Adobe Stock don't just reject a pic on the basis of lack of size or definition...they've just rejected pics of mine for the following mendacious, insulting reasons:
(I should specify that all photos submitted are my work, Adobe!)
1. Model Release Missing
this is the picture of a girl with a religious banner in Naples, Italy. This is a picture of an unknown person in a public space, Adobe, release does not apply...
2. Lack of aesthetic or commercial appeal
applies to two rejected photos - one of a coot diving, the other of an eccentric woman, also in Naples, Italy. Lack of aesthetic or commercial appeal? that's for me to judge, Adobe Stock, not you.
3. Intellectual Property Violation
picture shows female journalist interviewing a personality, also in Naples, Italy.
All the pictures in Naples, Italy, were at a public event, in the street.
Thank you ever so much, Adobe Stock, for your crude, overbearingly patronising, arch, haughty attitude.
I appreciate your candid feedback. It sounds like you may be confusing the Royalty Free Commercial Use license we are selling with an editorial use only license which we do not accept.
Any recognizable people in an image must sign a model release before we can accept the content. The same applies to intellectual property and trademarked items.
As far as aesthetic appeal is concerned, yes that is certainly subjective though over the years we have gotten a pretty good sense of what has a chance of success and what does not. I would encourage you to post an example in the critique forum to get some constructive criticism from other photographers.
To avoid further confusion regarding releases and IP issues, please review our legal guidelines here: tagproducts_SG_STOCK-CONTRIBUTOR_i18nKeyHelppagetitle
Copy link to clipboard
Your files are reviewed by a trained moderation team that evaluates your content based on technical and aesthetic quality, commercial viability, and whether you have evidence of all appropriate rights.