Technical issues rejection.. Please help..

[DarkClearSky]

Recently had an image rejected for technical issues.. and not sure why.  I want to resubmit it with fixes - just not sure what to fix.

Here's the image in question:

Background too blurry?  Focal length too narrow?  Not enough color?  I'm not really sure what's going on with this rejection.

Thanks in advance.. 

(btw - you guys have been awesome picking apart my prior "technical issues" submissions)

[creative.shukla]

I think it's to dark not enough brightness to the image and also looks to warm.

Correct this two thing, upload again than it might get accepted.

[Test Screen Name]

Also... it may get an IP rejection. I assume you made up all these bottles yourself? If so, and you're asked for an IP release, you can make one as the artist and owner. (NB different from model release).

[DarkClearSky]

Yes - bottles are made up (by myself).  I've had that exact issue before with Adobe stock before - and had to do exactly what you suggested, but this one was not rejected for IP.  It's another dreaded "technical issues" rejection..

[George_F]

Interest photo!  I love the concept.  The technical issues I'm seeing you touched on mostly.  In my opinion, the depth of field is too shallow and there is noticeable lens distortion.

The white portion of the histogram was pretty empty and the exposure had some pretty dark spots although I'm not sure if those were deciding technical issues.  There also appeared to be a yellow color cast, but I adjusted white balance a few times and liked the results less than the original.  Perhaps the color is intentional to give a certain feel to the photo, but I suspect a more neutral photo would be desired to let the customer stylize as they see fit.

You may have already addressed this, but I believe a property release will be needed if you get over the technical hurdles.

I hope this pans out!

[DarkClearSky]

Thank you so much for the feedback..!

I originally went with more neutral lighting - and I (like you) liked the warmer color better.. but when you stare at your own work for too long you sometimes lose the ability to judge it critically.  I've learned that I often tend to make depth too shallow and exposures a bit too dark (and so I try to compensate).. Perhaps this is another case where I've fallen into old habits..

Here's a version with brighter, more neutral lights (5100K) as well as increased depth.  (This is lower resolution fore the forum):

Better? Worse?

[DarkClearSky]

(I just noticed there are some artifacts in there... please ignore.. this is just a quickie to see if I'm going in the right direction...)

[George_F]

I agree with @jacquelingphoto2017 that the appearance of a monochrome image would probably not result in approval.  Now with the image lightened, I can see the image appears slightly crooked but can probably be straightened, and think the lens distortion will probably still net a refusal.  It may also be correctable, but at the end of the day wide angle shots have distortion and you may just need to shoot at a longer focal length.

But yes, I think you are getting these sorted out 🙂

[Jill_C]

My immediate reaction was "underexposed". A lab would not be this dark, and the lighting would be directly overhead without the side shadows I see here.

[DarkClearSky]

Thank you for the feedback .. my underexposing ways have crept back into my work.. 😕

[DarkClearSky]

Ok - based on the comments here, I think I'm going to resubmit something along these lines -

I brightened things up a lot - extended the lighting to the distance - and made it universally pointing downward to avoid shadows, and I changed the camera angle slightly down more.  Focal length is deeper than it was.  Color temp is more neutral - about that of a fluorescent light.. Basically trying to get more of a "lab vibe" to it. 

This is a big difference from what I originally submitted..!

[Nancy OShea]

B&W images don't sell.  People want full color images.  They can grayscale it themselves if the project designer requires it.

[jacquelingphoto2017]

Hi @DarkClearSky ,

This photo comes across as a monochrome. Also, it is underexposed and you should either have the main subjects taking up more of the negative space, or adding more depth. The main subject has a shake blur near the neck of the jar.

I'm afraid you might not get this one accepted.

Best wishes

Jacquelin

[DarkClearSky]

Ok - thanks Jacquelin.  More things to fix!

[Denys Myts]

Perhaps you should work a little with the composition and with the contrast?

[DarkClearSky]

These are excellent suggestions (I love this forum).  I actually resubmitted the image earlier this morning with a little bit of what everyone had suggested here.  Lighter, cooler color temp, and deeper focal length.  There were comments about it being a black and white image - but it actually wasn't taken as a black and white - it's just that everything in the image was either white or clear so naturally it looked like a black and white image.  To help remedy that I introduced a very slight green tint to the glass in the bottles. 

Here is the image I submitted this morning:

Hopefully it gets the go ahead!

[Jill_C]

Much, much better than the original !

[jacquelingphoto2017]

Hi @DarkClearSky,

It looks better. Let's hope it gets accepted this time. However, I believe it's a little underexposed. This is how it should be: you take the photo with the correct white balance for the lighting you're working with, with correct depth and exposure. After taking the shot you make corrections to what deviate from what is perceive as normal by someone that was not there. If the white balance is still out you adjust white to be white and the rest will fall into place. Plus, doing the other adjustments such as removing noise etc.

Please take a look at some details laid out here that will explain in more details. Pay special attention to subtopics listed numbers 4, 5, 9, 12, 13. You may read through everything just in case you may be enlightened on other subjects.

[DarkClearSky]

Thanks Jacquelin for the excellent suggestions and information.

Like all the submissions I put up here - I won't quite declare victory just yet even if it passes review and is added to the portfolio, I'll feel far better when an image "proves itself" by being downloaded by stock customers. That's a much better feeling.

I love that Adobe provides this forum - it really helps to air out the mistakes and continually improve the quality of the images to make them more appealing. For example - I was actually somewhat stunned at first when this image was rejected - but now that I've had all eyes looking at it and given feedback, it seems almost obvious in retrospect why it was rejected.  Now tweaked accordingly, hopefully it'll make it.  I am still concerned about the (mostly) lack of color though.

I'll definitely check out all the information you posted.

[DarkClearSky]

That latest revision was rejected again this morning - "technical issues" ..  so I'm stumped.  I think I'm going to give this one up (at least in terms of Adobe Stock).

If anyone has ideas, I'm all ears, otherwise - not going to push an image where is isn't wanted.

fwiw - I did include a property release, just in case.

[George_F]

Have you considered shooting a single bottle at a longer focal length?  

[DarkClearSky]

Thanks for the suggestion George..  I'd not really considered any new material with this one yet but maybe I should.  You think one bottle and maybe a syringe laying next to it (with longer focal length) would do it?

Let me explore that a bit. 

I feel like with bivalent vaccines coming this fall and there not really being much coverage on this in stock.. seemed like a good idea to put something out there.  Adobe reviewers appears to not agree...lol..

Also pondering if the muted color is an issue.  Maybe a syringe could have a blue cap or something..

[George_F]

I believe just the opposite!  I think this subject is probably in high demand.

I wonder if a single object that is in focus and able to easily get a selection from is going to be the most usable in terms of the Adobe Ecosystem.  Of all of my photos purchased as Adobe Stock assets that I've found in the wild, they've all been used in composites.   Not saying that's the only use, but how I suspect many are being used.

I believe so many have commented because they also see the potential.  Hope it works out!

[DarkClearSky]

Thanks for the encouragement! I don't like resubmitting the same thing over and over - feel like a spammer or perhaps forcing something where it's not really appreciated / wanted. 

It's been accepted elsewhere - it's not a complete lost cause.

Ok - that all said - were you thinking something like this?:

[George_F]

Yes, that is the concept I was describing.  But at the end of the day it's still your image.

I'm rooting for you 🙂