why rejections?

[karlp10609245]

Hello, I am new to this field, I want to understand why works are rejected due to quality. (Some of them are even made with a current full format cam). I will be glad to receive comments and advice, thank you (Example: Beeches in autumn)

[Nancy OShea]

Quality covers a wide range of topics.  Much more than we can cover in this user-to-user to forum.

Start by straightening your image. Consider using a Rule of Thirds approach to composition.

https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/photography/discover/rule-of-thirds.html

Read these links for more tips.

• 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/how-to/tips-stock-image-acceptance.html

[Abambo]

The picture is oversaturated.

It's underexposed and even so missing some blacks:

...and it could get some geometry correction.

I would assume that this is not the resolution as submitted, as the camera is able to do a higher resolution.

[karlp10609245]

Of course it isn't because the orignal picture is 16,5 MB. To much to upload. May I'd upload an image detail...

[karlp10609245]

The exposure actually seemed balanced to me. This is also shown by the histogram of the larger image file (see image). Ultimately, only a few branches were "drowned", while the remaining dark areas had enough detail.

[Abambo]

It looks like different tools from Adobe give different results with this: ACR as a filter in Photoshop and stand alone.

Photoshop shows your histogram. The first histogram was Lightroom on the iPad.

This is the histogram on Lightroom:

I'm not persuaded that the Photoshop histogram is good. But I also have my issues with the histograms above, where Lightroom seems to “expand” the histogram to the right and left. 

But let us discuss the second point: geometric correction, or as @RALPH_L says: you also need to straighten the trees.

I deliberately refrained from doing this in order to keep more areas of the picture and to emphasize the subjective feeling of the trunks reaching upwards.

By @karlp10609245

The trees make me feel dizzy. Anytime I check your asset, it does not feel good. Trees grow straight to the sun. And that's all we can check, as we do not have the full-size picture. You could check for artefacts in the picture, at 100 or 200 %. Chromatic aberration would be a good point to start.

[Abambo]

Of course it isn't because the orignal picture is 16,5 MB. To much to upload. May I'd upload an image detail...

By @karlp10609245

Of course, it isn't too much to upload:

[karlp10609245]

Oh, I tried to upload the larger image and it gave me an error.

[Abambo]

Oh, I tried to upload the larger image and it gave me an error.

By @karlp10609245

You uploaded into the message, not in the attachment area. But I will check that also.

[Abambo]

I see no issue at uploading a 19 Mb file.

[Abambo]

I see no issue at uploading a 19 Mb file.

By @Abambo

Except for finding such a file, as most compressed to well.

[RALPH_L]

you also need to straighten the trees.

[karlp10609245]

I deliberately refrained from doing this in order to keep more areas of the picture and to emphasize the subjective feeling of the trunks reaching upwards. Or is that "old school"?

[Ricky336]

Hello,

It is a bit oversaturated, and I think you could alter the white balance a bit, add more yellow - it brings out the golden leaves more- and increase the tint slider, and adjust the tone curve by a small amount. I think you could do more post-processing on this. And in my view, I don't think the trees need straightening, as they are growing on a slope, so of course, they are going to look somewhat slanted. Optical illusion!

Maybe as well, crop the image - 16:9??

[Abambo]

I would think that trees grow straight into the sky, when they have the space to do. But I also think that the picture has not been refused for a small error like this. The saturation is strong, but it's not too much. I really would like to see the full-size picture.

[Ricky336]

Plants grow towards the light - phototropism. If they grow on a slope, they can't grow 'straight up', and if the trees in this photo need to be straight, then which tree should be straightened? 😁

[Abambo]

The middle ones. It's of only a little, but slightly rotating the picture helps enormous. What is disturbing is that when you look at the middle, the ground goes up and yet, the trees are crooked. I won't say that they don't were like that. But I had multiple times, that slightly rotating the image got a better impression.

If you are standing on a slope, you either put you straight, or you need energy to keep you perpendicular to the slope, or in the other direction. It's natural. If the trees were doing a bow, it would be different.

Incidentally: I have trees in my garden that are not straight, but they needed to avoid other trees in their way.

[Ricky336]

In a forest, all trees are straight, but some trees are more straight than others!🤣

[Ricky336]

There are trees that grow like this as well:

😁

[karlp10609245]

This is the fullsize one

[daniellei4510]

Well, for what it's worth, I rotated the image until the trees on the left were straight. That, of course, tilted the trees on the right. Then I used the Distort feature to straighten everything out, and filled in the resulting gaps with gen fill.