Some of my video footages are rejected with template reasons

[panboibut]

I shot with Sony system. I uploaded the ungraded S-Log2 versions so the buyers can edit themselves, some of them were accepted, some of them were rejected with no clear reasons. I believe we all need specific reasons if our footages are rejected, to improve ourselves, to avoid the same mistakes in the future.

Template answers like:

"Thanks for giving us the chance to consider your video.

Unfortunately, during our review we found that it contains one or more technical issues, such as unintentional shaking, empty black or white frame, compression and/or audio issues, so we can't accept it into our collection."

are not helping at all.

My handheld footage got answers like those, my footage made with tripod also got answers like that. It's frustrating and not helping me improve myself.

Maybe we should start uploading the color-graded footages instead?

[Abambo]

Adobe stock is not a video school, where you learn to become a better contributor. Adobe stock contributors are supposed to be professionals submitting only perfect assets. To protect the customers from bad assets and in the same way also Adobe they perform checking before releasing the assets for sale. Moderators don't write refusals, they just hit the refusal button with one of several predefined refusals.

But I would think that the rufusals you experience are due to submitting unedited assets.

[panboibut]

Well, I guess it must be a brief selection process to hit the refusal button then, since some of my unedited, ungraded assets were accepted. Perfect assets? Duh, deep down inside, I realize all my accepted assets in fact, are not "perfect". When I looked for an asset to purchase, I wasn't looking for perfect assets, I wasn't looking for color-graded footages too, I was looking for the assets that match my story, I was looking for ungraded footage too, since I wanted to add my own mood for my videos . Also, in my opinion, perfect is quite subjective. Anyway, thanks for your comment.

[Abambo]

Perfect is without errors. That is not subjective. Assets should not be colour graded, they should be quite natural in colours, so that the buyer can use them.

And yes, moderation is fast. And the moderator hits the refusal button at the very first error they see. Refusals are faster than acceptances.

The database should only contain "perfect" assets. If you buy an asset with errors in, after hours of research and after the customer has accepted your test real, you will be very upset and that will cost a lot of money, more than only the one video, that you can't use.

[Nancy OShea]

Whatever you submit to Stock must be commercial-ready for use.  That's what customers pay for.

Your Contributor User Guide has tips on how to prepare video for acceptance.  Pay particular attention to the DOs & DON'Ts:

• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/video-requirements.html

Good luck.

[panboibut]

Thank you for your comment and the link that somehow I missed a point that states: "Don't submit raw video files or uncorrected logarithmic gamma (log) footage. Footage shot in log should have a simple color grading applied — we recommend a basic Rec 709 LUT."

I think it must be a new rule, since my accepted footages have no basic Rec.709 LUT at all. I'll try to follow the recommendation next time. Thanks again.

[Abambo]

No, that rule is there since I started submitting assets. At least since I read the first time the requirements. But as you have experienced, some assets get accepted even without following the rules, but your acceptance rate should be higher by following the recommendations.