I am trying to get a better idea of how some of the rules work regarding rejection. I have read the guidelines extensively. This image for example has been rejected on grounds of Intellectual property. It is my own image, no name is visible and there are lots of images of large and recognisable superyachts available for people top buy so I would like to know why this image may have been rejected ? does this yacht belong to the CEO of Adobe perhaps ?
Also on the second image. Refused on"technical grounds" Any suggestions. The full size image is pin sharp etc. There is no excessive PP / artefacts etc. I don't have a big problem with the refusals and don't take it personally, I just want a better understanding of the rules so as not to waste everyones time. The refusal of the first image of the large yacht I find particularly hard to understand on the grounds cited given how many similar images there are available for sale here in AS ???
Any thoughts, especially from Adobe please.
File ID: 239016714 Original name: Superyacht.jpg
File ID: 239014227
Original name: Camasdarrach Sound of Sleat Scotland.jpg
Your pictures are to small for an analyses.
So only this: IP can also be because of the keywords.
Thanks for the very quick reply to my post. I tried to upload target images but was told that they should eb only 900 pixels wide so reduced them accordingly. Can I upload a higher resolution version here ?
The image of the large yacht would have had keywords such as yacht, yachting, Superyacht etc. I can not remember exactly what I used but they would have been very similar to those. So still do not understand the rejection on IP basis.
You can upload higher resolutions. I do not know the real limits, but try the full resolution...
there may be a logo visible on the yacht. On the second image there is a logo, but that's ip and not technical issues.
(FYI: I'm not Adobe and generally Adobe does not comment on general issues like this. But it may be that Adobe staff will be answering if your question is of interest to the general understanding of the moderation process).
Could be the design of the superyatch. As for the 2nd picture - technical issues - it's a bit hard to tell at this resolution. Possibly adding a bit more contrast and vibrance - it would then give a bit more punch to the image. As it is now, it is a bit dull. I can't see any other problems - apart from the logos...which would then be IP issues...
People who contribute here are users like yourself. If an Abode staff responds - they'll have a red 'Staff' badge under their avatar.
Thank for the comments.
I made sure the name on the vessel was not visible and even erased the courtesy flag so you could not even tell which country the yacht was in at the time.
Regarding the second image I can see the point of the Branding be visible on the small tender in the foreground, but as you say that would be an IP issue. I am very careful when post processing s I have had a few rejected for"Artefacts" including one that had almost zero pos done on it, just happened to be natural saturated and vibrant.
This version is uploaded at75% original size so in theory will be much better but the dialogue does say it may be called to 900 wide...
I think the issue could be with the actual design of the yacht. The design itself is recognisable, isn't it?
I have worked in the world of large yachts for about 25 years and would not have recognised it unless I had seen the name there are many much more distinctive yachts out there that have images that are available here. For example image no 178076552. Like I said Im not taking it personally in any way i just do not want to waste anyones time uploading images that will get rejected so merely wish to better understand the rules. All the comments much appreciated.
I understand your issue...
That's where the only 'help' is this:
Which I guess you have read - so:
Distinctive product shapes like toys, bottles, luxury furniture, vehicles, airplanes
This would probably include superyachts.
I think Adobe Stock is being a lot more careful with recent submissions.
IP rights are a minefield!
Yeah read it right through already.
It's no big deal and thanks for the assistance.
There are still small logos here and there:
Thanks for the eagle eyed comment. I will take care to eliminate all such branding in future, never knew hey could possibly be so pedantic about branding !!! Many thanks.
Yes they are... If you know where and what to look...I won't say that was the refusal reason, there may still be the "big picture" as pointed out by Rickey.
All very helpful as Im learning my way. many thanks to all who have commented.
Maybe a yacht of a more generic design would be accepted, but this is a very destinct design. This goes fir bottles, cycles, cars and everything. Some images which are accepted before and are not according to the rules can be from the “old” Fotolia-period.
Image 1: Take out the blue and black image below the top deck window and the blue mark below it. those are identifying marks.
Image 2: Take out the blue and red writing at the side and the front, and there seem to be some writing on what appears to be the engine. Take that out also.
The magnified image of Amabo shows grains also. You need to correct that, or it will be rejected a second time for grains/noise.
many thanks for the input. I'm beginning to get the picture now. So all branding no matte how insignificant in the image is going to cause a problem so far as I understand from everyone's comments. Once again. Thanks to all for their conributions. in helping me figure this out
You are welcome... You understand correctly.
Yes, any logos, branding etc may lead to a refusal and needs to be edited out. As for distinguished forms, there would be a refusal for a coke bottle, the green yellow colour on fendt machines etc. Information on this may be found in the contributors user manual. I do not think that this yacht would be refused as the form and the setting is quite generic. I'm not an expert in yachts, but this is how I probably would draw a yacht from scratch.