pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: strange rejections  (Read 621 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

« on: May 11, 2022, 04:09 »
+2
I keep getting photo rejections for 'technical reasons' on adobe when there's nothing wrong with them, they are at least properly focused, lit & exposed. Is there anything I'm missing there? I even shoot in RAW now and get slightly sharper and better quality images. Some photos rejected had a small DOF area in focus intentionaly but will the rewiewer realise that?
When I started over 2 years ago I hardly ever got any rejects apart from IP rejects even though I only shot in JPEG and was a stock beginner but have improved greatly since



« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2022, 04:16 »
+3
I don't know what is wrong with your image (impossible to tell without seeing it in full size), but what I can tell you is that "technical reasons" is the only rejection reason Adobe ever seems to give and that's the "explanation" you get no matter what is wrong with your image. I keep getting these rejections from time to time on my photos of plants on white background and I have yet to find anything wrong with them. They are in focus, have no noise and no other agency, including Shutterstock, where most people seem to get rejections, ever rejected any of them.
The real reason could be anything, from wrong keywords, to too similar to other content to a simple "We don't want this content".
It's quite annoying, because without a more specific reason you don't know what to fix with the image. Sadly no one here can really help you with this.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2022, 00:18 by Firn »

« Reply #2 on: May 11, 2022, 11:42 »
0
I keep getting photo rejections for 'technical reasons' on adobe when there's nothing wrong with them, they are at least properly focused, lit & exposed. Is there anything I'm missing there? I even shoot in RAW now and get slightly sharper and better quality images. Some photos rejected had a small DOF area in focus intentionaly but will the rewiewer realise that?
When I started over 2 years ago I hardly ever got any rejects apart from IP rejects even though I only shot in JPEG and was a stock beginner but have improved greatly since

Me too whole batch on technicalities. Perfectly exposed, always use exposimeter and in focus. Dont get it.

OM

« Reply #3 on: May 11, 2022, 18:57 »
+3
Unfortunately with AS rejection reasons, they're usually too general and are not really helpful. I've only recently started again with submitting and the rejections are minimal. When rejections occur, I tend to regard them as simply bad luck and move on.

« Reply #4 on: May 12, 2022, 18:00 »
+1
Many of the rejections for technical reasons are bogus.  When you shoot in studio with same light, same aperature, same focus etc etc and not similar image at all but one is rejected--- it is totally bogus.

AS not the only one.  (And what is rejected is different -- seems more important that process rejects something once in a while more than accuracy)

« Reply #5 on: Today at 01:49 »
0
It seems to me that Adobes standard rejection reason is because Adobe is not the agency that carries newbies trough the process. They want photographers who know what they do. It is the same with Alamy, they do not go easy on rejections. I also had technical good images rejected. On the other hand I had an image accepted that had noise and was not in good focus. Because the image was funny and unusual.

Sometimes the technical rejection comes quite fast. It could be they have some algorithm sorting out obvious faulty images, before ever letting the human reviewer bother with it.

Adobe is one of the better paying agencies. If you want more help there is always Shutterstock...

« Reply #6 on: Today at 02:15 »
0
It is the same with Alamy, they do not go easy on rejections.

Alamy does rejections?  :o

« Reply #7 on: Today at 08:06 »
0
It is the same with Alamy, they do not go easy on rejections.

Alamy does rejections?  :o

Not sure if you are being sarcastic here, but yes, they do?
Anything shot with my smartphone won't fly there. (but I don't have a high-end smartphone).

« Reply #8 on: Today at 09:50 »
0
It is the same with Alamy, they do not go easy on rejections.

Alamy does rejections?  :o

Not sure if you are being sarcastic here, but yes, they do?
Anything shot with my smartphone won't fly there. (but I don't have a high-end smartphone).

No, I wasn't sarcastic. I don't have rejections on Alamy.

Alamy doesn't accept photos from  "something that doesnt compare to a standard DSLR", so submitting spartphone photos maybe isn't the bets idea:
https://www.alamy.com/blog/alamys-rough-guide-to-digital-cameras
« Last Edit: Today at 10:00 by Firn »

« Reply #9 on: Today at 11:46 »
0
It is the same with Alamy, they do not go easy on rejections.

Alamy does rejections?  :o

Not sure if you are being sarcastic here, but yes, they do?
Anything shot with my smartphone won't fly there. (but I don't have a high-end smartphone).

No, I wasn't sarcastic. I don't have rejections on Alamy.

Alamy doesn't accept photos from  "something that doesnt compare to a standard DSLR", so submitting spartphone photos maybe isn't the bets idea:
https://www.alamy.com/blog/alamys-rough-guide-to-digital-cameras

But Firn, there are rejections.
After several years and over 10,000 uploads, it got me a few weeks ago. Out of over 100 images in several batches, one image was rejected and with it, of course, all the photos from the submission.
The rejection compared to Shutterstock refreshingly different: Excessive Sharpness  ;)
Since then Alamy punishes me with longer review times. Everything is actually a bit childish.

And as I have already written several times, I have no problems with iPhone 12 Photos here.

« Reply #10 on: Today at 11:52 »
0

Since then Alamy punishes me with longer review times. Everything is actually a bit childish.



Wait, your QC rank dropped because of ONE rejected image?  :o
That's really childish.
Though I must say the speed at which my images are reviewd varies a lot even at the same rank. Sometimes it's a day, sometimes it's 3 or even 4 and can be even longer if a weekend is inbetween, where no reviews happen at all.

But the whole review process on Alamy is a mess. What I can't stand is how you can only check the "editorial use only" box after an image was approved and is basically up for everyone to buy. Not that my Alamy images sell like hot cake the minute they are approved and that's a real worry of mine, but the thought has crossed my mind. What if a buyer buys an image after it was approved before I have the chance to mark it as editorial and used it commercially? Then I am the one to blame.
« Last Edit: Today at 15:03 by Firn »

« Reply #11 on: Today at 12:26 »
0

Since then Alamy punishes me with longer review times. Everything is actually a bit childish.



Wait, your QC rank dropped because of ONE rejected image?  :o
That's really childish.
Though I must say the speed at which my images are reviewd varies a lot even at the same rank. Sometimes it's a day, sometimes it's 3 or even 4 and can be even longer if a weekend is inbetween, where no reviews happen at all.

But the whole review process on Alamy is a mess. What I can't stand (or maybe in all these years wasn't able to figure out) is how you can only check the "editorial use only" box after an image was approved and is basically up for everyone to buy.. Not that my Alamy images sell like hot cake the minute they are approved and that's a realy worry of mine, but the thought has crossed my mind. What if a buyer buys an image after it was approved before I have the chance to mark it as editorial and used it commercially? Then I am the one to blame.

The QC indicator in the dashboard was unchanged. So far, my review times have been one to business days. After the rejection, it was suddenly almost a week. In the meantime, everything has returned to normal.

Your Editorial thoughts has crossed my mind too  ;) Its strange.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
3102 Views
Last post March 27, 2009, 14:44
by gaja
5 Replies
3479 Views
Last post November 25, 2013, 11:22
by ruxpriencdiam
6 Replies
4307 Views
Last post January 21, 2016, 02:55
by roede-orm
4 Replies
4242 Views
Last post January 20, 2017, 11:53
by FlowerPower
5 Replies
2231 Views
Last post July 22, 2017, 06:03
by Brasilnut

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle