I recently submitted several photos to adobe stock hoping some of my work was saleable. Apparently it's not; I had 11 out of 11 rejected. 10 were for quality issues - okay, I have room to improve. No big deal.
But the one that gets me is the one rejected for "Similar image(s) already submitted" because I didn't submit a similar image let alone have one accepted! The image in question is a bright green bush background. It's at the bottom left of the multiple picture screenshot. It doesn't have the same subject, color scheme, or overall vibe as the others. I also wouldn't feel inclined to use it interchangeably with any of the others.
Sooo, what gives? Am I massively underestimating what constitutes "similar images" or does this seem like a mistake? To clarify, I didn't have any other images uploaded besides these ones. So this bright green supposed doppleganger is really frustrating me.
Also, it's making me question whether all 10 of the others should have been discarded or if someone just wasn't paying attention. I can understand the flaws in some of them, but others I just don't know what they didn't find acceptable. I did read guidlines for what could be accepted and I did look at each photo at 100%. I guess I'm just a clueless noob. 😛
Here are three of the other photos if anyone wants to diagnose them.
Thanks for your time. Vent over.
Similar images are already in the database, so, 'similar images' can also actually mean that there are already tons of such images, even though you didn't submit them yourself!
As for the quality of the images, not very good, I'm afraid!
Quality issues such as exposure- there are highlights that have 'burnt out'. No detail in the whites, composition could have been better, and also really important, is the saleability of the photos. How commercially useable are they?
And, somebody was paying attention; if they weren't, they would have passed! (Unfortunate for you.)
Thank you for clarifying that the similarity problem actually means similar to another image somebody already uploaded, not "similar to another image(s) you've already uploaded" (emphasis mine) which is the wording in the feedback I received. If the feedback for the green photo had said something like "we already have something like this" I would not have bothered to question any of the other feedback. But when feedback says "you've already uploaded" something that I know for a fact I didn't upload, there is a lack of accuracy and that raises questions about the overall quality of the feedback.
Also, thanks for your tips on the other photos. I likely don't have the equipment to avoid the overexposure (this is a budget hobby for me) and unfortunately it's often worse on the photos with a better overall composition. So, I will content myself with hanging photos on my own walls, or gifting them to people who like focused subject, unfocused background photos.
What camera are you shooting with?
But when feedback says "you've already uploaded" something that I know for a fact I didn't upload, there is a lack of accuracy
That's correct. However, this refusal is used basically with flower images and sunset/sunrise pictures generally available also from other contributors or for other pictures, where you have similar pictures in the database. The moderator “misuses” this refusal reason, as they don't have a mean to differentiate. Adobe should, however, adjust the standard wording.
This does in no moment mean that other refusals are incorrect.
I likely don't have the equipment to avoid the overexposure (this is a budget hobby for me)
This is not a matter of equipment, but camera settings and careful editing.
who like focused subject, unfocused background photos.
This will also be a problem when printing the image:
The contrast has been destroyed by over processing (probably by your in-camera program).
Regarding the three images you posted for review, the first two have overexposed highlights and the last one is not focused.