I licensed some images I need for a big scale print. Therefore I looked especially for images with a high resolution. Some were okay - some were totally unsharp (e.g. #378691837 - 12000 x 8000px - but it can hardly be printed bigger than A4 if you want a sharp picture, #425438892 and #316947285 are also far away from the expected quality).
As there is no possibility to detect this before licensing I contacted customer support by chat. First they told me, that I need to open them with Photohop - then they would be sharp (which is of course nonsense - I afterwards sent one picture to a colleage of mine who has a subscription and they look exactly the same as in my standard image viewer). Then they wanted to push me into a Photoshop subscription offering worse conditions than on the website.
This combination is really disappointing.
12000x8000 px is really intriguing, as this resolution needs a very high-resolution camera. This looks like a digital upscale of a smaller picture and that is not allowed according to the contributor's guidelines. Looking at the quality of this asset, I only can confirm that it is terrible. And you are completely right, there is no need for Photoshop to view pictures. You only need a viewer that allows you to look at the picture at 100%. Would you please post the case number? I'm convinced that @EvilBugQueen1 and/or @Contributor1 would be interested to look into the assets and the chat.
As a contributor, I know that these assets are not in the required quality. Assets are really stringently vetted.
Edit: Just checked the contributor "Melanie" (image id 378691837). All the assets are around that fantastic size, and some assets look even bad with the low-resolution preview.
Hello, I've verified the issue and granted you 3 replacement licenses. I'll send the 3 assets to the content team for review. Thank you for the report and sorry for the problem with the assets quality.