We have a brand new look! Take a tour with us and explore the latest updates on Adobe Support Community.
I'm new to Adobe Stock, but have been using stock images for a year or two now. I finally was able to purchase a DSLR worthy of Stock images, and I will always try and get some stock-type shots whenever I'm out shooting. Not much material recently, but I was able to grab a few that I thought could do okay on Adobe Stock. They've all gotten rejected for technical issues, so I was hoping to get some insight. It'd be nice if they gave a little more description pertaining to the technical issue.
I would have just inserted them into the text box for easier viewing, but the files were too big. Sorry.
The attached images aren't all of my submissions that have been denied, just the ones that I thought for sure would be accepted. I know that the last image, of the mountains + river has a little bit of artifacting when you zoom-in a lot on it, but I thought its not easy to tell until really zoomed in.
For reference, the first two photos were taken with a Nikon D7000, (16.2mp sensor), and the kit Nikkor 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6. I'm aware the glass quality isn't great, but I thought it adequate enough for stock photos.
The last photo was taken on a compact/bridge camera, althogh I have printed that image out poster size and it looks fine.
Sorry for the long post, just wanted to get some constructive criticism to get my photos on stock. Thanks!
I also wanted to note, when uploading JPEGS that were processed by my DSLR I get a quality alert. It initially asks me, this image may be too low quality, submit anyway? I chose yes, as I haven't found any quality issues, and a 16.2mp sensor is plenty high resolution, although I'm aware an 18, 20, 24, or 48 mp sensor would be preferable. However, weirdly enough, when uploading photos from my 12mp compact/bridge camera, there was no quality notice, and you can actually tell a visual quality difference when looking at photos from both side-by-side. Any guidance on this would be appreciated as well. (Lightroom exports (editing RAW .NEF files from my DSLR) to JPEG Large does not get the quality alert.)
You do get artifacts when enlarged. For the mountains and river, you are also getting noise - which isn't good for stock.
It looks 'grainy'.
It's the same issue with the other pics.
For stock as well, better to take the pics in raw format, use photo editing software such as Lightroom - you need to do some post-processing - and then save to JPEG. You can control the output quality, whereas with the camera in-processing, you don't have any control.
Have a read of this. It's a brief guide on image quality:
Thank you for the prompt response! I was aware of the artifacting in the one photo, but I wasn't sure how much of an issue that would be. Regarding post-processing, I typically edit everything that I want to use for something, and very rarely use the camera's JPEGS. The photo with the music stand was in fact edited in lightroom, and so was the shot of the walkway. I uploaded the walkway photo previously without any editing, and it was not accepted, so I uploaded again with an edited veresion to balance out the shadows of the bridge and highlights in the background.
The compact/bridge camera does not allow for RAW shooting, so I don't have very much control over them unfortunately. I also studied the guides pretty extensively prior to uploading, and was a little bit dissapointed.
Hi @Brennan5FB7 ,
Photos bought are used in different sizes, extra large, large, medium, small. For example the display photo on your computer if not in all cases, in some cases are stock photos. You know There are monitors of different sizes, hence noisy images with artifacts would be very unsightly, hence the reason to submit clean, good quality images. All images are noisy, both chromatic and luminance. The shaded areas could be lighted a bit. The sea photo is under exposed.
There are coloring at the left edge of this frame that should not be there.
excessive color noise, along with the luminance.
When you do in-camera processing you run the risk of over compressed images. This destroys the quality of your file. If you haven't done so as yet, read-up about the functions of your camera, so that you can take the best quality possible with it. Do all post processing externally using a photo editor with camera raw plug-in such as Photoshop. Use the camera raw to edit. You will need to take care to correct exposure, color balance, contrast, etc. Also you will need to clean noise and so on. I've uploaded a few that was taken with camera without RAW format that are accepted, some got sold. You just need to practice until you get it right.
Appreciate the reply, and your insight. You're right about the under-exposure, and I know that they will be used in a variety of sizes, I just didn't pay close enough attention to the Sea photo especially, to notice the artifacts that badly. Like I said in my previous reply, I do in fact export RAW files when using my DSLR, and always post process them using Photoshop/Lightroom. My issue was simply that I was using a camera before I had a DSLR that didn't have RAW capabilities. I have gotten 10 or so photos accepted since I made this post, and I'm slowly figuring out what exactly I need to especially tweak in my photos.