Couple questions for you amazing humans 😄
1. Are submissions considered as a whole or as individual images? Uploading to other sites submissions are considered as a cluster, but I didn't see that when uploading here.
2. When submitted to another site, 0828 and 0028 were accepted. Here, they were not accepted. Any ideas on why? Or, is it the collective submission issue above?
3. I'm in an area with bald eagles, so I want to dig in to my regional availability. BUT, getting too close can be unlawful and scary.... have yall seen those talons?!?! Any feedback on 0641, 0624, 0664 and getting closer to saleable work accepted 🙂
Thanks in advance!!!
hello @KendellRenee , on your eagle photos it is easy to see that the photos are not real sharp and the the shadows are underexposed. The sharpness is probably due to a shutter speed which is too slow for your telephoto lens. On photo 0028 and 0828 I am not sure.
Thanks Ralph!!! Gonna definitely review my first set of eagle shots again... appears the ones that are sharper are less composed 😕 Gonna see what I see the next time out...
Images are not considered as sets. They may not even be considered by the same person.
Thanks!!! Definitely confuses me a bit more, but thakful for insight!
Why does this confuse you? Each picture is considered on it's own merits.
I've looked at 624. It's simply not sharp at 100%. I also think that the exposure is not good. If you want to get nearer, you will need a bigger telelens.
Getting pictures accepted on other sites does not guaranty success here and vice versa. Adobe vetting is known to be stringent.
Confuses me more because I need to sort through a submission of 30 to determine where each could use improvement. That is a lot easier to process when "one bad apple" could spoil the bunch...
As stated in my subject, I'm a newbie, so just learning about the stringency of the various sites.
Thanks for the response!
I never submit 30 at a time - usually only 5-6. Particularly when you're new at stock submissions, I think it's best to submit a few, wait for feedback, fix those if possible and resubmit, then move on to the next batch. You'll soon learn what is acceptable to the Moderators and won't have wasted a lot of time uploading, keywording and submitting inferior images.
Makes perfect sense (now)!! I (may have) got a little excited and definitely wasted some time LOL!! Will adjust as a I move forward for sure. Thanks again for giving your time snd knowledge!!!!
As an aside - One was accepted!!
Actually scratch that TEN (10) were accepted!!! I'm stoked!!!!!
Gonna use those tips from you amazing humans and get some of those Eagles in!!!
Each image is considered on its own merits, and as you've learned, Adobe Stock Moderators are very discriminating. I've had images accepted to Getty Images which wouldn't pass the hurdle here.
Image 0028 - if you zoom in to 100% you'll see that focus on the chairs, which seems to be the focal point of the image, just isn't sharp enough.
Image 0828 - I can't figure out why this funny image was rejected; there might be a bit of noise in the shadows, but focus on the goat's eye and face is definitely sharp enough. I think you could get this one accepted with a bit of denoise applied.
The remaining 3 images are not focused sharply.
Nesting eagles does seem like a good subject to focus on; however you'll need a long lens with image stabilization (probably 400mm+) and a monopod or tripod in order to capture them sharply.
Thanks so much Jill!!! Feedback a newbie can really use, sincerely appreciate the time taken to help 😄 Will be looking in to getting better stabilization and setting up further from the eagles.
Hi @KendellRenee ,
There is color fringing around the edges of this image. It is also not properly focused.
Number 0828 is a little cool. I am not sure if the out of focus plank is an issue since the main subject seem to be within focus, but I usually like all elements in the forefront to be properly focused.
0028 elements in the forefront are out of focus.
0641 has a major white balance issue. It also appears to be noisy.
0664 seem to be underexposed
Photographer and Nutrition Author
Thanks for taking the time to review!!! Feedback apprecuated!!