Copy link to clipboard
Copied
A few days ago I uploaded 12 new photos to my portfolio: they were a series of photos related to work in the countryside with a bulldozer.
They have all been rejected due to "quality issues".
WHICH problems they had were not specified, so it is impossible to understand why they were rejected and possibly correct them.
They look very good to me!
If the reason is the "presence of blur" for example, the "blurred" present is WANTED!
This is earthmoving whereby the earth that falls from the bucket is PURPOSELY MOVED.
If that's not the problem, WHICH IS?
You don't help at all like that!
I am attaching two sample photos.
In think focus is the problem. The subjects are not real crisp.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
In think focus is the problem. The subjects are not real crisp.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
1) Live action photos require a very fast shutter speed. Too much motion blur.
2) Tree branches in foreground are not fully focussed.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
1. As I wrote the motion blur is intended to show the earth falling from the bucket.
2. The subject is not the branches in the foreground which do not need to be in focus, but the machine in action.
And in any case it should be the people who reject the photos to explain why they were rejected!
You shouldn't need to waste a lot of time looking for a cause that you may not see!
And scrambling to find one!
I don't like this system!
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Reviwers' decisions are final. You asked for feedback and we gave you our honest critique.
1. Equipment (not dirt) has too much motion blur.
2. Foreground trees are an integral part of the scene thus must be in focus. Otherwise, crop them out.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Thank you.
Sorry, I wasn't criticizing your comment, but I feel that when a photo is rejected a specific reason should be given for this.
And don't leave it in doubt that you don't understand why.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Moderators will reject based on the first issue they see, and there could be multiple issues. They simply don't have time to enumerate every issue in the image. The assumption is that we're experienced and competent photographers and that we can properly assess our own images.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Nobody here is an Adobe Stock Reviewer.
We are unpaid forum volunteers and Adobe product users like you.
You may take our feedback or not. That's up to you.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
And in any case it should be the people who reject the photos to explain why they were rejected!
You shouldn't need to waste a lot of time looking for a cause that you may not see!
And scrambling to find one!
I don't like this system!
By @Raffaella23127102497g
Moderation is done to protect customers from bad assets, not to explain you your errors. The system is very effective and fast, as the moderator simply refuses on the first error they see and they give you a predefined reason. It's your task to find the error.
In the case of the bulldozer I would think that there could be at least three reasons:
A fourth reason would be IP, because of the penguin on the machine.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
1. As I wrote the motion blur is intended to show the earth falling from the bucket.
2. The subject is not the branches in the foreground which do not need to be in focus, but the machine in action.
By @Raffaella23127102497g
1) It may be hard, but what you intended is not relevant. What is relevant is what the moderator thinks what the picture represents and if it is good enough, to be added to the database. I doubt that the falling mud is the trouble in this picture.
2) The machine is not in focus. The exposure is not good. You have missing whites in your picture, and the overall picture is missing contrast.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Thanks to all for the interventions!
I'll go check my photos better.