogram for that image you should see blue peak at highlights.
DSC2294: The dynamic range is too high. The shadows are too dark in relation to the highlights that have caused details to be lost.
DSC3676: Not sufficient depth of field. Too much of the subject is out of focus.
The details of some of your images are lost. For example, I cannot say what tree it is.Images without details, will not sell. Therefore you will need to pay attention to details. Also as highlighted before, view your images at 100 to 200% to make sure they are without flaws.
Thanks so much for your detailed critique. I see understand everything you explained except for one thing.
I am confused abut the vetical blue streaks you are seeing on the first picture (DSC 1031). I can't see them and no one else has mentioned them. Can you explain further? I'm just trying to see what I'm missing.
Please take a close look at this 100% zoomed patch:
If you are unable to see it clearly, you may need to zoom to between 150 and 200%. This was zoomed to 100%. The image is also extremely noisy - both color and chromatic noise.
I had not seen that. Now I can't unsee it! Thanks again for all your help.
Please find attached some non-technical notes I have made.
Apologies in advance for handwriting on your work, I found it quicker and was with the sole purpose of providing some help beyond the "plain" rejection legend we all might have get once or more in our work. Photos are assumed to be yours. NO plagiarism intentions of any kind at all are pretended from my part. I hope this contribution helps to cover one part of that "big void" of multiple possible rejection reasons.
I am not an Adobe employee nor anybody to convince you about anything, I am just a volunteering dude trying to help people blowing off some steam when their work is rejected.
In other words, trying to provide an "out of the box" perspective. My contribution is with good intentions only and hopefully will produce at least one smile.
For more formal and professional comments listen to the guys that clearly know what they are talking about.
Keep shooting, learning, observing, and specially, having fun!
PS Really nice work overall. After reading quite some rejection posts (from way back in time to present day), it seems that perhaps there is something going on with how or with "what" reviewers evaluate submitted photos. I think that the amount of uploads might not be of crucial importance, I have uploaded and submitted up to 45 images in a single hit, sometimes just one, and in my case, they always take a minimum of 10 days, for 1 or +30 photos. But your case is intriguing me, I got to say. I don't know more and I am just openly speculating, because I'm curious too. One day, we might get it.
Thank you so much for your wonderful notes. You are very kind to have taken the time to notate my pictures so I can see exactly what you are talking about. Adobe should hire you to do these critiques :-).
There were two things that were odd about my last two submissions. I have always submitted 12 photos at a time. Seems like a nice round number. In the past, as you have seen, it always took 10-14 days to receive a response. So it was very unusual to have one group reviewed within a day and the other in 2 days.
The other thing that was different was the number of rejections. I've only been submitting photos for a couple of months. I was thrilled when 3 of my first dozen were accepted. Gradually the percent of acceptances grew to where they were taking 10 of 12. It was jarring to suddenly feel that I was back to the beginning. Now it's more than possible that I just selected a bad bunch of photos to submit (but twice? Maybe).
Just in answer to some of your questions/comments:
That insect is a midge fly. I had to look it up. It really does look like that. Since I got my macro lens I've been meeting lots of bugs I had never seen before. There is a moth that looks like a cross between a honeybee and a fly. Took me a long search on Google to find out what it was. I only saw it once and was unable to catch a good shot, but it is on my bucket list.
The background looks like that because of the arrangement of the plants. There is a large clematis vine behind the right side of the plant. You've commented on the backgrounds of two photos so I need to try to take them into more account. I just get so excited sometimes that I only focus on the subject and forget to look at the rest.
The spot on the left in the tree picture I believe to be a bird in the distance. Would Adobe accept it if I DID place a horse in the field? 🙂
I really like the shot with the kites and the gull so it was disappointing to see all the negative comments, however true they are. There have been many comments about the logos. I've run into that with other photos but didn't think the writing on the kites were logos in the typical sense. Can you please tell me what you wrote on the bottom left in red? Something about the sky but I can't make out several of the words.
An interesting note (to me, at least): I recently submitted to another site all of my photos that Adobe had accepted so far (over 70) and that site accepted only half of the ones that Adobe did! So is that site too fussy or Adobe not fussy enough? Just wondering. Every one of those submissions (about 10-15 at a time) was reviewed within 10 minutes! So it appears that AI is heavily used there. Then, as an experiment, I submitted a few photos that Adobe had rejected and they accepted 3 of them. Huh?
I recently retired after 40 years in a very stressful profession and have taken the opportunity to return to a hobby that I had long been unable to pursue. I sometimes do have to remind myself that this is just for fun...
Anyway, thanks again very much for your witty and constructive comments. You're great.
You are the very first person that has taken the time to write such a magnificient post (can I call you my Fan #1?). I truely appreciate it, my "trademark" is that, producing fun by challenging myself to be creative with non offensive critique, and hopefully turn frustration into a little smile and encouragement. Sometimes I come up with good ones, and other days not much.
Yes, it'll be some kind of dream to be "hired" to do this (specially after being laid off from my full time job due to COVID), but I imagined that probably I'll start seen it as work and perhaps, loose some creativity, who knows. In the mean time, I take this as therapy for myself, trying to help here as I can. Quickly abandon the idea of making lots of sells, no, I rather prefer to learn and help, "fame" will come later... I hope 😛
Once again, thanks a lot for your letters. Let's keep having fun 😄
I like your photos very much. Your landscapes are amazing. I really love that bee on the pink flower! You are doing great with whatever lens you are using. Maybe I can borrow one of your prairie dogs to place in the field next to that oak tree? (Just kidding).
My macro is a mid-range one. I'm still learning the ins and outs of using it. I treated myself to it with the money I've saved in gas and other expenses by staying home. 🙂 Right now my only distraction from the insanity out there is photography so I figure the occasional new piece of equipment is good for my mental health.
You're right about getting attached to some of our work. I think it's inevitable but understand that photography is very subjective and one person's masterpiece may be another's "meh".
If you are interested, here are my photos https://stock.adobe.com/contributor/209543411/Lillidale
Clearly we have very similar taste in photo subjects. I love photographing birds, flowers and the other assorted wildlife that hang around my back yard. I have several bird feeders that are visited by over a dozen species of birds (And squirrels. And chipmunks.). I'm working on getting shots of all of them. There are a lot of immatures about at this time of year and I'm getting some of them as well. The spiders are starting to spin their webs now and I'd like to capture some shots of those as well as the butterflies that have recently appeared.
May I go out on a limb and guess that you are in western Canada? I'm in the very eastern edge of Pennsylvania. No mountains here. The "mountain" that I live on is only 400ft above sea level!
I'm so sorry about you being laid off; it has to be scary. I hope you will be called back to work soon. I was extremely fortunate in being able to sell my business a year ago. I don't think I would be able to handle the stress of trying to run it during this disastrous time.
I'm very much enjoying corresponding with you and would like to keep it up if you are in agreement. It's nice to have a fun communication when one has been essentially trapped at home for months on end. If you are willing, perhaps we can exchange home email addresses? Totally up to you.