More Rejcted Images

[teddyholt]

Hi

This appears to be a common subject !!

I am not a prolific submitter of images but until a few months back I would rarely have an image rejected for technical reasons ehch are so vague as to be useless.

I shoot in raw and use the adobe editor to convert to jpg. I occasionally boost the saturation a little and modify exposure levels. I have got into the habit of sharpening a tad and some noise reduction if over 400 ISO. 

The first image image below was rejected and the second accepted afer I reconverted and did not sharpen or perform noise reduction. Could the 3rd image have been rejected as it is deemed to breach copyright ?

Unfortunately I appear to be unable to be unable to attach any images as I exceed the limit.  The files are 14mb each. So should I resave them at smaller sizes ?

Help

[Abambo]

There is no image attached here. Use the drag and drop area and upload one image. 

Quality issues is about errors in the image file.

IP issues are a separate refusal. Assets may have multiple issues, the first one detected triggers the refusal.

Shooting bad pictures in raw still means that the pictures are bad. Shooting in raw only allows for a wider range of editing. That does not mean that the asset is of good quality. ISO 400 and above normally needs some consequential noise reduction processing.

[Jill_C]

Yes, save them to a smaller size, 47MB max, to allow upload here in the forum.

[Abambo]

OP's files are 14Mb. 3 files should pass without modification.

[teddyholt]

Thanks.

Maybe there is something odd going on somewher they would still not uplpad at 14mb, even one at a time so resaved them at a smaller size and uploaded successfull,

[teddyholt]

This image was rejected :-

[teddyholt]

This image was accpted

[Jill_C]

You uploaded the same image twice ?

[teddyholt]

No, I submitted the same image but without any noise reduction or sharpening. I have had a lot of images rejected recenly which appear to be since I I started using a different option in the Imagenomic noise reduction. The second image was the same photo but with no noise reduction. I have resubmitted other images having removed noise reduction which have subsequently been accepted. It just seems a bit mad - maybe it is just that different Abode quality checkers look at images difeerently somehow.

[Jill_C]

One of the files - marked "x" in the description is so tiny as to make it useless for evaluation here. I can't see any difference between these files. Perhaps the NR you're applying is softening the images too much? Have you tried using the noise reduction in LRC? At ISO 500 perhaps NR wasn't even necessary...

It's definitely possible that different Adobe Stock Reviewers look at images differently; there's always an opportunity for human error in that process.

[Abambo]

At ISO 500 perhaps NR wasn't even necessary...

By @Jill_C

It was probably necessary, but noise reduction is not straight always the same.

[Abambo · Accepted solution]

Check your assets at 100% and you will see the difference.

Left is the rejected, right is the accepted image. You see immediately a huge difference in the image quality.

As a side note: Both images should have been rejected because they expose huge compression artefacts. But the right image is also cutting down the image dynamic.

[Nancy OShea]

You never get something for nothing. 

Adjustments always result in trade-off of some kind. The trick is knowing how much adjustment to apply and when to back-off to ensure highest possible image quality. 

In my world, there is no (I repeat no), preset that can automagically factor for every possible situation.  Some human decision making is always required. 

[teddyholt]

I'm mot really sure where to put this reply but it a general reply to the posts I have received.

Thanks for all your help but there is something very odd going on here. The system will not let me post the actual images (14mb each) saying they are too large. I therefore saved them again, re-converted from the original RAW format, as smaller images whch has therefore degraded their quality. Both images are from the same RAW image. Why there is such a difference between the 2 images quality wise is a complete mystery to me.

I am at a complete loss. I never used to have as many rejections as I am getting now. This seemed to start when I changed the settings used in the Imagenomc noise reduction add-on to Photosop Elements 15. I shall be more selective in when to use it and when not.

Thanks again - I just wish there was more info given by approvers as to why an image is being rejected. But I do understand that this would be somwhat time-consuming !!

Cheers

Teddy

[Abambo]

The system will not let me post the actual images (14mb each) saying they are too large.

By @teddyholt

You are inserting your pictures in the post, instead of attaching them.

Don't insert (cloud, 1) or use the image icon (2), but use the “drag & drop” area or click the “browse” link (3).

[teddyholt]

Thanks !

[Abambo]

Wrong image!

[teddyholt]

You can't get much more ironic than a converstion about an issue with images that ends with a failed image tha cannot be displayed !! Oddly if I click on it, it opens !  You are not missing much anyway it was a very unflattering self-portait from a few years back. I had dragged and dropped it but just tried browsing instead just to see if it works ? 

Well, not a very flattering self potrai Iagree.

[Abambo]

The self-portrait is not flattering because of the wide angel lens and the very closeness of the face. And when you can't hold the camera as you need and when you look at the screen, instead into the lens. But if it's not something you need advice about, it should not be posted here. 

I really thought it was one of your pictures from above. 

[teddyholt]

Sor ry - just meant as a sign-off sinature type of theing. No advice sought - I know it is crap on every level. 

[Abambo]

Sor ry - just meant as a sign-off sinature type of theing. No advice sought - I know it is crap on every level. 

By @teddyholt

You could use it as your avatar…