• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Exit Search
0

Photos rejected due to 'quality issues'

Community Beginner ,
Feb 10, 2023 Feb 10, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hello,

 

Since I started using my new camera in December, I've noticed that a lot of/most of the photos (although not all) I upload are being rejected. I wonder if this is a coincidence since I'm getting far more rejections than before. 'Quality issues' is the reason being given. Is there anything I can do about this? I'm editing out signs/logos etc as before.  I've included a few examples of recent photos I've tried to upload.

 

Any advice would be appreciated.

TOPICS
Contributor critique , Contributors , Troubleshooting

Views

826

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines

correct answers 2 Correct answers

Community Expert , Feb 10, 2023 Feb 10, 2023

Hello,

Overall, you have to think about the composition of the photos.

You have to think about exposure. The picture of the square - 0645 - you've got strong shadows, the shadows are too black, as well as the perspective of the building; they're leaning to a degree. Same with 0770. And with 0595, what are you trying to show? What is the subject?

Be very mindful that Adobe Stock is selling pictures commercially, so the picture must have some commercial use behind it. What can the picture be used

...

Votes

Translate

Translate
Community Expert , Feb 10, 2023 Feb 10, 2023

IMG_0645.JPG - leaning verticals, underexposed shadows, clumsily edited areas - for instance the white wall next to the 2 women on the left. Had this not been rejected for quality issues, it would need a model release for each of the recognizable people.

IMG_0770.JPG - same here, but you've blurred out some faces in a very noticeable way, which is not going to be accepted

IMG_0595.JPG - not in sharp focus, chromatic aberration 

.

 

 

Votes

Translate

Translate
Community Expert ,
Feb 10, 2023 Feb 10, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hello,

Overall, you have to think about the composition of the photos.

You have to think about exposure. The picture of the square - 0645 - you've got strong shadows, the shadows are too black, as well as the perspective of the building; they're leaning to a degree. Same with 0770. And with 0595, what are you trying to show? What is the subject?

Be very mindful that Adobe Stock is selling pictures commercially, so the picture must have some commercial use behind it. What can the picture be used for? How can it be used? Why would someone download it?

It would be a really good idea to read through some of the Adobe help guides. For example, start with this, and follow the links in the guide:

https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/user-guide.html

 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Feb 10, 2023 Feb 10, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Seems odd that those things are such an issue now, since I've uploaded over 2300 photos without issue over the past few years, of similar subjects to those and making little alteration to contrast etc.  And many which were previously rejected have been accepted at a later date, so it's clearly not an exact science. This is the first time that whole batches of files have been rejected at once, it's not the norm.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Feb 10, 2023 Feb 10, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I would suggest that now due to the volume of pictures being sent/submitted, the moderators are now paying more attention to the quality. So, you should think about the overall quality of the picture to get a high acceptance rate; the issues that I pointed out you need to consider for future uploads.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Feb 10, 2023 Feb 10, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Maybe so, but my photos are clearly considered to be of some value, considering that my photos have two years in a row now been included in the site's free collection and I've had 900 downloads, which across 2300 files, isn't the worst ratio, surely. And I do know a number of possible 'commercial uses' for my work, having happened across it several times by chance. I don't really appreciate being told what might appeal to people and what might not, given that. The 'quality' of my photos has been entirely consistent throughout, so, still, I'm really not sure what's changed.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Feb 10, 2023 Feb 10, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Nonetheless, I'll look into your comments re brightness/composition.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Feb 12, 2023 Feb 12, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

quote

I'm really not sure what's changed.


By @Calum264426994hah

=========

Adobe customers still want highest visual & technical quality for use in commercial projects: TV commercials, billboard ads, magazines and merchandise: posters, textile prints, calendars, t-shirts, tote bags, etc...

 

Nothing remains the same. The quality bar is higher today than it was a few years ago.  Camera & lighting equipment and computer software are much improved, contributors are better at their craft now than when they started.  If you're not keeping up, you're falling behind.  It's that simple.

 

Try new things.  Look at subjects from new angles, experiment with different focal distances and settings.  If your budget allows it, buy 1 or 2 new lenses. Mix things up.  Keep working until you find your own unique style, whatever that may be.

 

Hope that helps.

 

Nancy O'Shea, Product User & Community Expert
Alt-Web Design & Publishing ~ Web : Print : Graphics : Media

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Feb 12, 2023 Feb 12, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Certainly not against trying new things!

 

Based on what I've submitted previously, what would you suggest I could look into more in the future?

 

https://stock.adobe.com/uk/contributor/206158428/calumsmith0308

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Feb 12, 2023 Feb 12, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I put together a list of inspiration ideas below.  Or make your own list.

https://community.adobe.com/t5/stock-contributors-discussions/looking-for-inspiration-what-to-submit...

 

Take some blank model releases along with you on location shoots.  They could be important to have.

 

 

Nancy O'Shea, Product User & Community Expert
Alt-Web Design & Publishing ~ Web : Print : Graphics : Media

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Feb 10, 2023 Feb 10, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

IMG_0645.JPG - leaning verticals, underexposed shadows, clumsily edited areas - for instance the white wall next to the 2 women on the left. Had this not been rejected for quality issues, it would need a model release for each of the recognizable people.

IMG_0770.JPG - same here, but you've blurred out some faces in a very noticeable way, which is not going to be accepted

IMG_0595.JPG - not in sharp focus, chromatic aberration 

.

 

 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Feb 10, 2023 Feb 10, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hello,

 

Thank you for that somewhat more constructive feedback. In regard to blurring, how far do I actually need to go? Do logos, for instance, need to be totally hidden or simply not recognisable as anything recognised? I'm certainly not keen on any more blurring than absolutely necessary but also do not want images rejected for the opposite reason.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Feb 10, 2023 Feb 10, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

You should not blur, you should edit. Edit out anything that does disallow commercial use, like logos, in a way that the edit is not seen. I doubt that you have similar assets accepted and that there are sales on such assets. 

 

You also need to avoid people, where you did not get model releases.

 

The assets here are rightfull refusals. The 2 first have strong editing errors an yes, the strong shadows are disturbing. The third picture shows chromatic strong aberration.

 

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Feb 10, 2023 Feb 10, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Okay. I have a few images which have sold where I've blurred out shop signs etc, but in those instances it was not especially prominent or obvious, so what you're saying does sound reasonable. Re people, obviously hard to avoid completely, but as long as they are in the middle distance or beyond, I've normally had such assets accepted in the past.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Feb 11, 2023 Feb 11, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

quote

Okay. I have a few images which have sold where I've blurred out shop signs etc, but in those instances it was not especially prominent or obvious, so what you're saying does sound reasonable. Re people, obviously hard to avoid completely, but as long as they are in the middle distance or beyond, I've normally had such assets accepted in the past.


By @Calum264426994hah


I do not know what you understand by "past", but all the rules were well in place when I started several years ago to submit. People should not be visible, and it is not a question if it is hard to avoid them or not. If people a recognizable, they need to sign a model release, or you should not submit. If such assets got accepted, the moderator made an error. 

 

I also do not know what assets sold, but I can assure you, that if I would buy an asset like this, with blurred logos, instead of cleanly edited out logos, I would complain about the asset. I've seen some assets, that have been bought by customers, and they got deleted, because of the amateurish editing. 

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Feb 12, 2023 Feb 12, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Surely such assets shouldn't have been accepted in the first place if the editing was so 'amateurish'. I've seen numerous examples of blurred images for sale on this site. Although I do wonder if the images submitted are actually moderated by someone individually or if you make use of AI. I'm sure you can clarify...

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Feb 12, 2023 Feb 12, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Moderation is done by humans and as of my experience, they are very stringent. If you have a different experience and your pictures sell, then, I suppose, are the buyers not using them to be reproduced in high quality. Website use won't see much of the defects.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Feb 12, 2023 Feb 12, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Erm, yeah, but how do you know that my defective images that your moderators accept are only going to be used by those who download them on websites? Seems a bit presumptuous to me...

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Feb 12, 2023 Feb 12, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

It's not presumptuous, it's a matter of experience. If you have errors like the ones in the assets you presented here, and I would licence them for print, I would ask for a refund. If I licence for the web, the errors won't shine through. I have 30+ years of experience in print and web. I've seen all bad images possible. I've enhanced images that were completely destroyed. I know the hours you can spend to get something out of bad images. If you do a banner, the errors will jump in sight. If you do a flyer, and you do not check your images before the good for print, you will have a nasty hour with your boss in his office. Believe me, quality issues jump to the eyes in print, they get overlocked with websites. The needed resolution is different. Details are not that important.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Feb 12, 2023 Feb 12, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I don't care how many years of experience you have. I find your tone highly patronising and I love how you haven't actually answered my question at all. I've made Adobe money from my photography and probably got far less back in return. 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Feb 12, 2023 Feb 12, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Maybe you didn't read my first sentence: Moderation is done by humans!

 

And well, this is amateurish editing:

Abambo_0-1676237569059.png

 

You're welcome.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Feb 12, 2023 Feb 12, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I read it fine, thank you.

 

You still haven't answered my question as to why assets are being accepted which are clearly blurry in places. You aren't to know in advance that they'll only be used on websites.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Feb 12, 2023 Feb 12, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Because human moderators refuse assets by error and accept assets by error. Accepting by error rarely gets a contributor posting here. But customers post in the stock forum, when they detect such items, and there is an Adobe team reevaluating such assets. And no, the moderators just look into the pictures and if they find an error, they refuse. They don't assume a specific use.

 

It's just the case, that certain errors in a file only jump to the eye with certain applications. For websites, images get scaled down and defects may disappear by this operation. In the contrary, print files often get used at a higher than design size (pop-up banners, wall papers as an example) and the blemishes get amplified by that.

 

It's the way it is.

 

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Feb 12, 2023 Feb 12, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

'Because human moderators refuse assets by error and accept assets by error.'

 

Must be one hell of a lot of erroneous acceptances, then. But, as you say, 'it's the way it is'.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Feb 13, 2023 Feb 13, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

There are massively many assets checked and added to the database each day. A small error rate is to be accepted. Now with the massive arrival of the first generative AI assets, there was an invasion of 3-handed characters, or characters with 6 fingers or things like that. At a first sight they looked OK, so they passed. Now, moderators are trained to those errors, I hope they refuse them straight away.

 

So yes, if assets look OK at the first sight, they may pass, even if they are not OK if you take a more profound look into it.

 

Refusals are frustrating, and my first refusals were quite a shock. I had logos in and thought that little logos does not make the picture unusable. It's a street picture, after all. I had also pictures accepted by error here. And I have pictures refused here for quality issues that sell well on other sites, and vice versa.

 

And then there are those pictures, where you have to decide: correctly exposed or under/overexposed. It may pass or not. Not all pictures are straight failures.

 

I look into my failures and if I cannot solve the issue, I move on.

 

Especially for logos, I look beforehand if there are many and if they are easy to edit out. If yes, I do it. If not, they may pass as illustrative editorial.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Feb 13, 2023 Feb 13, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LATEST

Fair enough.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines