Hi, new to stock photos and got my first two rejections after uploading ~40 successfully. I was trying to upload some examples of bioluminescence, since there doesn't seem to be that much out there, but was rejected on technical issues. I was thinking this might be due to high iso, underexposure, or subjects being small? But given my novice stature, looking for some advice on why these two got rejected. Thank you!
They are too dark, especially the second photo, which is also very noisy.
Thank you, appreciate your reply!
Unfortunately, Adobe are not a natural history library and they apply the same "quality" criteria to all pictures. They are not going to know about the difficulty of taking the picture or the scarcity of the subject - they can't be trained in all possible fields - so they look only at things like exposure, composition and so forth. And by any standardised rule, these are underexposed. I hope you're able to find an outlet for interesting and unusual natural history shots that don't fit in the commercial stock area.
Thank you! That's great to know. Yeah I am primarily in wildlife photography so half my photos are high iso and under exposed. Appreciate the insight.
You have exposure problems. Both are underexposed. You have to try and balance the exposure to get the luminescence and balance that against the background. Also, you have to try and get the colour balance right. Think about the composition as well.
Definitely a challenge, but I appreciate the insight - thank you!