Hello, Technical reasons include chromatic aberration - the purple/green fringing around the edges -  which you have here - note the green around the edges... and here: A bit harder to see - but along the leaf edges... Also, white balance could be altered just a bit - more in the second shot, some may see this as being a bit too warm. ... View more

I also have filled out this form, and it has been validated. I only had to fill it out once. So, there must be some incorrect information. You would only have to update the form, if you have had a change in circumstances. (Like any other official form). ... View more

In my opinion the Adobe portal is great and easy to use - and I like the idea that you can upload directly from Bridge or Lightroom - assuming of course one uses those programmes. I also think that the auto keywording function is very useful indeed - although it is not fool proof and one needs to edit them accordingly, but it most certainly saves time having to input more of the common keyword terms! As for the number of views - how useful and accurate this actually is debatable I think. Image views were in the past - but were taken down due to inaccuracies apparently. I have tried another agency before Adobe, but resigned from that because their portal was awful to use - although just after I joined they were making a lot of changes to the service - but these changes drove me nuts - so I quit! For me the Adobe portal is NOT cluttered with I think useless information, which is more out of interest rather than being practical - although a lot of people may disagree with this, and is debatable. As for the email being displayed - this information is available in your Adobe Account. And if you submit your proof of ID, and it is approved, you can upload. If not, then you can't upload. You get an email sent anyway. I cannot compare to Fotolia as it is now owned by Adobe, but I think the Adobe portal is just fine. So, really, this is just a matter of opinion. I don't think I would call the Adobe portal stone aged. Quite the opposite - up there with the movers and shakers. ... View more

If you use Lightroom and want to publish to Adobe Stock AND you want to publish directly within Lightroom, then you don't need to convert to JPG as the Adobe Stock Publisher converts raw format to JPG automatically. This saves you the extra step of conversion within Lightroom. Also when you are converting, make sure you are using the maximum quality - 100%, and the maximum file size. ... View more

On the page you have shown - screen shot, hover with your mouse over the title for example, the section will be highlighted and you will see a pencil icon - click on it - and you will be able to edit! You can do this with all the options. ... View more

In the waterfall picture, part of the reason is that you have chromatic aberration - which is the purple fringing you can see on the rock, and possibly white balance is also an issue as well as in the second picture. ... View more

Hi Mateusz, You are a bit unclear - nie rozumiem - zdjęcie za 8 tysięcy?! Nie do wiary! Opublikuj przykład zdjęcia - może możemy pomóc. The minimum resolution is 4 megapixels - but better to have higher. The Canon cameras - (lustrzanka -DSLR) for example have a good range with a good amount of pixels. (PS Joan - Mateusz is a he!) ... View more

I don't think the blurred people would be considered as chromatic aberration. I think white balance could be a problem - it is a bit to blue! This was done using the raw filter in Photoshop - auto mode. Your second picture - you could adjust the horizon a tad - easy to do. I think white balance could be adjusted a bit as well - but - you may have other problems with exposure due to the sun's rays being burnt out a bit too much and composition - the lamp kind of divides the photo in two! ... View more

Adobe bought Fotolia, so that is why you're selling photos there. You don't have to maintain two accounts. ... View more

Yes, there is a lot of blur. Always inspect you work at 100%. You can see here that the birds are just not sharp at all. So, this is what the reviewers would be referring to: ... View more

or compression rate, it is best to leave on maximum - large file, so in Photoshop that setting would be 12. This should then reduce jpeg artifacts and other potential problems. So, to be clear, these were uploaded as illustrations, right, and you submitted them as JPEG files, right. The only difference between these two is the background. Blue being accepted - as you stated and white background rejected due to 'artifacts', right? So, it seems that with a white or grey background, this somehow made a difference in reviewing. Which of course does not make a lot of sense. Perhaps, with the white background it created an optical illusion - giving an appearance of being blurred, or having artifacts. Whereas with the blue background, this didn't occur. So, maybe, submit again. Start with a new file, and save as a large file (maximum) and see what happens. Although, I guess you do this anyway! Personally, I can't see any difference between the two files - apart from one white background and one blue. ... View more