Rejection for technical issues

[talhacizmeci]

Hi everyone, do you know why this photo might be rejected ? It is confirmed from all of other stock sites except adobe ? Because of trademark, I had to blur some part of the tools which might  cause rejection but still could not be sure..

I will try to re-upload after increasing the sharpening and noise reduction. Any more suggestions ?
Thanks in advance

[mccjeff]

I am 100% that your images were rejected because of the blurs your applied to this image. To remove logos and text you need to either use the spot healing tool or the clone stamp tool.

They might have also rejected this images because of their viewing it as not a commercially marketable image.

[talhacizmeci]

thanks so much, I think that way too. 

[Abambo]

They might have also rejected this images because of their viewing it as not a commercially marketable image.

By @mccjeff

That's a different rejection reason. The moderator rejects on the first reason the moderator sees. Quite easy here.

[mccjeff]

The OP didn't say what reason was given for the rejection . I simply listed the two most obvious reasons.

Pretty simple.

[George_F]

It states technical issues in the title.

[George_F]

I didn't find the composition, colors, lighting, or tones very pleasing to the eye on this photo. Compositionally it looks a little haphazard to me, and the diagonal lines really stand out.

The blur of brand names could certainly cause the refusal, it really stands out.  Maybe try removing the red and white bag completely?  The other blurs are less noticeable.

There is still the possibility of an ip refusal, there are a lot of recognizable things in this photo even without the brand names.  I'm fairly certain that's a Makita power tool in the corner for instance.

I hope helps!

[Abambo]

I'm fairly certain that's a Makita power tool in the corner for instance.

By @George_F

You can read “Makita” and you still see the logo.

[George_F]

Now I'm even more sure, haha.  I did miss that.  Even zoomed out, the design was distinct enough that it reminded me of the Makita Brand though.

[talhacizmeci]

woww it really is Makita power drill in the corner 🙂 and the funny thing, I just realized that first 3 letter of Mak is readable. So how come the other stock sites approved this photo :s 

Should I delete it from those sites not to get a penalty or something ? 

But normally for ip reasons they chose the rejection for intellectual property reasons. Anyway, I am confused now, let me think about it. I really appreciate your help.

Thanks so much

[RALPH_L]

The main issue is deffinately the blurry logos and trademark names. 

This needs to be done better.

[talhacizmeci]

Thanks so much

[Abambo]

Hi everyone, do you know why this photo might be rejected ? It is confirmed from all of other stock sites except adobe ? Because of trademark, I had to blur some part of the tools which might  cause rejection but still could not be sure..

I will try to re-upload after increasing the sharpening and noise reduction. Any more suggestions ?
Thanks in advance

By @talhacizmeci

I really would like to know what stock sites accepted this? Let's see this from the customer perspective. I spent hours to find the ideal picture, I select yours and buy it, and then I discover this bumbling overlay of logos. Qualitatively, this is an absolute nogo.

But also with photoshopping the logos correctly, you have a quality problem:

• Washed out details,
• noise,
• out of focus.

Simply doing a noise reduction and applying sharpening will not save this picture. Additionally, you need to photoshop (correctly) multiple logos. You can try, but it is not worth the sweat IMHO.

[talhacizmeci]

Thanks for your honest opinion and taking your time to share.

When you ask which stock site approved, the answer is the most famous one.. Do you think should I delete it ? I know deleting a photo is bad for reputation agains the site, lowers your degree, etc but I am asking because of IP reason, makita brandname can be barely read and realized, so can it cause a problem for me if someone complains about it ? 

About the photo, how to save it, well may be I should crop the photo and only use the center of the photo where there is no many brushing or blurring because of trademark..

[George_F]

I'm unsure in this case if the liability falls on Adobe or the creator in this instance.  I'm in the United States, and I suspect that it would be both here.  I'm also not an IP lawyer though.  Or a lawyer at all.

I'm fairly certain, in the United States at least, that IP violations have automatic penalties for copyrights and trademarks.  They are in the thousands of dollars here if I remember right.

It is my understanding that with ip law, having something that is still recognizable even without the brand name may still be considered an IP violation.  So removing just the brand name from a drill that has a very distinct design may not be enough.  I tend to play it safe when it comes to potential IP violations.

It is important to remember other sites may be accepting this as an editorial image.  Theoretically other creators could have releases to use a product likeness commercially as well.

I'm sure there are a variety of views on this subject, that's my two cents though.

Cheers

[talhacizmeci]

Thanks so much for the advise. 

[Jill_C]

Next time when confronted with such a scene, take a moment to remove or reposition anything with a visible logo on it and make the "mess" a bit more organized. There might be a market for an image of an assortment of painter's supplies. Search on "house+painter+supplies" to see what others have submitted.

[Nancy OShea]

In my world, painting is organized chaos and quite messy. 

But in photographs, it helps to streamline the mess have a human holding tools to obfuscate them. 

I think it's a good subject and worthy of more experimentation on your part. 

[talhacizmeci]

Thanks so much for your encouragement