Use the picture icon to include in the post.
the file is reduced to 2560x1708
Among other things, it's way too dark. And underexposed images tend to have other technical problems that must also be dealt with such as white balance, artifacts and noise.
thank You for you explanations.
I'm very consternated although the picture was in various exhibitons and had a excellent review - also online. It's likeley that Photographs way up in the North in January have less light then elsewhere ... it was also taken at noon at about minus 32°C. So it shares some mystic, realistic spirit. And last but not least it was not manipulated in Photoshop or elsewhere - maybe thats a major point, and I don't like manipulated pictures.
Sorry that this is nothing that Adobe wants ...
#1 I don't work for Adobe. Like most people here, I'm a product user and unpaid forum volunteer.
#2 I don't care how many awards you've received or that the shot was taken at -32°C, etc... as that's irrelevant to this discussion.
#3 Adobe Stock customers expect perfection. They want high quality, edited images for use in million dollar print or digital ad campaigns. This image won't sell in its present state. I think that's why the Stock reviewers rejected it for technical reasons. It's not personal, it's business. Adobe Stock wants to sell images.
#4 With some slight adjustments in Photoshop, I think this photo would be an excellent addition to your Stock portfolio.
Good Luck & Happy Holidays!
Many unique pictures are useless for stock, and the fact that there is no chance to get a different one is irrelevant. This is especially true of the natural world. If you had the only picture of a unique animal species, and the composition and focus weren't perfect, it would be rejected. To complain is to miss the point: Stock is NOT a gallery, a competition, or a specialist photo library. Stock is a general offering of high quality photos for use in design. When an Adobe customer sees "problems" with focus, composition, colour balance or anything else in the photo, they complain, and want a refund. Adobe's reputation suffers. So your magnificent shot has no place in this world, as it stands.
Maybe the reviewers were thinking about the white balance. It is a bit on the magenta side. The exposure could also be increased a bit, and the highlights reduce.
It's a great picture and many social media like sites will get you many likes, points and comments. I agree with @ricky336 that there is a white balance problem. As for the exposure problem, any correction needs to be subtle. In the right upper corner there is a small darker patch that may be a sensor dust problem or a lens dust problem or simply a cloud not any more in the picture. I would patch that out.
I think it will be a great addition to Adobe stock.