Why Was This Rejected?

[jjwatx]

I submitted this shot of the recent eclipse and had it rejected due to:

Possible reasons:

- Non compliant use of another artist’s name.

- Undeclared Generative AI Content.

- Content not compliant with overall guidelines:

I took this and didn't label it as someone else's

Didn't use AI to create it - did use Topaz AI Sharpening tool - why should that be an issue?

Not sure what guideline this wouldn't meet.

Any clarification would be appreciated.  Shutterstock and Alamy didn't have any problem accepting it.

[Jill_C]

Could be related to titles or keywords.did you include any brand names?

[daniellei4510]

The rejection reason aside, do a search for "eclipse" on Adobe Stock. This could be an issue of, "Seen one, seen them all." Based on anecdotal evidence over the lenth of my participation on this forum, Shutterstock and Alamy are pretty liberal with their acceptance rate compared to Adobe. Acceptance on one platform is no guarantee for acceptance on Adobe Stock.

[Abambo]

The reason is not the first, not the second, but the third: Content not compliant with overall guidelines.

If the keywords and title do not contain any “forbidden” words, it's the overall execution of the picture.

The refusal reason could also have been quality issues, but the moderator felt that this reason was stronger. It is indeed unusable for general stock use. I suggest that for the next eclipse, you take some training before the eclipse happens so that you can generate an excellent picture that does not exhibit all the issues, your asset has. There are some YouTube videos available, I did stumble upon some, when I was searching for a different topic.

Shutterstock and Alamy do not have the same quality criteria applied as Adobe. Adobe is master in their house, and I'm sure they got hundreds of pictures that were better quality.

[jacquelingphoto2017]

Hi @jjwatx ,

I do not understand the pink fringe protruding at the side of the center object. I also do not understand why I should see the clouds through the central object, or is it clouds over it?

Best wishes

Jacqueln

[Jill_C]

The red spots are Solar prominences, and you should see them on every image of the full solar eclipse. I think it's the only time they're easily visible. 

[ricky336]

@jacquelingphoto2017 The photo taken is what you see, as I watched the eclipse live - CNN had a live broadcast - and you do indeed see the 'pink' protrusions - solar ejections - from the sun. This is the ONLY time you can see the corona - the white halo around the sun, so it is a fantastic opportunity for scientists to study.

There were light clouds during the event, but the eclipse was visible throughout.

[jacquelingphoto2017]

Thank you @ricky336 ,

Regards

Jacquelin

[jacquelingphoto2017]

I really don't know what to say. I got a refusal like this before in error. The moderator apparently thought it was an AI image. I don't know if this is the case with this one.

Regards

Jacquelin

[ricky336]

Hello,

I think the tone of the image could be altered just a tad - the 'halo' is just a bit too yellow - so reduce the colour temp just a bit.

Also, look at your keywords, did you include 'Nasa', maybe that wasn't liked.

[Nancy OShea]

That's a generic rejection letter. 

Non-compliant image means you didn't follow all the submission guidelines as described in the Stock Contributor User Guide.

• 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
• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/submission-guidelines.html