HI, one possibility how, where and by whom your pictures are used, at least for those in the web, is to google for your seller pseudonym or to search in the Google picture search by drag and drop your pictures. As far as printed magazines etc. are concerned you are dependent on your own or on the attention of friends/colleagues who point this out to you. Greets, v.poth. ... View more

Hi, I think it's the elevated perspective you took the picture from. This is a copyright infringement in many countries, because you apparently did not photograph from public ground street, sidewalk. A legal restriction of panoramic freedom lies in the way the photo is taken. The authority extends only to the external view of a work. Anything that shows more than just the outside view and is therefore no longer visible from public roads, streets or squares is not permitted. Likewise an aerial photograph is inadmissible and in addition to the airplane also telephoto lens and ladder are declared in the judgement as further inadmissible aids, if thereby the private sphere is spied out. For the photographer it means: stay on the ground! Unless he has a valid property release for this type of recording. Greets, v.poth ... View more

HI, if your pictures have been accepted, are stock-suitable and of good quality, they sell well, regardless of the number of your rejections. Greets, v.poth ... View more

Hi, I think there are several reasons why the picture was not accepted and, despite possible attempts at improvement, would not be accepted in the future either. In both technical and pictorial terms. From the technical side, the image is not sharp in any area, the image detail is not well chosen because the feet of the bird are cut off here, and the square image format is also not given here for a wide use of the image for customers. Check the image sharpness in the 100% view, observe the rule of thirds and consider when designing the image that there is a meaningful free space for text, if this is intended. Greets, v.poth ... View more

Hi, generally nothing is shown really sharp in this picture, the optical exemption of the dog in front of the background is not good enough and the exposure of the picture shows too little contrast. Saturation should also be increased. White balance is certainly not the reason for rejection, I think. Since the image sharpness cannot be improved here, I consider a new upload to be useless, since here the image would surely be rejected again for this reason. Greets, v.poth ... View more

Hi, what do you think you can use faster now to adjust your workflow or to hope for an update in Lightroom? The problem of alphabetical sorting of keywords in Lightroom has been known for years and has not yet been solved. I think keywording in Adobe Bridge is the quicker and more effective solution. But it´s your choice what make sense for you. Greets, v.poth ... View more

Hi, das PDF ist Teil dieser Seite: https://www.adobe.com/legal/terms/enterprise-licensing.html wo es speziell um Enterprise Lizenzen, also um die Nutzungsbedingungen speziell für Unternehmen bei Erwerb einer Lizenz geht. Sei es als "Standard" oder "Extended". So habe ich die Frage von Wilm verstanden das er dies wissen wollte. Generell gibt es ja für Unternehmenskunden auch spezielle Angebote für den Erwerb von Lizenzen. Hierzu ein Kommentar von Mat: "Hi All, The sales that are currently labeled "Subscription X" in Fotolia and "Extended" in Adobe Stock are from Enterprise sales. Enterprise deals have custom plans and you receive 33% of the purchase price. The sale information on your account page will be changed to “Custom” in the near future. Thank you, Mat Hayward" Enterprise Lizenz heißt meiner Meinung nach einfach das hier ein spezieller Kaufpreis mit einem Unternehmenskunden vereinbart wird, aber dies keine eigene Lizenzart oder ein generell neues Preismodell ist. Dies ist im Antwortschreiben des Supports oben offenbar einfach nur mißverständlich ausgedrückt worden. Die Standardvergütung von 26,40€ für eine X im Einzelverkauf gibt es auch weiterhin, denke ich. ... View more

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Wilm+Ihlenfeld  schrieb Wobei es ja keine X-Lizenz ist, sondern eine Enterprise Lizenz. Was ist das? Was kann der Kunde damit machen und was nicht? Hallo Wilm, hierzu habe ich diese Seite gefunden:https://wwwimages2.adobe.com/content/dam/acom/en/legal/terms/enterprise/pdfs/PSLT-Stock-NA-2018v1.pdf Gruß, Volker ... View more

Hi Annett, sicher wirst Du hier im Forum keine detallierte Erläuterung von Adobe erhalten. Die Preispolitik wird hier von Seiten Adobe nicht öffentlich diskutiert, davon solltest Du ausgehen. Um über Details der Lizenzbedingungen solcher Verkäufe informiert zu werden, kannst Du nur versuchen über contributor-support@adobe.com Näheres zu erfahren. Beschwerden hierüber sollten auch an diese Adresse gerichtet werden, wenn sie eine Chance haben sollen "gehört" und evtl. entsprechend beantwortet zu werden. Gruß, Volker ... View more

Hi, in the search at Adobe it is generally not possible to search for titles. If you want to search for your pictures you have to enter the keywords you entered for your picture during the upload in the search to find your pictures. Greets, v.poth ... View more

Hi, please post the pictures directly here in your post, because nobody here in the forum can access your rejected photos by picture ID. Greets, v.poth ... View more

Hi, You took the pictures with an Olympus E30 at ISO 200. In general you should be very careful with the image processing, because this camera obviously has a bad noise behaviour. This is particularly noticeable with high-contrast images. In the first picture you can see the artifacts on the window frames and I find it exposed too dark. More contrast in the image could not hurt either. The second image is severely underexposed and has strong noise in the area of the sky. The image looks dull and could use a little more contrast/saturation. I would change the composition of the picture according to the rule of thirds so that the sea lion moves more into the focus of the viewer and the horizon moves up a bit. You should be very selective when correcting technical image errors and further processing, as the source material is not particularly good and new image errors are created or amplified otherwise. Greets, v.poth ... View more

Hi, I see in the 200% view strong noise in the sky and chromatic aberration around the contours of the helicopter. Here too, I think the rejection by the selector is justified. Another thing is certainly the unique identifiability of the helicopter by the text on it. I think you also need a property release here. Greets, v.poth ... View more

Hi, a problem with Focus Stacking is depending on how many images you combine here with the software that can result in an irregular depth of field. This seems to me to be the case in this picture. Some blurred areas in the image maybe have been interpreted by the selector as artifacts. Example: One should pay attention to check the even distribution of the depth of field in focus stacking shots carefully, as the software processing can result in several image errors with regard to joining and fading. Greets, v.poth ... View more

Hi, I can understand your frustration very well and I think all providers know this feeling. One puts a lot of work into his image production and money into his equipment and often no longer understands the world why this or that image was now rejected. But one should not make a mistake, especially as a beginner where there is a high rejection rate, if one wants to improve his acceptance rate: To ignore the reasons for rejection and not to try to regard these as help to learn with the time what kind of pictures to upload should have a good chance to be accepted. This learning process takes time and here you have to fight your way through, persevere, and don't let yourself be discouraged. After that you will also get to another point that will occupy you and possibly frustrate you, namely the sales figures of the pictures. The acceptance is only the first step and is no sales guarantee. And also here there is again a learning process which one must go through which also needs again its time. There is a saying that is often quoted here in the forum: "The road to success is not a sprint, but a marathon". Greets, v.poth ... View more

Hi Wilm, ich denke je populärer das wird umso öfter wird ein Kunde davon Gebrauch machen. Rabatte von fast 40% auf ein Produkt sind wirklich nur als "obszön" zu bezeichnen, das gibt es sonst nirgendwo in der freien Wirtschaft, denke ich. Aber wenn man bedenkt das die Unterschiede zum Kaufpreis von Bildern mit Credits und des Kaufes durch Abo´s noch extremere Rabatte bedeuten, wundert es dann nicht mehr warum eine Agentur diesen Schritt geht und auch X-Lizenzen zum Ramschpreis anbietet. Nur eine unternehmerisch logische Folge die zu erwarten war. Der nächste Schritt wird der sein, das es X-Lizenzen nicht mehr gibt und alle Bilder in jeglicher Weise genutzt werden können, vermute ich mal. I think the more popular this becomes, the more often a customer will make use of it. Discounts of almost 40% on a product can really only be described as "obscene", nowhere else in the private economy possible, I think. But if one considers that the differences to the purchase price of pictures with credits and the purchase by Abo´s mean still more extreme discounts, it is no longer surprising why an agency goes this step and offers also X-licenses to the junk price. Only an entrepreneurially logical consequence that was to be expected. The next step will be that there are no more X-licenses and all images can be used in any way, I guess. ... View more

Hi, I don't think Adobe Stock rejects pictures deliberately, because they earn their money with them and therefore want to have and sell as many pictures as possible in their database. The technical, pictorial and legal requirements for a commercially usable image are defined by Adobe Stock and will be applied accordingly by the selectors in their evaluation. Believe me, there are many examples here in the forum, in which offerers think their pictures are error-free from their point of view, and with concrete consideration it turned out again and again that they actually were not. One thing I learned in my time here as a provider, the eyes of the photographer on his own work can very often be blind on one eye. It doesn't matter what you see on your monitor, but what the selectors see on hers matters, and I don't think they are of bad quality. The keywords and titles of the image must also be checked by the selectors, so that subsequent indexing after approval would only require a further check. That doesn't make much economic sense to a company, I mean. Greets, v.poth ... View more

Hi, please have a look at the information in the Adobe User Guide about Intellectual Property: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/user-guide.html?topic=/stock/contributor/morehelp/legal-guidelines.ug.js Then I think it would make sense if you would post your picture here, because we cannot retrieve rejected pictures via the picture ID. Greets, v.poth ... View more

Hi, I don't think it's a DOF problem, because he photographed with an aperture of 8 and 10 and still nothing is really sharp in the pictures. ... View more

Hi, please see the explanation of the reason for refusal "technical reasons": https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html Then take a look at the bridge in 100% view. There are a lot of chromatic aberrations here. I think the bridge was also too strongly cropped for the selector. Apart from these reasons for refusal, however, it seems to me that the image as a whole is not sharply focused. Greets, v.poth ... View more