Photos was rejected because of quality issue

[Rishabh263843408b0n]

Can anyone suggest the reason for the rejection 

[RALPH_L · Accepted solution]

The first photo (rose) is not focused properly and the upper edges of the inner petals are blown out and have no detail. The photo is also quite noisy.

The third photo (bread) is also out of focus.

The fourth phooto (island) is also out of focus, noisy and has compression artifacts.

[Test Screen Name · Accepted solution]

Horse - imperfect composition. The horse is off centre. Photo not sharp.

Indian village - photo really not sharp. Would also need seven model releases signed by models or parents of models, despite apparent attempts to hide faces.

[Abambo · Accepted solution]

1: out of focus, underexposed: missing whites. Colours are unnatural.

2: Overexposed: missing blacks. Parts of the clouds look unnaturally photoshopped:

3: Where is the focus:

The butter has no structure. This picture looks like one that has been heavily upsized.

4. Full of artefacts:

5: completely unsharp:

6: completely unsharp. Question to a Horse breeder: how many legs does a white horse have?

7: Completely out of focus. If it were in focus, you would have to provide a model release for each person, including this alien:

I would suggest you use real photographs instead of bad AI art. Don't think that any of these pictures is in any way near to get accepted.

If you are new to stock, you should consider these resources: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/tutorials.html
Please read the contributor user manual for more information on Adobe stock contributions: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/user-guide.html
See here for rejection reasons: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html
and especially quality and technical issues: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html

[Jill_C · Accepted solution]

1. Red roses are blurry. There are nearly 1.8 million images of red roses in the database. While photographing and editing flowers is good practice for a beginner, you're unlikely to ever sell one on any stock agency.

2. Clouds has blownout areas which cannot be repaired.

3. Poorly composed, poorly lit, out of focus, blownout highlights 

4. Oversaturated, artifacts everywhere, missing structure/detail presumably due to small sensor (mobile phone?)

5. Blown highlights, cropped too close (where's the top of the head?)

6. Lacking any photo-realism. In addition to the 5th leg noted by @Abambo @the eye has no iris and the coat is blue...

7. This is a blurry mess; the people look like zombies 

[Abambo]

@Jill_C ,

I think they are AI generated and up-scaled.

[Nancy OShea · Accepted solution]

AI generated illustrations have many well-known problems with colors, eyes, mouths, hands, legs & feet. Results are often unacceptable if not ridiculous.  Inspect AI images carefully at increased magnification. If you can't correct the failures manually, don't submit the images. 

[Ricky336 · Accepted solution]

These are for sure AI-generated. An old film camera e.g. the Kodamatic would produce better results!

[Test Screen Name]

If these are AI, then they ARE NOT photos. That is a LIE, and it would be illegal for Adobe to sell them as a photo (in some countries at least). So of course Adobe will reject it for that reason alone.

[Abambo]

If they were good quality (they aren't), they would need to be marked as illustrations according to Adobe's rules. announcing-the-adobe-stock-policy-on-generative-ai-content 

[Abambo]

These are for sure AI-generated. An old film camera e.g. the Kodamatic would produce better results!

By @Ricky336

😄 Including 5 legged horses… I rarely saw such a mass of bad pictures than these AI ones. Even the good ones of them are riddled with mistakes.