Requesting feedback on rejected images

[nalin_1478]

Hi and greetings,

certain images that I uploaded have not been accepted due to 'quality issues'. I'm trying to figure out reasons for the same so your inputs would be highly appreciated.

Regards
Nalin

[daniellei4510]

All for are poorly cropped and the compositions overall need work.

[nalin_1478]

Well thank you, it's good to know that there is probably no technical issue as such. No image is cropped except 0246 (only the empty area from top).

It appears then tight compositions are not really welcome here.

[daniellei4510]

"It appears then tight compositions are not really welcome here."

Correct. Think of your potential buyer. Give them room to crop or add copy.

[Ricky336]

Hello,

Composition is really important. Read this link from Adobe about composition.

Composition:
https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/photography/discover/photo-composition.html

There is also another issue you ought to consider, and that is your white balance/colour temperature. Your shots are too yellow. I assume you took these under indoor lighting. You have to account for this.

White balance:
https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/photography/discover/white-balance.html

[nalin_1478]

Yes a little on the warmer side, noted. Thank you!

[ZALEZPHOTO · Accepted solution]

-I will also emphasize composition as a factor for the rejections. Think of giving a client more breathing space to add whatever  they want to the image. I'm wondering why you decided cropping as you did... Lets say it's a breakfast image, crop the coffee, but don't crop the bred, in another photo you left parts of dishes that cause more distraction and little contribution to the image.

-Styling food photography is KEY to great photos, this requires intuitive good taste and or looking at beautiful photos, think Martha Steward, anything she touches is magic. And pay very close attention to food crumbs that will result in not buying your photos. 

-Personally I love shooting with shallow depths of field, but have to always remind myself not to over do it. I think you went too far with you f stops in all the photos... also pay close attention to what your point of focus is, and focus on that.

In your contribution variations you can switch your focus as you see fit.

-If you are using Photoshop, learn to play with Camera Raw tools, Adobe is advancing this very rapidly and it will help you do many kinds of enhancements that will blow you away.

Overall I give you a B+ for putting the effort. I realize you play with the props you had available. But if you go to a place like TJ Max Homegoods, you can buy a bunch of beautiful kitchen props, spend a day shooting all of it, then go return it when you are done. And one more thing I want to say:

Get ideas anywhere you want, includding from adobe's buyers site then give them your own twist. ALWAYS remember 

you are creating your own work, NEVER limit your thinking with what you are competing against, or how many millions of images already exists of any given theme.

There's only one you, and if you keep polishing yourself, you  will create awesome images that buyers will want to buy.

Cheers! 

ps. I played for about a minute with you r shot using Adobe Camera Raw in Photoshop, compare it to the original and see the difference. You tube has tons of videos showing how to use it.

[nalin_1478]

Thank you Francisco for your inputs, I really appreciate you taking the time to explain things so thoughtfully while also encouraging new users here.

I did not crop the images in post, but composed them that way, your point still stands however and I'll keep that in mind.

[daniellei4510]

"I did not crop the images in post, but composed them that way"

Which is also cropping, except not in post. In-camera is the best way to crop, other than those occasions when you may want to give yourself some "leg" room for some minor cropping after the fact.

[nalin_1478]

Which is also cropping

My understanding of semantics betrays me, but thank you Daniellei, it is now clear what the reason for rejection was.

[Jill_C]

Composition is very much a quality issue and is one of the factors that the moderators consider when reviewing every image. For instance, in Stock-0252.jpg, there are extraneous objects in the upper right corner and the main subject is partly out of the frame. Additionally the subject is not completely in focus.

[Nancy OShea]

This is what foodies post on Yelp & Instagram. It's not the commercial quality that Stock customers expect. 

Stock contains over 100 million food photos. This is the visual & technical quality that you're competing with.

https://stock.adobe.com/search?k=food

Read your Stock Contributor User Guide:

• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html
• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html
• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/user-guide.html/stock/contributor/help/photography-illustr...
• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/how-to-submit-distinct-content.html
• Model/Property Releases:
  https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/model-release.html
  https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/property-release.html
  
  

Hope that helps.

[ZALEZPHOTO]

Nancy, I genuinly don't get you!  You could basically copy and paste the same message to everyone asking advice:  "not good and look at the million of assets you'e competing against" plus links.

Why do you even bother contributing any assets yourself?  When such adds are against you? Something about that is depressing in my head. Yes it is true that all assets have hundreds of thousands and zillions of images already, so why bother?

I appreciate your desire to help and to be honest... but honesty, I find no advice in that wisdom, it's a downer and incentive killer for anyone new desiring to start contributing thier own work. 

Why not try giving some words of sincere encouragement and concise suggestions on how newbies can improve and continue to make their best work ever?  

Sicerely & Respectfully! 

[Nancy OShea]

TBH, I can't make out what foods the OP has captured, so I went with the whole enchilada.

A picture says infinitely more than I can in a thousand words about composition, color, lighting, balance, focus, visual interest, texture, and overall food aesthetics. It needs to look yummy & scrumptious. Otherwise, nobody will buy it.

Suffice it to say that food photography is a highly advanced sub-specialty. In order to compete in this category, you've really got to bring your A game.  I can think of no better way to learn what's required than to see the kinds of images that Stock accepts. That's not negative, it's reality.

[ZALEZPHOTO]

I agree with everything you say!

Your personal take that captures what photography is and attempts to do.
we should all strive to become better, and that does not require comparing our work to others.
My biggest sellers in Adobe stock are photos I would have never thought would become the best sellers. So I apply the lessons to create more of that not caring or even thinking what I'm competing against.

And keeps me doing what I love!

Cheers!

[Jill_C]

I have to disagree with your statement "that does not require comparing our work to others." I have always followed other good photographers and studied their work and their advice. Years ago there was a very active community on Flickr, and I spent a lot of time looking at the works of other photographers, from beginners to pros and always learning, learning, learning. And when I started on Adobe Stock I regularly compared my images to those that already existed in the database. Looking at good photography is absolutely one if the best ways to learn to be better at our craft.

[ZALEZPHOTO]

Jill, I gave a lot of advice and suggestions I use,  to someone asking for feedback, trying to make a much bigger point.

You picked a tiny portion of my words, and I bet that after thinking deeper about the entire context, you'll find the value and little to disagree.  So let me be very specific, look for inspiration in other phtoographers and study what appeals to you, but never ever compare your work with theirs. Your work is yours, therefore your work should only be compared to your own as you see your progress.

Cheers!

[nalin_1478]

It's mainly croissant and iced coffee. Google lens is helpful. Thanks

[nalin_1478]

In all fairness, it was not shot with commercial intent. And I am also pleased to let you know that an image prior to these was accepted wherein the coffee glass was not cropped in composition, everything else remaining technically constant.

Let's not go by the millions of photos, half of them are AI generated. Thanks for chiming in!

[Ricky336]

In all fairness, it was not shot with commercial intent.

By @nalin_1478

For stock photography, it helps to think about commercial intent!

If such a photo got accepted, and it wasn't shot with commercial intent, then sales may be nonexistent!

If a shot is shot with commercial intent, then the chances of making a sale increase.

Getting accepted is only half the battle!

[ZALEZPHOTO]

I get the point you're trying to make Ricky.

But undeniably, we are under going a paradigm shift in commercially produced content. Companies like Adidas are paying big money to creators with the condition they shoot on cellphones. Models are now being casted based on real looks and real imperfections. Is a form of reverse psychology engineering, trying to make the commercial content as real as possible.

It's why even though I welcome all the AI tools we are using today, I believe that "creepy perfect images" will have a place in mainstream culture, perhaps more for entertainment or very particular brands.

Most companies will not want to be branded with fake anything!

cheers

[Ricky336]

My point is only that one should think about what one is taking and why. Who is the target audience, and so on.

[ZALEZPHOTO]

• Like I said, I got your bigger point. Yet I can say that I'm surprised to which are my most selling images, and how some of my personal favorites have not sold. 

[daniellei4510]

"Most companies will not want to be branded with fake anything!"

Except for companies recently using Ai, such as Coca-Cola, Heinz, Nike, Netflix, Samsung, and Zara, to name just a few.

[ZALEZPHOTO]

It's predictable that big creative directors are using multimillion $ AI spots to expand their brands, and they are likely to continue that as part of a strategy.

but a local business like a law firm, interior designer or boutique hotel, will soon find out that associating their brands with creepy perfect fake imagery will be more damaging in the e longer term.

My opinion, 5 yrs from now small brands will mostly want the real thing.