Photos rejected due to technical issues

Hello ZenVikram,

Please find attached some non-technical notes I have made.

Apologies in advance for handwriting on your work, I found it quicker and was with the sole purpose of providing some help beyond the "plain" rejection legend we all might have get once or more in our work. Photos are assumed to be yours and NO plagiarism intentions of any kind at all are pretended from my part. I hope this contribution helps to cover one part of that "big void" of multiple possible rejection reasons.

I am not an Adobe employee nor anybody to convince you about anything, I am just a volunteering dude trying to help people blowing off some steam when their work is rejected.

In other words, trying to provide an "out of the box" perspective. My contribution is with good intentions only and hopefully will produce at least one smile.

For more formal and professional comments listen to the guys that clearly know what they are talking about.

Keep shooting, learning, observing, and specially, having fun!

Cheers,

Vences

PS, Doing some research on camera sensors, Samsung Galaxy A7, has a Sony IMX576 CMOS sensor (6.475mm diagonal). About the Casio mentioned, which I assumed that it might belong to the "Exilim" series, has also a small sensor. That, along other things might have caused the low quality appearance of the photos. Oh! and another thing I've seen here in stock, is that no matter how super-cool-super-sharp the photo is taken and looks on the (a) phone, it is really really different on the computer and I'm pretty sure reviewers don't analyze submitted photos with their smartphones (I hope, actually).

Additionally, if you are some how planning to plunge into the beautiful world of photography, well, there is plenty of options and ways to everybody. The answers you might get, highly depends on who you are asking. That means that recommending you to go and buy a specific brand/model/etc, it is a HUGE deal, and people on the other end, doesn't know how deep the pockets of anybody are... so, that's why I prefer to share, how I started. Used, I started with a used gorgeous second hand Nikon SLR camera (old 35mm film), so cheap and battered that it broke down after just two days of use (lol), and had to have it repaired. Then, with the pass of the years and some learning, I found Canon gear some-how better to the feel in general, as well as "easier" to use (but that could be relative/subjective). Lastly, also consider who's costumer service is better in your country, you never know what accidents could happen while shooting photos out there in nature!

Hello,

In all your photos the composition isn't very good. What are you trying to show? How could these pictures be used commercially?

Smartphone photos also tend not to do so well on stock due to the size of the small sensor. When the pics are enlarged, you get to see the pixels more. There are a number of reasons why.

Have a read of this from Adobe about how to create better photos.
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/how-to/tips-stock-image-acceptance.html?set=stock--fundamentals--adobe-stock-contributor

Also, have a read of this. It's a brief guide on image quality.
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html

First picture: Artefacts due to the phone sensor, unsharp:

Second: Noise, mirror artefacts, artefacts, dust mark.

Third: lower part underexposed and missing contrast, noise

Fourth: guess (artefacts, noise, bad contrast)

Fifth: The first image where I need to look a little deeper: The framing, there is a strange halo around some leaves, missing contrast (may be)

Last: The flower is out of focus.

Before submitting, look at your pictures at 100 or even 200%. At 100% the image needs to be flawless: Noise, sharpness, artefacts.

In general images should have a correct contrast and a correct white balance.