There are several points in the "Technical FAQ" which may meet my photo, but I really don't know which of them leaded to rejection. I hope, somebody can tell me more.
I will describe the possible points:
1. I used my drone "Mavic 2 Zoom". Perhaps drone cameras are not good enough because of poor lenses.
2. I took videos instead of photos and extracted this picture from a video. Perhaps too bad resolution and compression.
3. The horizon was not horizontal. For better quality (IMHO) I resized the picture to 400%, turned it by 1°, cut the triangles off and resized the result back to the original size 3840x2160 which means increasing the original resolution by about 3,3%.
4. I separated the sky and increased the contrast of the landscape three times a little bit, each time more and more concentrated to the horizon.
5. To make more details visible in the dark areas, I increased gamma and adjusted contrast and brightness.
6. I increased the contrast of the separated sky.
7. To meet the taste of most people (IMHO), I increased the saturation of the whole picture a little bit.
OK - which point was wrong and which point was acceptable?
left picture: original - right picture: final result (rejected)
Copy link to clipboard
There are compression artifacts:
It is noticeable when you zoom in.
Thank you very much. I see that all my gessings went in a wrong way.
And I am afraid, I can do nothing against that.
if I think about this issue - is this really a serious problem? If somebody prints this photo on a whole "letter" or "A4" sheet, nobody will see those artefacts. It could be left to the future customer if this photo meets his requirements.
I made a quick attempt to blurr only the water (see below). Is this an advance?
No. Your photos must be perfect. If a customer finds a poor quality picture, Adobe's reputation suffers. Every picture must be as good as a professional photographer could make it in ideal conditions with the best equipment. The customer makes no allowance for difficulty or rarity. It must be suitable for a multimillion dollar advertising campaign.
Thank you very much for your comment.
I would like to suggest you to enhance your FAQ by a small gallery of "frequently rejected photos and reasons why". I read your FAQ, but I came never to the idea to enlarge my photos and check for artefacts.
The FAQ isn't mine, it isn't ours. This is a community forum. Here you work with other Adobe customers and suppliers, to let people share their knowledge. It's clear, though, Adobe have no interest in spending their time to help people develop their skills. They want contributions from experienced professionals who already know what is expected of them. At least, that's how I see it. I know they don't say it.