Hi If any one can help and give me a bit explanation with rejection to my photo.
File ID: 186053130 - reason of rejection - Non-compliant Image
I'm not discussing why Adobe Stock done this - because they always can do this, because it is their shop.
I would like to know the reason of rejection - juts to avoid failure in future.
Any one can say something constructive ?
Hi Piotr, it's probably because of the logo on the cable car! It can be recognised.
Thank you Ricky. Its more as information not logo. This sign mean High Mountain. But it can be a reason.
I think another reason, apart from the recognizable logo mentioned by ricky336, is the black rounded frame around the picture, which is as far as I know from Fotolia always a reason for refusal.
Furthermore, the image seems to be very / or too sharpened. All in all, the colouring of the picture seems unnatural to me. Is the red sky coloured afterwards? It doesn't really fit to a bright time of day, I think.
Thank you. Frame it can be one of reasons. About photo itself - did you try to photograph this kind of scenery at foggy day ? Its almost 2650m over sea level. So weather conditions are poor. About colours - its more my interpretation - this don't have to be 100% as it is on nature. Don't you think ? I have other photos in my portfolio with colours unreal and they are accepted by Adobe. But your opinion can be similar to someone from Adobe and this is one reason of rejection. I appreciate your opinion. I'm wonder why Adobe will not put a bit explanation with picture rejection- its much more friendly why.
Have a good day
It looks it is probably because of logo on Ropeway car. The reason of rejection - Non-compliant Image is fits into this as logo is identifiable and require release.
Sohn Gottes - I'm afraid is not. Simply because when you type Lomnica or Wysokie Tatry - you can find others pictures from others members of Adobe stock with this logo. So It can't be a main reason.
Thank you for answer.
Ha Ha Ha...
May be.... may be not....
Everyone else other than the reviewer himself/ herself can here can only give his/ her view on your photo. Only the reviewer who rejected your Photo can exactly tell what he/ she saw or noticed when rejected your photo.
I pointed out the reason of because of logo on Ropeway car and it may be ropeway car and the whole system because it is someone else's property/ may be public department owned and maintained.
I had asked similar query myself in forum. Adobe do not accept editorial images from every one. Yes there are editorial images on adobe stock. When I searched "Lomnica or Wysokie Tatry" there re some photos which have trolleys in them and they are editorial and there are commercial images too. I don't know If contributor had submitted property release for commercial use of these images. When we submit image we have to check weather the image is editorial or commercial and if it need a release. So it becomes a responsibility of the photographer itself when any issue appears later. So there are chances that similar images may have been approved for commercial license without a release. That's why the reviewer can only tell what he/ she noticed for image rejection. It is very mixed up thing for what monuments or landmarks one can submit images for commercial use and there is very blurred thin line between both.
The whole white frame thing needs to go.
sjlocke215 - I'm afraid you are not right. Already I have other photos with frame accepted. So its not a issue as a main.
Thank you for your answer.
The frame is definitely an issue. The logo on the car is also an issue, the file is oversharp and the color is funky. Generally you will find better success submitting the clean, color version of your file. Designers prefer to add their own special effects to match their project exactly. Processing it this much severely limits the market for your content.
"sjlocke215 - I'm afraid you are not right. Already I have other photos with frame accepted. So its not a issue as a main."
Sorry, it is. Stock photos should never be submitted with efx like a fake frame on them. I'd be happy you got the other ones in somehow, and not do it on further images.