Looking for feedback about quality issues

[wilkas]

I would like to learn about quality issues that could be the reason this image was declined.

Thank you

[yamato7]

Is this the same size as the image you submitted?
Please upload the same image as you submitted.

[wilkas]

I did upload 9MB full resolution image, it might have been downscalled for preview

[yamato7]

Sorry, I checked.

As other community experts have mentioned, I'm concerned about the edges of the image being emphasized.
These lines can appear due to the algorithm and sharpening process used when enlarging an image.

[Abambo]

I did upload 9MB full resolution image, it might have been downscalled for preview

By @wilkas

Uploaded assets here do not get modified. 

[daniellei4510]

Haloing and misshapen edges, noticeable even at this size. Slightly underexposed in the shadows.

[wilkas]

Wow, are all these being found automatically? I haven't noticed misshapen edges until you showed me. These bright edges are what you call Haloing? I wonder if these are inherent to AI generated images and if I can easily fix them in post editing.

[daniellei4510]

Haloing can happen in AI images, but it can also happen when an asset is upscaled. There are YouTube videos on how to fix haloing. No, misshapen objects are not found automatically but by moderators. Always view your assets at a minimum of 100% after upscaling. 200% is even better. Sure, lots of issues can be addressed and corrected in Photoshop. It just depends on how much time you are willing to spend fixing things. 

[Abambo]

No they are not found automatically, they are found manually. But one error is enough to earn you a refusal. The moderator's job was particularily easy here, as you do have multiple, easy to detect issues in your asset. Check simply the coal miner's face, nothing in that face is natural: 

Haloing is not inherent to generative AI. They happen, when you sharpen assets to much. So they may have been part of the training images, or they may have been introduced later, with sharpening. When you resize the asset, you will resize also the errors. That is a major issue, connected to resizing.

[Jill_C]

The skin texture is unrealistic and there is haloing around some edges.

[daniellei4510]

In addition to manual editing, keep in mind you have additional AI options to improve the quality of an asset: ChatGPT, GPT Image (available in Firefly), Gemini 2.5 Flash (a.k.a, Nano Banana, also available in Firefly), Krea (image enhancement) and many others. They all come at an additional cost, of course, but if you're dead set on submitting quality content from crappy or at least less than perfect AI, you'll need to take the plunge. I ran this example through ChatGPT and then manually removed the haloing. Would it be accepted? I dunno. The coat looks a little too stylized and cartoonish, but I think you get the idea.

[Abambo]

😂 @daniellei4510 : No, check the cheek! And the skin texture is still bad. 🫣

[daniellei4510]

Oh, there are still plenty of issues. But I do have a limited number of credits. 🙂

[Abambo]

Sure, that proves that "improving" by generative AI may introduce other errors. There are no 25 solutions and one should decide, if it's worth the effort. 

[daniellei4510]

And the time. And again, the credits. Generating AI is a never-ending expense. Is it worth spending, time, effort, and expense on an image might not only be rejected, but never sell if it is?

[Nancy OShea]

This looks like AI.

The texture on everything is oddly synthetic and unnatural.  I would have refused it for that reason alone. 

[wilkas]

I shuold have mentioned this. Yes, this is ChatGPT made, marked as AI content, with a face transfer (my face) and has a person release 🙂

[daniellei4510]

ChatGPT is not my go-to AI platform unless I use it to edit existing AI. It leans heavily on a deep yellow, almost sepia color tint that's difficult to correct.