Skip to main content
L
louisl30267027
Participant
May 4, 2023
Answered

Rejection due to quality issues

  • May 4, 2023
  • 4 replies
  • 1311 views

I am a contributor since 2018 with very few rejections over the years. Recently I had a batch of 15 photos rejected for quality reasons. Here is one example from the batch. Please help. Thank you

This topic has been closed for replies.
Correct answer Jill_C

It appears that, due to achieving the right exposure on the bright white buildings, the rest of the frame has been underexposed. I would mask out the land / building area and lift the exposure in the sky and foreground.

4 replies

L
louisl30267027Author
Participant
May 10, 2023

Thank you for the valuable feedback I have received. The photos were taken with a polarizing filter. It took away all the glare but also made the coulours more saturated and a slight increase in contrast made it worse. I shall be more careful next time and let me see what the result will be.

 

    Abambo
    Community Expert
    AbamboCommunity Expert
    Community Expert
    May 11, 2023

    You're welcome. You may correct, what can be corrected: exposure in limits, saturation, contrast, and resubmit. If pictures are out of focus, there is no need to resubmit.

    ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer
    S
    Sunshine Seeds
    Participating Frequently
    May 8, 2023

    I'm also having issues with rejection for Quality issues as of last 2 weeks or so. I've been submitting since 2018, with a good acceptance rate. Occasionally I'll get a few rejected- but lately I'm having whole submissions being rejected for quality- even though the images come from a large batch of similar quality that were all accepted each time in the past (I submit big batches over many months to spread it out). They were fine before- but all of a sudden it's a No- and btw, it's not every submission, as some are all making it through every other time. It's like there's one particularly strict reviewer who is just hitting reject to easily. frustrating. 

      Abambo
      Community Expert
      AbamboCommunity Expert
      Community Expert
      May 9, 2023
      quote

       It's like there's one particularly strict reviewer who is just hitting reject to easily. frustrating. 


      By @Sunshine Seeds

      Moderation is done by humans, so the human factor plays. Just as an example: many fellow participants here are fast, criticizing a swallow DOF. I do that more rarely. We don't have here strict “instructions”, but we are all interpreting the rules. So yes, when you hit a particular stringent moderator, you get more refusals.

       

      But also, if the moderator is still fresh into their working day, they may refuse faster than after having reviewed 789 assets. Others may refuse less after that.

       

      And then, don't tell me that inside of a batch, all your pictures have exactly the same quality. I don't find that in my batches.

       

      And then, you seem to think, that the refusals are not correct. Maybe, the accepted pictures got accepted by error.

       

      If images are on the borderline of rejection, then the pendulum can swing to one side or the other. If the moderator has more experience or less experience, the pendulum may swing to one side or the other.

       

      And a last: You seem to believe that the moderation is to check and accept your pictures, but it is not. The only reason pictures get moderated is that Adobe needs to feed the buyers with high-quality assets. And from that perspective, it is better to refuse a good picture than to let pass bad ones. That may be, I agree here, somewhat frustrating.

      ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer
        S
        Sunshine Seeds
        Participating Frequently
        May 13, 2023

        You're welcome to share theories of conspiracy or misbehaviour by reviewers. EVEN if that's the case, some of us may want to improve our work, and people are invited to share their work for review: sometimes perfect art just isn't fitting Adobe's business model, sometimes people even can improve their work. Of course some people choose to just share their suspicions and not share any of their work to back it up. Some suspicious people might find that suspicious. Good luck with your chosen strategy.


        This has clearly got NOTHING to do with the quality of my images - as it was fine for 5 years, and then rejected for a period of 2-3 months and only on occasion, and now my work is 100% fine again. My quality hasnt changed, somehting happened on their end. For a photographer, you're clearly bad at noticing patterns 

        Jill_C
        Community Expert
        Jill_CCommunity ExpertCorrect answer
        Community Expert
        May 4, 2023

        It appears that, due to achieving the right exposure on the bright white buildings, the rest of the frame has been underexposed. I would mask out the land / building area and lift the exposure in the sky and foreground.

        Jill C., Forum Volunteer
          George_F
          Community Expert
          George_FCommunity Expert
          Community Expert
          May 4, 2023

          I think this was mostly an exposure issue.  It appears underexposed to me and the Histogram confirms it.  You may be able to correct this, but I was unable to get a decent result with a quick attempt.

           

           

          Cheers!

          George F, Photographer & Forum Volunteer
          Abambo
          Community Expert
          AbamboCommunity Expert
          Community Expert
          May 4, 2023

          Without looking into the histogram, my first thought was: underexposed. And yes. I agree.

          ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer
            Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
            Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices