Rejections seem to be the norm....

[johnr91578105]

I guess that whoever edits and decides what photographs are welcome to be published and possibly paid for is an expert in the field taking professional exposures without ever the thought that their work might be lacking. So my photos were rejected for a number of reasons that you deemed necessary and that there is no artistic quality to them, since you've decided that they were not edited in Adobe Photoshop. It's not that I don't understand that some may be rejected for lack of content, but I have found throughout life that critics think they know best. A person's opinion is another thing although it seems that we're all the same when it comes to photographs, no one having a different perspective or point of view, just whether or not it's sellable or not. Nobody knows what you mean by too much noise unless the buzzing in your own ears of how good you are and professionally you think your concepts of photography are. A good or interesting photograph is a good photograph and a person opinion is their own, not some person who rejects opportunity because he or she can. The whole point is someone or more could of and would of liked the photographs that I placed for submission, but you're too busy wasting time with your beliefs that you have a right to dictate what looks good instead of giving an interesting or different type of photograph a chance.

[joanH · Accepted solution]

Hello john01578105,

I see in your email above, that your experience with the rejections of your photographs submitted to Adobe Stock is very disappointing to you. Those of us on this forum who volunteer to answer questions here have also had their own early work rejected for similar reasons.

We are here to help you and others understand the standards and processes of submission to Adobe Stock. We offer what we hope will be helpful insights and information to the guidelines contributors must know about before sending in photographs and works of art. Even though your photographs might have been accepted by other stock online markets Adobe will perform their own reviews and accept or reject offerings that match their current client demand.

If you have not read the guidelines posted for new contributors, that is probably where you can find most answers to your questions. For now, here is a bit of information and a link you may review.

Please send us a specific question about one of your rejected photos and post the photo here.A forum volunteer professional will reply - if needed, a staff member will also offer assistance. Best to you. JH

Quality standards

"For your images to have commercial value, we expect them to be:

• Appropriately lit and exposed
• Without visible noise or dust
• Well-composed
• Processed inconspicuously"

For more information on what makes a quality image, see The review process and Create better photos for Adobe Stock with 7 tips for success.

[Abambo]

Just to say: I got now a rejection on a competitor's site for trade mark violation, because my picture was titled "Coke in the transfer car". Someone at that site drinks to much of that black soft drink.

[DrSniffy]

Hey John,

I'm pretty new to Stock also and found my equally fair share of frustration about the process of acceptance or rejections.

I came to Stock after being a contributor to Getty to expand my sales. I have to say that it appears each Stock reviewer has their own rules and eye, which can be really annoying (mainly as it's so removed from personal and relevant feedback). There's even threads here that suggest you re-submit an image a second time and someone else might see it and approve it.

Don't despair though! I've had nearly 240 images accepted in less than 2 weeks. Some stuff even I'm surprised got through haha.

Yes, sometimes it seems robotic about "exposure wrong" (for a night scene) or "focus wrong" for a shallow depth of field. I've now found myself less worried about "How dare they reject my image I worked so hard on in Lightroom" and often hit the "reset", do the basics and it gets through.

Balance the histogram, make the shots 'text book' and try to remove yourself from how you like the art to look

[Abambo]

Rejections are not the norm and it is also not a matter of using Photoshop for editing.

Rejections are also not arbitrary. Even the Commercial apeal follows some logic, as explained in a different thread here.

Now, weather your pictures are great photographs, artisticly valuable does not play a great role in stock images. Just to say, there are some great photographers who would not sell their most iconic pictures because they do not follow the established rules for stock photography.

As you may argue if some pictures are acceptable or not, and as I have pictures being accepted here and not on a different stock provider and vice versa, the rules for stock pictures seam to be quite consistent for all stock image providers.

If you want concrete indications why a picture has been refused, post it here and we will look into it and consult why the picture has been refused. Very often, it is quite obvious, if you are trained to what is acceptable as stock image and what poses problems.

[luisae7950351]

Hola....

Vamos sigue intentado!!!.... esto es un aprender todo el tiempo y los peores criticos son los que mas enseñan has una bitácora de las fotos rechadas y estudialas aprenderas exactamiente lo que no se debe hacer,  te sugiero ver videos en YouTube que te muesten como  corregir  tus errores...

asi aprendemos todos....

Cuando te acepten la primera brincaras de alegria...

Saludos!!