Greetings! Dear experts, please, can you understand why 1 photo of these 2 was accepted and the second was not accepted. I really can not understand how it works on Adobe Stock. Thank you. What photo was declined can you guess?
Both images have uneven exposure. Neither one should be accepted.
That said, Tree in Water is a more visually interesting photo. Of the two, I think it has the most commercial value. Correct the issues if you can and resubmit. Or not, it's your choice.
No, I think, thank you. I found some photos adobe recommends as a quality standart, they are fully corrected in LR or Ph, and first there is really powerful camera there used. I have no such an equipment. Gonna not to ask here questions more. As many other expert answers are mostly emotional and out of business. Thak you for your exploring.
Dear experts, on hearing your points of view, nobody asked what lens I use. How it can be? Lens! To camera is not cruical thing? I use usual kit lens for this camera. What kind of demanded quality maybe we talk witout this detail. I have no long distance expensive lens, what do you use for high quality production? Can you show me the real quality? In Adobe stock I can't find quality photo of this kind. Except Ai generated
No one cares about the equipment you use; what's more important is how you use it. It's possible to take bad pictures with a $10,000 camera, and it's possible to take good pictures with an iPhone.
Dear Jill, it's clear to everyone in this world about how we use it. Not sure about Iphone, as Iphone has a proccessor inside, we are not about skills to do photos on Iphone I think. I try to find out how! I don't look for moral speech. For example, davidanlinares gave me some info, I am very grateful. This is what I look for. Dut you are the experts of this community giving answers here mostly speak morality without any information. This is emotional and not not nice to read. Thank you. Consider your expert work, please.
You know, sir expert, show me your class quality of this sort of photography, you write every time the same about artefacts. Are you sure I won't find artefacts about your photos? Show your quality. I will increase scale like you and I find your artefacts. The true thing that Adobe Stock is in disfunction proccess now. And this is the mess is going now. You should not write your answers any more here due to your precious. And your answers are not useful as previous were the same.
Even cant understand why not to stroke the whole photo area and call that atrefact. Absolutely unuseful information, looks like trolling. In this way I am not going to ask here experts anymore. That's it all.
If my analysys is not detailed enough, you are free to wait for a different opinion. And if you do not want advice, you can simply stop asking for advice. And if Adobe stock is too picky for you, you should change to something different. I wish you a nice day.
and one more detail I forgot to say about wall printing, the company where I worked as a designer had two paid subscriptions for stocks, Adobe and one another , I don't call that here. So, all images were taken from that stock, as Adobe Stock gave much less iltems for wall printing. It was 2 years ago. And what people customers worried about , it was not artefacts. They watched patterns on thier smartphone, and colors were different. For home walls. They need colors, highlights, tones, they do not understand artefacts what is that. Where to look them.