18
Replies
They get rejected for “quality” issues.I understand the need to have high standards, but these folks appear to bereally into themselves.Ed Printz
By @Ed Printz
You need to check your assets like a (good) moderator does. No noise, correct white balance, nice histogram, sharp, but not oversharpened, chromatic aberration corrected, good composition.
The "problem" here is that they are really good in checking real photos. So they see the slightest deviation from the ideal.
So, they actually pay thesejudges to make wrong determinations?…
By @Ed Printz
They are humans. Humans err. But not here.
And they err more often on the other side, accepting assets that should get a refusal. At least that is what we see numerous times, when people complain that this picture passed and that other one got refused.
And you have to know, moderators do not need to check all of the asset. They refuse at the very first error they see. The more errors you have in your picture, the easier their task is. And to point to oine of your errors: noise is easy to see. So your first, without the noise could have passed, even that it is slightly underexposed.
Don't get me wrong, I love noise in pictures. I often add it to give a picture a certain look and feel. But that's something I can do as a buyer. It's easier to start with a clinical clean asset in such a case...
Ironically, they accepted the worst (in my opinion) image I submitted outof all the rest that they rejected. Thanks for your feedback/ honesty.
By @Ed Printz
That happens.
FYI: The Sunset image that many on here say is under exposed andnoisy, (It’s nightime. It’s dark)….has sold on two other sites.🙂Ed Printz
By @Ed Printz
Two things here:
- noise is not dependant on the time of the day you take the picture, but on the camera settings and the subsequent edits.
- Even low key assets need to be correctly exposed. If you check the histogram, you'll see a prepoderance to the left, which means you have a dark picture, but still, there need to be some whites (the right of the histogram) till the very end of the histogram. We are doing photography, and that has to do something with light. To find the correct settings is much more difficult for such pictures than for standard day pictures.
I do not doubt that other sites accepted it, and that it sells. First the buyer won't see the noise in the preview picture. Second, the noise may or may not be an issue for the buyer. If it is not, all is good. Third, there is only a slight underexposure. Without the noise, it is possible that it would pass.
And as a last: Adobe has it's criteria to refuse assets, that is, at least for photographs, more stringent than what other sites have. That's why I'm really disapointed with the scrap they accept as a generative AI asset.
I agree with @Jill_C thgat the sky is too noisy. I disagree with @daniellei4510 about the first photo. I think it is underexposed and that is why the sky has excessive noise. If you lighten the exposure you can see a huge chunk where all details are lost.
The second image has a halo arround the large cactus and you need to put a top on it so that it is not cut off.
The sunset/rise picture is definitly too noisy:
Noise is everywhere, I just took this excerpt. That may be addressed probably easily. And then it's indeed slightly underexposed, which normally should not be a huge issue to correct, but I do not know what corrections have been applied for now.
The second shows a well exposed overall picture, but the contrast could be enhanced and the shadows lighten up. Then you may have done a bit too much with sharpening, as the Cactus shows an outline around.
AdChoices