I just had 95% of the photos in a submission rejected, a lot of them due to "Aesthetic or Commercial Appeal of Image". Some of these have sold elsewhere and are in fact marketable, and I got to thinking, is it one person that reviews your entire batch of submissions or are they done individually by random draw? This would help me understand how reflective of adobe stock as a whole this high rejection rate was, in other words, did some of these not meet one person's criteria or were most of these just actually junk?
Perhaps you could post a few examples, then others here may be able to give an opinion. I don't know how they review them. I think it might be rather a random draw! The aesthetic rejection can be rather subjective.
Keep in mind however, Adobe do seem to have a high standard. They don't just accept anything like most microstock sites - Shutterstock, iStock for example.
The lacking commercial appeal usually means Adobe customers have not purchased this kind of stock. Yes, it is Adobe's own standard set to satisfy their customers. However, as Ricky33 mentions, we can not see the pictures. Also, we responders do not have a list of things that do sell. You can take a look at the stock listings and trends to get an idea of what is selling. Regards, JH
Sure, can do. I'm new to Adobe Stock and if the photos stink and I just got lucky with them before then I'm ok with that, I'm just trying to get a representative idea of what Adobe will and will not want. (I read their submission guide but it didn't really cover this.)
Here's a few that have me second guessing myself. I'm not under the illusion that these are particularly good, but some have proven marketable:
hydro-electric turbine impeller,
sunset in the far north,
equipment repair service.
Thanks for taking the time to give me your thoughts on this.
To be honest with you Stephan, the photos don't do anything, so I'm not surprised they were rejected due to lack of aesthetics and commercial appeal.
They're 'nothing special', no 'WOW' factor, so this means that Adobe does not think it will fit into their collection.
You need to read up on composition. Photography is more than just pressing the shutter button!
By the way, you get to know what passes, what may pass, and what will not over time. As, I myself have found out.
These shots are okay, some have problems with high-key white areas and composition, & focus. Interest might come from a magazine depicting this kind of work or equipment or an advertisement but very little call for these. Rickey336 is so right, over time we learn what works for Adobe stock customers. Happy to help if we can. JH
Thanks Ricky and Joan for your thoughts. I chose those ones to share because they are all ones that have made sales in the past (except for the snow scene, I think that one is probably just too abstract). Even though these 5 photos are all about 15 years old which is ancient in the digital camera world, I thought they still had some relevance.
I've got about 1,000 of these that are not inline with my regular work, sort of a "seconds" of the B-roll, but after hearing your thoughts I won't submit them to Adobe. I'm actually a full time nature photographer and I agree, it's not just about the shutter release.
I welcome you to check out the work that actually earns me my living. My website is at www.spnp.ca
Thanks again for the honest input about those 5 aesthetic rejects.