I really like this one. The technical issues are less apparent, but I think this comes down to how the photo will be used and fitting the needs of that particular use.
I suspect many popular Adobe Stock assets are used in composite work, and this photo had enough out of focus areas that I think getting a selection would be challenging and it would look out of place with some in focus and some out of focus areas.
There is some visible noise and it's a bit overexposed, but I believe those would be fixable if not for the depth of field issues.
I hope you also have a pleasant day 🙂
Thank you for you insight!
It's hard to get everything in focus while doing a macro shot of a live insect. If your theory is correct, Adobe could still have accepted this image since some people might want to use it AS IS.
I don't it's noise but rather the flower texture.
Even tough this histogram didn't show overexposed portions, I guess some of it still appear to be overexposed (the metallic aspect of this green bee is quite hard to get right with a Flash and Diffuser).
Anyhow, it would be nice if Adobe would tell us a bit more of the reason they reject an image and not keeping us guessing what's wrong with it. I also understand the reviewer would need to take more time on each image to do so...
Thanks again for your help!
Have a nice day!
Perhaps a better way to talk about the exposure is image being too bright, and the histogram does reflect that.
Here is the histogram after just hitting the auto button in Lightroom, and it's more or less how it should look.
It's a cool photo and might make a nice print, but it's just not technically sound and thats what Adobe is after.
Well! This makes perfect sense! Thanks a lot!
Nice! I think it is a depth of field issue and there is a white halo around the outter feeler.
Thank you Ralph! It's appreciated!
It's beautiful. However some areas are blown out because of overexposure, and also the subject is not completely in focus. The edge must be sharp enough all around so that it can be cropped.
I believe it is a bit grainy, I'm not sure if it is enough to cause a rejection. To see faults you need to zoom in on your photos at between 100 and 200%.
Thank you Jacquelin!
I can see that this image needs a little more work...
It's a great picture, I guess. But there are some faults. First, it's overexposed, you could bring down the exposure, and it would be a lot better. The histogram shows a preponderance of the whites. I suppose you can correct that easily.
The biggest fault is the missing sharpness of the eye of the insect. That should be sharp.
Then there is a certain noise level, and it's not the flower structure. I have also the impression that you applied a huge amount of sharpening. Some structures really look over sharpened. That would also explain the white halo around the insect's antennas.
And then I have this area
which is disturbing me.
As I said: It's a great picture, and I would have been happy to get such a beauty, but it maybe not good enough for the stringent eyes of the moderator.
I would correct the exposure, check if one or the other points of critique could be corrected, and then I would resubmit. There is a good chance that it may pass.