Reason for rejection: Technical Error

[cestes0001]

I've gone through the conditions listed in the literature for why an image would be rejected for Technical Error and, as far as I can see, This image doesn't seem to fit any of them.  Any Ideas?

Title is: Myrtle Falls - Mount Rainier National Park

Description is: Just an easy walk from Paradise lodge is this beautiful waterfall with a foot bridge across the head of the falls.

Tags: Bridge; Destination; Forest; HDR; Hiking; Landscape; Logs; Mount Rainier Natl Park; Nature; Outdoors; River; Myrtle Falls; Rocks; Scenic; Spectacular; Stream; Sunny; Tourist; Travel; Trees; Washington; Water; Waterfall; Woods;

[joanH]

WoW! That's a great photograph. My guess is that somehow the words selected for the title and selected search words are not quite right.

I have had things returned for Tech Error and reposted the photo being careful to use the right description words and a better title and it was accepted. JH

[oleschwander]

Great image - but maybe it’s oversaturated in postprocessing ..? Try to make the colors a bit more ‘natural’.

[v.poth]

Hi,

I think these two points out of the reasons for "technical" rejection could be:

"White balance: The white balance may be too warm or too cool." and/or "Contrast: There may be too much or not enough contrast."

This makes the overall appearance of the image too unnatural. The effect is enhanced by the HDR-technique you obviously used for the recording.

Greets,

v.poth

[ricky336]

To me, it is also oversaturated and the white blance is off - I think it is too blue - as noted above. So, you need to alter your white balance - make it a bit warmer and tone down the saturation.

[mars lewis]

Nothing wrong about the image technically. Any purely subjective issues can be modulated in post. There appears to be some occasional snobbery or professional jealously at work depending on who evaluates your submission. It's the luck of the draw unfortunately.

I just got a rejection on a beautifully rendered CGI generated female image. The problem? The Einstein that evaluated my image found the the CGI female so realistic that he/she insisted that I supply a release for a non-existent person.

I objectively have issues with about 2/3 of my rejected images. It's unfortunate because I have had multiple sales on everything that made it's way through the capricious gauntlet of gate keepers.

[oleschwander]

Mars Lewis - I don’t thik your rejection is due to the realistic person, but sometimes they need a proof that you have taken the photograph you use for sketching or rendering yourself and not have used a random photograph from the internet? Then it is not a model release but a property release. Other sites also demand property releases if you draw realistic persons - also e.g. in silhouettes.

[mars lewis]

I submit original 3d renderings. There is no release needed because these are creations from imagination and not from a reference photo. It is interesting how some of my renderings get accepted with no problems and others of comparable origination, design and quality get what can only be described as a purely arbitrary rejection decision. I don't believe you currently possess an equitable standard for evaluating submissions - which has lead to the unfortunate rejection of good works, free of copyright issue, that possess commercial appeal. All my submissions through 2017 have had multiple sales.

I just have to learn to live without the 99 cents that i could have earned on these rejected images. I do feel, that there is currently a limited understanding of the difference between a photograph and the hyperealism of 3d creations within your current submission approval process and would hope that this might improve over time.

Let me finish by saying whereas i am very dissapointed with the undeserved rejection of some of my images, i am sincerely grateful for the approval of the other images which allows me to participate with Adobe Stock.

Thank you.

[mars lewis]

Also, how does one prove that their image is not derived from some random image on the internet. One cannot prove "a negative". This is a fundamental logical truth. On the other hand, if Adobe feels that any of my images are derived from some random image on the internet for which i do not possess property rights for, then it is incumbent on the person or persons rejecting a submission on that basis to produce evidence of the image they feel my submission plagiarizes.

Otherwise there is absolutely no just cause for rejecting an image on that basis. It is unfair and a logically flawed policy - i don't think this is Adobe's policy however- i just think some of those who are making these flawed decisions aren't all that good at their job or are just making it up as they go.

I'll be interested to see what kind of malnevolence i encounter from this point forward for simply pointing out these unfortunate errors on Adobe's part.

[oleschwander]

Mars – I'm not representing Adobe Stock. Just another underpaid microstock contributor ..!

[mars lewis]

Sorry for the error on my part - and thanks for caring enough give input. Hopefully my reply did add clarity to the somewhat flawed but understandable logic you presented as a possible reason for the rejection of my submission. It was appreciated.

[oleschwander]

Hi Mars - yes I hope they are reading your exellent and positive input ..!

[v.poth · Accepted solution]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/mars+lewis  schrieb

Nothing wrong about the image technically. Any purely subjective issues can be modulated in post. There appears to be some occasional snobbery or professional jealously at work depending on who evaluates your submission. It's the luck of the draw unfortunately.

Hi,

this is a statement that does not help the author of the thread with his question. I consider this general statement, which influences the assessment of the selectors by personal feelings, to be very questionable and wrong.

There are definitely technical problems in this picture that justify a rejection, I think.

The reasons for the refusal of your pictures which you describe here have nothing to do with the topic of technical problems.

Maybe you will find here some information about the reasons for refusal in illustrations concerning property releases:

https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/user-guide.html

Otherwise, I would recommend that you describe these problems to support in order to clarify them and avoid further rejections.

Greets,

v.poth