Can 'Non-Compliant Image' mean = we just don't want your photo?

[3Days2Go]

Some photo submissions are rejected due to Model/Property Release issues or Intellectual Property issues.  These are -for the most part- understood and make sense...  But, then there are photo submissions rejected due to "Non-Compliant Image".  These rejections seem a lot less clear to me.  I've read the Contributor Guide, and per its guidance it seems that a "Non-Compliant Image" can be the result of something as innocuous as a keyword the moderator did not like, but it apparently could also mean 'we just don't want your photo'.  Am I correct? 

If so, those are BIG differences.  A keyword problem is worthy of trying to correct and re-submit.  A 'we just don't want your photo' problem isn't worthy of further pursuit.  But how is a contributor to know whether it's one or the other (or even something else), from the vague form-letter 'Non-Compliant Image' response provided by the moderation team?

Please advise.

[Abambo]

Could you post one of your non-compliant pictures.

[3Days2Go]

   Abambo Here is an example of a submission that received the "Non-Compliant Image" rejection.

[Abambo]

Did you file the model release?

[3Days2Go]

Yes.  And that same release was attached to another image which WAS accepted. 

[Abambo]

There is nothing I could think off. I suppose the keywords were appropriate. There is no watermark...

[3Days2Go]

>There is nothing I could think off. I suppose the keywords were appropriate. There is no watermark...

Correct.  As far as I can tell, the image and its supporting documentation all seem to pass muster.  So, sort of returning to my original inquiry, does Adobe Stock use the "Non-Compliant Image" objection (beyond all other meanings) to indicate when they simply don't like or don't want an image that otherwise meets their criteria?   

[Abambo]

No. Adobe does not have a policy to do that. Their aim is to get masses of pictures accepted so that the buyer has the most open choice for selecting an image. They do not like or dislike a picture specifically. They are looking to get high quality shoots to be used by their customers.

When they think that the image is not standing out, they use the commercial value topic. Flower images for example really need to be good to be accepted.

[3Days2Go]

>When they think that the image is not standing out, they use the commercial value topic.

Aha, so, "Lacks Aesthetic or Commercial Appeal" is an actual objection that the moderation team will use for any images that they simply don't want or that they don't believe buyers would want to purchase?  That is good to know!  I haven't seen that one!

I guess that means then that the "Non-Compliant Image" objection that I received for the above submission must not be because of a lack of aesthetic or commercial appeal, (or else they would have used that actual objection).  Yet, when they give the "Non-Compliant image" objection, the form letter that goes along with it does go on to say that, "[the image] doesn't meet our needs so we can't accept it into our collection."  That sounds a lot like a value judgment, very much akin to lack of aesthetic or commercial appeal...  So, I'm sure you can see why contributors like myself might think that receiving a "Non-Compliant Image" rejection could mean something more subjective like that.

But anyway, I am back to wondering what was wrong with my submission in the first place...  It's something perhaps I may never know...

[jacquelingphoto2017]

Hi 3Days2Go,

My guess is, the photo accepted is the one that is attached to the submitted release. My understanding is that you're required to have a separate release for each photograph of the same person, even as much as you need separate releases for different person. My suggestion is to have another release signed which will include this photo as well as its description and location. I hope this helps

Best wishes

JG

[ricky336]

The OP submitted a release with the photo:

"Yes.  And that same release was attached to another image which WAS accepted."

So that's not the problem, otherwise, it would be mentioned that a release is needed and therefore go into the reminder section of the portfolio.

I can't see anything either with this image, so it must be something in the keywords. I'm afraid, it's a bit too cryptic for me.

[joanH]

The photo looks to be cut out and layered in. feet show a tight outline - unnatural. Post work in shadows? JH

[Abambo]

  wrote

The photo looks to be cut out and layered in. feet show a tight outline - unnatural. Post work in shadows? JH

That would not be "Non-compliant"... 😞

[joanH]

Anything that does comply with any rule or regulation or subject and quality level ect.can be considered as not complying. :=)

[Abambo]

Yes, but the specific critics you gave falls in Quality and technical issues rejected at Adobe Stock and not non-compliant.

Non-compliant file

This reason means that your content doesn’t comply with our Contributor Agreement. Content may be non-compliant due to watermarks, inappropriate or irrelevant keywords or image titles, or questionable, or defamatory content. Your file is also rejected as non-compliant if you receive a reminder to submit a model or property release, or resolve a problem with a release, and you resubmit the file without addressing the issue.

[3Days2Go]

> Anything that does comply with any rule or regulation or subject and quality level ect.can be considered as not complying. :=)

joanh22203655​ Interesting, Joan.  So to that end, "Non-Compliant Image" could be an objection to mean almost anything, even though there are more specific objection categories that the moderation team could have used.  It's a catch-all, in other words.  If that is true, it would seem almost an impossibility (without use of a crystal ball) for a contributor to be able to discern what they are supposed to correct for a re-submittal.  Therefore, if you are right about this, the "Non-Compliant Image" objection is the kiss of death for an image.  Adobe essentially does not want the contributor to ever resubmit that image again.  Is this the official understanding? 

[ricky336]

What about the star on the vest and the stripy pants? Perhaps they should be cloned out. And the marks on the dumbbells.

[Abambo]

You want to say that an American company refuses a stars and stripes motive?

The marks are clearly numbers.

I see, you are picking also around without a clear idea.

What if the examinator simply pushed the wrong button? It may still be that the title or one of the keywords was non-compliant...in theory. Or the model release was non-compliant or was considered non-compliant.

[Abambo]

For all the ACPs guessing here with intelligent arguments and not getting to the point and conclusion, may be Adobe could jump in and look into this?

[Jill_C]

I do think that the inspectors, who are probably measured by how many images they can dispatch hourly, sometimes just poke the wrong button. I would probably just edit it slightly, keep it in my queue for a while and resubmit later on.

[Abambo]

JC926  wrote

I do think that the inspectors, who are probably measured by how many images they can dispatch hourly, sometimes just poke the wrong button. 

As this could be the case I do not think that Adobe can sustain if that happens to often. I get sometimes images through and others not and I see what the exterminator claims, but I see the artistic point of doing. I do not resubmit the pictures in that case, but I submit to other stock publishers and I sometimes even see sales on those pictures.

I also suspect that some images go into a multiple stage inspection as sometimes part of my submission gets accepted/rejected very fast and a different part gets a more slowly treated. But still this is guesswork and I may be wrong and that the pictures just entered different queues...

[jacquelingphoto2017]

Hi 3Day2Go,

As stated at Reasons content is rejected at Adobe Stock , Non-compliant means that "your content doesn’t comply with (Adobe's) Contributor Agreement. Content may be non-compliant due to watermarks, inappropriate or irrelevant keywords or image titles, or questionable, or defamatory content. Your file is also rejected as non-compliant if you receive a reminder to submit a model or property release, or resolve a problem with a release, and you resubmit the file without addressing the issue."

You can check to see if your image is in "Reminder" mode by selecting "Uploaded Files" then "Reminder". If it is in reminder mode then it means that Adobe expects you to do the necessary correction, or submit the necessary release and resubmit the image.

Here's also a "Non-compliant" discussion that you may find useful:NON-COMPLIANT IMAGE??? You will note that the contributor's rejection was for key-word reputation. The advise was given to make correction and re-submit.

Best wishes

JG

[3Days2Go]

joanh22203655​ Hi Joan, trust me, swinging ones body around one of these practice pommels _is_ highly unnatural, LOL!  But, it's not been cut out.

[joanH]

You see it as natural - based upon your experience. I see it as tense having rigid lines. Would you buy this? I would not. That is the point about Adobe Stock - who might buy this?????

Love the conversation with you all. JH

[Abambo]

I have pictures in my account that sell (sometimes), but I wouldn’t buy them. It’s not the commercial appeal as a refusal reason. I would understand that. It’s the non-compliant that makes trouble...

Someone doing a brochure for gymnastics could buy that.