MicrostockGroup

IS rejected one image first because of "noise/artifacting".  I denoised it and resubmitted it, now they say again:
"This file contains artifacting when viewed at full size. This technical issue is
commonly created by the quality settings in-camera or in post-processing."
They sent the "problematic area", attached below.  I don't see noise, but in fact overdenoising.

Regards,
Adelaide

Apart from their strict reviewers, I find IS quite consistent, and quite correct in their analysis. These artifacts could be due to various reasons, they do spot things that missed my own inspection, and I learn a lot from their rejections (and acceptance).

Keep trying. Good luck

cheers.

There are blocks of same coloured pixels towards the left hand corner,  that could be described as artefacts.

I believe you just coined the word "overdenoising"

Congratulations!

rjmiz,

I hope the next edition of Webster gives credit to me.

leaf,

This image was taken in long exposure, so there is a lot of motion blur from people walking. Also it looks a bit too soft because I had already denoised it after the first rejection.

I agree it's good that they send this type of feedback (though they don't always do).  I only wished I could see what they did!

The funny thing is that the sister image - a horizontal shot of the same subject - was more processed than this one because it was originally a bit darker, nevertheless it was accepted at the first inspection.  We gotta be lucky with the inspector we pick!

Regards,
Adelaide