Why was my image rejected for NON-COMPLIANT without describing how?

[herbertg80280944]

This image is a Kaleidoscope which was created within PhotoScape X effects panel. In order to correct a Non- compliant issue, that issue should be identified by the reviewer. How can the non-compliant aspect of this image be addressed and corrected if that aspect is not defined?

[ricky336]

Hi,

Have you read this?

https://helpx.adobe.com/content/dam/help/en/stock/contributor/Adobe_Stock_Contributor_Guide.pdf

It says this about noncompliance:

Check for noncompliance. Noncompliant means your content is not in line with our Contributor Agreement, possibly due to inappropriate or irrelevant keywords or titles, or questionable or defamatory content. We may also reject content as noncompliant if you do not supply a model or property release after it is requested, or otherwise do not resolve a known issue.

Have a look at your keywords!

[joanH]

Yes, this is the right answer. One of the guidelines was not applied or conformed to. Check all the reasons listed in the Text.JH

[herbertg80280944]

The rejection does not specify which aspect of this image is non- compliant. It is in my best interest to send quality images for two important reasons 1. I want every image I capture to be an accurate depiction of that small slice of time. 2. I want to make money doing what I do anyway. The first is more important to me than the second. But how can I correct a problem that has not been clearly defined,a process very easy ,as , easy as  Non - Compliant  Keywords/ Title /  well you see what I mean. I have read the available material on this issue and it doesn't address this rejection.

[sjlocke215]

You'll be more successful submitting images without having run simple filter effects on them.

[scottbu]

What an absolutely ridiculous system!  The reviewer could take 5 seconds, maybe less, to tell the contributor what the problem is.  Instead, the contributor is left to guess.  And with so little info in the above referenced pdf, will probably guess wrong.  So the contributor corrects what they think MIGHT be the problem, and the reviewer rejects it again - wasting valuable time for both of them.  This could go on for some time, wasting more time with every re-submission that will be rejected for a reason the contributor can only guess.

If the goal is to get salable images onto Adobe Stock as efficiently as possible, for Adobe as well as for the contributor, it would be in Adobe's best interest to give SOME CLUE as to why the submission is "non-compliant."  Adobe - help us help you!

[Abambo]

scottbu  wrote

What an absolutely ridiculous system!  The reviewer could take 5 seconds, maybe less, to tell the contributor what the problem is.

This would slow down the process enormously. Moderators have very little time per image. An in most of the cases the problem is clear. But I had one image that I needed to submit 4 times to get it accepted each timewith a different modification. That's life...

Currently I get one in 20 or 30 images refused. It's a matter of self education.

[scottbu]

I have fewer than 1 in 20 rejected.  In fact, my first rejection in over 200 submissions was for being "non-compliant."  It's a pano of Mt. Rainier.  The only thing I can think of is that it might have too many pixels on the long side. Whatever the reason, Adobe rejecting it without bothering to say why means we both lose.

If Adobe has any sense, they have provided their moderators with software that simply allows them to check a box in a list of options.  Adding a few more boxes so that contributors know how to fix the specific issue, and more importantly, don't submit more photos with the same issue, would be simple, quick, not burdensome.

It's just a personal pet peeve of mine - I hate to see companies shoot themselves in the foot.  Especially when they do so willingly.

[herbertg80280944]

Thanks for the feedback ricky336. If the problem is the title and/or key words then wouldn't it be more efficient for the reviewer to specify which aspects are Non -Compliant in order for the contributor to correct the issue? Is there a way to view the keywords after a rejection? If there is could you direct me to the correct menu. This image is

the reference image for the Kaleidoscope . If this plain photography is transformed into a "illustration" or a " Vector graphics" by the effects panel of Photoscape X and my category,title,keywords, could be the issue.How I am I to know what to correct based on this rejection? REALLY?

[ricky336 · Accepted solution]

No, not that I can tell. The keywords don't show in the rejected files, so, unless you have a copy of your keywords...

'The rejection does not specify which aspect of this image is non- compliant.'

I'm afraid you have to work that one out for yourself. I can only speculate what might be wrong.

Is your reference photo yours?

Have you supplied a release form for IP purposes?

The guide is only a guide and therefore not detailed. It is up to us to adhere to Adobes requirement's. You can certainly ask advice from other users in these forums but sometimes it's like the blind leading the blind!

[joanH]

Hello herbertg, This is a continual and hot topic so you will save time and worry if you do study the handbook Adobe has created and posted for Adobe Stock Contributors. Here is a quote that applies to your question and comments. Remember, Adobe is international, reviews must be quick. The demand for reviews are increasing and the time to write notes with rejections is just not there. Take a look at the top righthand margin on this forum under MORE LIKE THIS  for links to more information. Best regards. JH

Non-compliant file

"This reason means that your content doesn’t comply with our Contributor Agreement. Content may be non-compliant due to watermarks, inappropriate or irrelevant keywords or image titles, or questionable, or defamatory content. Your file is also rejected as non-compliant if you receive a reminder to submit a model or property release or resolve a problem with a release, and you resubmit the file without addressing the issue."