Participating Frequently

Answered

Rejected by "Image does not meet requirements". Why?! Shutterstock approved this image!

Forum|Forum|2 years ago
April 10, 2023
6 replies
3771 views

Hello people! I have two rejects on quality. Then fixed some detail...And in third

case i have reject as "Image does not meet requirements" (translate from

russian). Can someone explain this reason to me exactly?!

Thank you for opinion.

P.S. My image name is "A nude girl in red bikini lies on

the grass and reads a book.The legs of some women are

visible from behind. The art of being free and combining

the useful with the pleasant." Look in my attachment file.

Contributor critique

Correct answer jacquelingphoto2017

Hi @names58321676 ,

For the reviewers it's a matter of if the files are to be accepted or not. Their job is not to find the faults of our files and inform us to correct them to resubmit. That would be the case if it was a training exercise. As far as they are concerned you should check to ensure your files are of acceptable quality. It is possible that each time you submit the file it goes to a different person, in which case you get different reactions. Once the reviewer sees a reason for rejection he'll look no further, because there's no reason to look further. The decision is made not to accept.

With that said, I require some clarification. Did the rejection caption said "Image does not meet requirements"? If it did it means the moderator that got your file on the third occasion is of the opinion that the potential for sale of that image is not good. The previous reviewer might have a different opinion about the file.

I do not think the pose is an issue for the decision. Nude images are accepted and place into Safe search on Adobe. There is nothing to prove that this was surreptitiously done. Therefore I will not argue that. It's either you have a signed model release or you don't. If you don't it will not be accepted by Adobe. I believe the image would be of a better composition or value if her face was visible or more of the book was showing. As it is the focus is on her crotch and everything else falls in the background.

Best wishes

Jacquelin

N

names58321676Author

Participating Frequently

I am very grateful to all colleagues who took part in the discussion of this image. The opinion of each participant was important. Health and good luck to all of us and of course, large and frequent sales

Henrik Heigl

Community Expert

Hi,

there are so many things wrong with this picture in order to be near a commercially usable Image. It wore looks like a Snapshot that someone took but not a well made Photo that could be used for some advertisement, Poster, Flyer, Banner, etc.
There may be people who like photos like this, but the majority of people who use stock photos don't want to.

Before you submit, please review the submission guidelines carefully and compare your work with other Stock inventory. To be accepted, your work should be as good or better than what's already represented in your keyword category.

https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html

https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/photography-illustrations.html
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/how-to/tips-stock-image-acceptance.html

Even at the risk of repeating or that you already know the information in the links, I can only urgently recommend following these rules.

Hope that helps to better understand.

regards,Henrik

N

names58321676Author

Participating Frequently

In the end of conversation i pay your attention to the image name in my first comment.
P.S. My image name is ...A nude girl in red bikini lies on the grass and reads a book.The legs of some women are
visible from behind. The art of being free and combining the useful with the pleasant...

The point is not to focus on sexual characteristics of the lady. Otherwise I would have done
framing 1:1. Pay attention to the background. And read the title of the photo again .... the thought was that manufacturers could buy such a photo epilators, sunscreen, in a pinch,
book makers, but then, the angle should be different.

Nancy OShea

Community Expert

Poor composition. Bad camera angle, unflattering to the female form and a bit tawdry. IMO, it's unfit for commercial use.

Nancy O'Shea— Product User & Community Expert

jacquelingphoto2017

Correct answer

Community Expert

Hi @names58321676 ,

For the reviewers it's a matter of if the files are to be accepted or not. Their job is not to find the faults of our files and inform us to correct them to resubmit. That would be the case if it was a training exercise. As far as they are concerned you should check to ensure your files are of acceptable quality. It is possible that each time you submit the file it goes to a different person, in which case you get different reactions. Once the reviewer sees a reason for rejection he'll look no further, because there's no reason to look further. The decision is made not to accept.

With that said, I require some clarification. Did the rejection caption said "Image does not meet requirements"? If it did it means the moderator that got your file on the third occasion is of the opinion that the potential for sale of that image is not good. The previous reviewer might have a different opinion about the file.

I do not think the pose is an issue for the decision. Nude images are accepted and place into Safe search on Adobe. There is nothing to prove that this was surreptitiously done. Therefore I will not argue that. It's either you have a signed model release or you don't. If you don't it will not be accepted by Adobe. I believe the image would be of a better composition or value if her face was visible or more of the book was showing. As it is the focus is on her crotch and everything else falls in the background.

Best wishes

Jacquelin

Abambo

Community Expert

I believe the image would be of a better composition or value if her face was visible or more of the book was showing. As it is the focus is on her crotch and everything else falls in the background.

By @jacquelingphoto2017

I think, the refusal reason is “Non-compliant Image”. And your description is undoubtedly why it's non-compliant.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

G

glum person

Inspiring

Hello!

Reason of rejection - impolite, indecent photo that humilitates the model. Angle of view - it looks like photographer was hiding, stalking and shooting people without their permission.

Shutterstock is not a criterion. Adobe and Shutterstock are two different companies with different standarts.

N

names58321676Author

Participating Frequently

...Angle of view - it looks like photographer was hiding, stalking....

At the end of the conversation, I will say this ... Dear Explorer. Do not draw conclusions about other people from yourself or your close circle.

Jill_C

Community Expert

I suspect that it does not meet Adobe's definition of " nudity with artistic value". It does seem that you took this image surreptitiously. I would not define this as having artistic value.

From this Help page: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/submission-guidelines.html

Follow the rules on nudity.

For submissions containing nudity that has artistic value, the model must be at least 18 years old and the model release must include the model's photo ID so we can verify age. Never submit any sexually explicit, pornographic, or immoral material, including material that sexualizes minors.

Jill C., Forum Volunteer

N

names58321676Author

Participating Frequently

Look! Why my image was not rejected by this reason in first time, in second time? I spent time on fixed some technical details and can spent it on other image. Could you send message to adobestock and tell him if reason of reject this image in not in quality why they reject this image on third time but not in first?! My English poor but i think you understand me.

P.S. I made many images surreptitiously and some of them already sold and in adobestock too!

Thank you for answer! I understand you opinion.

Abambo

Community Expert

I have no intention of disputing the images moderators. I have intentions to make it clear moderators to make changes to the process image verification so that contributors don't wasting their time, which they could have

spend on processing another image. In this context, I think that one should first evaluate images in terms of a given reasons for failure, and then in terms of quality...About surreptitiously.

I took photos in the style of "passing by" and I didn’t specifically monitor naked ladies. I photographed in a permitted location. The girl lies on the grass not in her summer cottage, but in a public place. And if she shows her "charms", then she should be ready for the fact that her can take pictures. If she's not ready for it,

then she must cover them with clothes or choose another pose! I repeat that I did not come to visit her

to the dacha in order to secretly photograph her! .. and to I also did not climb a tree for these purposes.

....I understand your position...and if moderators read this forum i ask to him make change to robots algorithms...i wrote about this earlier. Then contributors will have more time to change other images.

P.S.I won't be around for a day. Thanks everyone for the replies!

You are mistaken on several assumptions. Let me first state the obvious:

Adobe's turf, Adobe's rules. If Shutterstock accepts this image, that does not mean, that Adobe needs to accept. So, that has never been a good argument to bring up here, especially in subject/header.
The picture probably needs a model release. I wonder why Shutterstock did not ask for this. I have pictures refused by Shutterstock, where they asked for a model release for people walking up a way, photographed from behind.
Adobe moderators refuse on the first issue they detect. There is no guarantee that there aren't other issues in with the picture. This is for efficiency. The first moderation is always done on the terms of quality, as that is the easiest to detect/decide upon. It is not said that the same person checking the quality is also the one checking other requirements.
The girl lies on the grass not in her summer cottage, but in a public place. And if she shows her "charms", then she should be ready for the fact that her can take pictures. If she's not ready for it,

then she must cover them with clothes or choose another pose!

By @names58321676
This is incorrect. You simply can't photograph people without they're giving their approval. For private pictures, there is a certain grey zone, but the girl cannot expect to see her “charms” as you call it, on a billboard or in a magazine. The young lady can expect to get some gazes, but she should not expect to be pictured as you did it. Using a different angle would have made this picture less inappropriate.
Even if she has an exhibitionistic tendency, she has a right to know that you are taking pictures of her. Even then, the pictures should stay private, except if you have a written authorization.
Moderation is not done to pleasure contributors, but to protect buyers. There are no “robot algorithms”. But moderators chose between several predefined refusal reasons. The text is always the same.
I have never seen a moderator participating here on the fora. They simply don't get paid for that. I even doubt that they read the fora.

On a personal note, and really on a personal note, I would have sorted a picture like this out if I had taken it accidentally. That may happen, when the model moves to take on a different position when I take my picture.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded