Hi, the following photo got rejected for Quality Issue, I am wondering why? I assume it's probably due to the darkness (under exposure)? but what if this is the style I want the photo to be? does this type of photo get dislike by the adobe stock in general?
I've submitted a couple of photo in similar style but some got accepted while others not, didn't see a pattern here.
Any suggestion/explanation will be appreciated!
Hi, the horizon is not level. That is a big problem. Regarding the exposure, I get the style you're going for but I still think it's a bit dark. You could bump up the shadows to reveal the rocks in the forground without altering the overall mood.
Also, is it a composite of two or more photos? The appearance is a bit odd because some of the water is smoothed, presumably by a longer exposure, and some is not. Is that a wave crashing in the middle, or a rock? It's hard to tell.
Best regards, John
Hi, thanks for the input. It's not a composition, it's a single long exposure shoot, and the main object in the middle is a big block of ice, and the wave was coming through it. It's not at the best timing so I understand it may be hard to tell what is going on. Anyway, I will def adjust the level, but actually nothing is in a real dark (based on the histogram), but I will try adjust the shadows a bit too, see if it can go through this time.
"It's not a composition" I recommend you take some classes. All photos have composition. It refers to the choice of what you photograph. Composition includes everything you see, to make it pleasing, or not. For example, if you photograph a nice sunset and there is the corner of a car at the edge, this is part of the composition, and it will be rejected. In the same way, keeping the camera level is part of the composition. Adobe specifically list a bad horizon (not level) in their list of quality rules, which you need to follow closely. Adobe are NOT looking for art. They are looking for perfect pictures; if you can make them art as well as being perfect, they might sell well.
Composition vs composite. The OP would have meant composite! And, no this image wouldn't have been a composite. There are no indications that would lead me to believe it's a composite.
As John indicated, the leaning horizon is quite noticeable. I think you can retain the overall dark, moody look and merely lift the shadows, or use a Brush in Lightroom Classic to lighten the exposure on the foreground rocks. Doing so reveals how colorful and textured the rocks are. In your version, the foreground rocks are somewhat of a "black hole". That blownout area in the sky is probably another reason for rejection. You could use the Clone Stamp to repair that area.
Thanks for the reply. I do realize different people has different taste about how they want to demostrate their photo and I think it is fine as long as there is a reason behind it, since art is subjective. I am just wondering if it's a standard of Adobe Stock that anything that is too dark or too bright will be considered as "Quality Issues"? Don't they have any customer look for special taste comparing to making everything clear and sharp? If so, I am totally fine with it, but just want to confirm 🙂
Hi @Yan22576927drve ,
Your photos should be standard. The customers will determine if they want the photo darker or brighter. Standard here is what it would look like if you were looking at the subject in reality. Therefore you should not set your camera to underexpose or overexpose when taking your shots.
You also will want to take into consideration what your image would look like in print. On paper white do not print. Therefore overexposed subject will not come out well. Underexposed without details will just print as black without details.
Thanks for the explanation, that makes sense!
It is important to remember that we are not providing "subjective art" to Adobe Stock. We are providing useable high quality images for marketing and advertising and publication on websites. If you want to sell art, there are other venues for doing that, including your own website.
As others have mentioned already, submit more natural-looking photos without any colour effects, colour grading, and so on.
For quality - read this guide
So, in this respect, these are the following issues in my view:
1. Too dark
2. In the sky where the sun is overexposure
3. Where the pebbles are in the foreground - the loss of detail in the shadows
4. It is hard to see on a non-full-scale image, but most likely there is a lot of noise in the photo.
Thanks but I believe the noise level is acceptable since other platforms do accept it.
The fact that other stock providers have accepted an image is no guarantee of acceptance by Adobe Stock which seems to have higher threshold for quality than others. That is one of their main points of differentiation, plus the fact that Adobe Stock is tightly integrated into many of their programs.
5. It is also not clear what kind of light object is in the foreground and why it is brighter than the foam next to it.
Yea, that's a big block of ice 🙂
Thanks, the halo was there naturally, I mean it's not due to any post-processing, and most likely it's because the sunlight came from a very low angle --- Will that be one of the standard thing to remove in Adobe Stock? I prefer not to since it's "against" the nature 🙂
May I ask what do you mean by "not natural"?
Hi @Yan22576927drve ,
I mean if you look directly at a horizon you will not see a double edge. The halo creates a double edge. This is usually an issue created while taking the shot, no fault of yours.