Quality issues

[janisp41753227]

Hi all,

Quite a few times I get the "quality issues" feedback which is the most frustrating of all, because it tells you nothing.

For instance, these four photos. I have a theory why they were rejected, but I want to hear some other ideas first.

Any help is much appreciated.

[ricky336 · Accepted solution]

Kia ora,

For all your photos there is a focus problem. The pictures could be sharper, you used a wide aperture which resulted in a shallow depth of field (file 0562 is 1.4). And, you have a distracting background with the lights - file 0723, 0562, 0528. The spotlights in 0723 are very distracting! In the last file, the depth of field is also too shallow.

You should increase your aperture.

There are also signs of some noise in the files.

So, the main issue is focus and a shallow depth of field.

By the way, did you handhold these? Camera shake can also explain why the photos are not as sharp as they could be.

[janisp41753227]

Thank you for the response.
It confirmed my suspicions and is very sad, because there are parts that are in focus and that was how I intended it, but I guess I'm too artsy for stock 🙂 There are so many applications for these types of shots.

The potential of noise is only for 0942, but at this day and age I wouldn't call ISO 1600 noise especially since I've had photos accepted with higher ISO. The others attached were ISO 320.

Yes, these are all handheld, but there is no camera shake, because then nothing would be in focus, because of the wide aperture.
Thank you again!

[janisp41753227]

Actually, rarely, but I remember getting rejections that have stated that the image is out of focus and that's fine, because I can understand that, but this "quality issue" can be anything. Just frustrating, that's all.

[ricky336]

These days, all of the above comes under quality issues - focus, composition, artifacts, exposure... anything to do with the 'quality' of the photo/asset.

[ricky336]

Next time, just have a smaller aperture, say f 5.6/F8; it would give you a bit more depth, especially when taken with a telephone lens. As for noise, unfortunately, this would count - file 0562 - even though it was ISO 320 - it's still noticeable:😒

And this could be sharper!

[janisp41753227]

Could be is the correct term 🙂 5.6 and 8? Next time I'll grab a potato to shoot with 🙂 Just kidding. I get your point.

Thanks for explaining how now all the criteria falls under one umbrella.

Thanks again!!

[Abambo]

If you have a full scale picture and only the little screw is in focus, you have provided a bad asset. With some of your assets, you even have not the screw in focus. They would pass with a correct focus.

[Fabiobtex]

The first three have almost nothing in focus, not even a complete object, the second and third still have an unwanted strong motion blur, the fourth is beautiful in my opinion, but has a lot of noise and was also blurred

[janisp41753227]

Is it required to have a complete object in focus?

There is no motion blur, only a wide aperture and the subject being at such an angle that very little is in focus, but nevertheless, in focus, in fact, those parts are tack sharp in focus, but I understand how it may seem that they are not, unless not zoomed in.

[Abambo]

No, not all needs to be in focus. But focus still needs to be somewhere. The contributor's manual has an entry about focus. 

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

If you are a generative AI contributor, please look into these instructions and fallow them by the letter: https://community.adobe.com/t5/stock-contributors-discussions/generative-ai-submission-guidelines/td...

[winHei54]

Hallo, für was für eine Verwendung sollten solche Fotos gut sein? Überlege mal mit...

[Abambo]

Richtig geschossen, können solche Bilder ihren Reiz haben.

[WernerJB]

I like the pix and I think they would sell. Try to subit them again maybe under another category.

[Jill_C]

No you can't just keep resubmitting rejected images under a different catregory hoping that they'll be accepted. These were rejected for technical issues. If the technical issues can be corrected, it's okay to resubmit. Otherwise, resubmitting "as is" is considered spam and can get your account blocked.