rejected picture

[wilkov66567821]

Hi everyone.

I got a rejected picture and don't know why. Can anyone help me?

It is sharp, it was/is correct exposed, it has no artifacts.

Thanks already.

Wilko

[Jill_C]

The center of the flower is not in sharp focus, and there is no detail in some of the darkest shadows.

[wilkov66567821]

Hi thanks for comments.

My remark. As this picture is original on analog film.
Therefor the sharpness and the light setting are not quite comparable.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Wilko van Oostrum
[Moderator deleted mail signature]

[Abambo]

My remark. As this picture is original on analog film.
Therefor the sharpness and the light setting are not quite comparable.
By @wilkov66567821

Unfortunately that is the issue. With classic film you indeed need to produce the same quality as a digital camera. This here is not a showcase for good artistic pictures, but for commercially usable assets in the best possible quality.

Personally, I find the picture great. But if you ask me, why this picture gets rejected, you will probably get similar answers than those of @Jill_C .  And that is independent from what we think about the picture. I've seen here assets that I would never buy. I would buy your asset... if I would need such a picture.

[wilkov66567821]

Hallo everybody. I have the impression that the forum who judge the pictures here are not familiar with all facets of photography. I always get all my analog pictures back as rejects. In my opinion there is a lack of knowhow such pictures look: of course the pixels don't fit: if you can see well they are round: that's grain. The absolute sharpness is also missing. It's a pity if you don't know the story anymore. But so be it and I will no longer submit analog images to this platform.

[RALPH_L]

They are not reviewing the photography but the image. 

The image must be reproduceable in all medium types and at various resolutions.

This image is as @Jill_C pointed out, not sharp and in my opinion, the shadows are too dark.

This is what 3 minutes post processing can do:

[Abambo]

I have the impression that the forum who judge the pictures here are not familiar with all facets of photography. I always get all my analog pictures back as rejects.

By @wilkov66567821

Assets are judged for quality, not for artistic value. The issue here is that film photography does not produce the quality required for modern stock assets. BTW: we. only point out what mederators may have seen to refuse your asset. Nothing more.

In my opinion there is a lack of knowhow such pictures look: of course the pixels don't fit: if you can see well they are round: that's grain. The absolute sharpness is also missing.

By @wilkov66567821

Those are quality issues, as defined by stock.