Author Topic: Adobe rejections (Read 3351 times)

angelacat · « **on:** June 17, 2022, 15:59 »

Anyone else getting more rejections on Adobe - loads rejected mainly on "aesthetic appeal" or tech issues. Usually have only a few rejections with Adobe. Oddly less rejections on Shutterstock recently (fingers crossed).

Thanks

Pacesetter · « **Reply #1 on:** June 17, 2022, 16:46 »

No not at all. Adobe take my content like a hungry beast. Much better than Sstock.

und888 · « **Reply #2 on:** June 26, 2022, 10:00 »

Adobe is rejecting less than Shutterstock for me.

angelacat · « **Reply #3 on:** June 28, 2022, 12:17 »

Mainly photos but more than usual - hoping the dreaded algorithm hasn't made it's way from SS to Adobe - but doesn't seem so. Thanks

candidcruiser · « **Reply #4 on:** June 28, 2022, 15:04 »

Quote from: angelacat on June 28, 2022, 12:17

Mainly photos but more than usual - hoping the dreaded algorithm hasn't made it's way from SS to Adobe - but doesn't seem so. Thanks

I agree but at SS I usually get them all accepted after a second try. Does anyone know if it works similar at Adobe. Should you resubmit rejected photos there too.

UPLOAD-UPLOAD-UPLOAD · « **Reply #5 on:** July 04, 2022, 06:16 »

I have 90% acceptance from all agencies except Wirestock.
For some reason they ding me for composition.
Go figure.
No, I don't think Adobe unreasonably tough. They accept
my images I make with the Iphone 11 Pro Max so no complaints.
You have to eyeball the images you want to upload at 100% and then
judge accordingly.
Focus is tough. No app does a decent job fixing blurry pictures.
I don't care what Topaz claims. They don't work.
Noise is an easy fix and Topaz does a superb job.

Roscoe · « **Reply #6 on:** July 04, 2022, 07:00 »

I didn't see a specific raise in rejections at Adobe. I can live with the few ones they reject, and the reasons they give me.
And I don't have the feeling they are particularly picky, except for their illustrative editorial content maybe.
I mean: it's illustrative editorial, I get that, but sometimes plain editorals are accepted too while some other illustratives are rejected. Their policy in that regard is not very clear to me, or maybe I'm not fully understanding the concept of illustrative editorial.

TonyD · « **Reply #7 on:** July 07, 2022, 06:50 »

I don't get many photos rejected by adobe now but if there's a lot of dark in the photo they seem to reject it

TonyD · « **Reply #8 on:** August 08, 2022, 08:35 »

Quote from: angelacat on June 17, 2022, 15:59

Anyone else getting more rejections on Adobe - loads rejected mainly on "aesthetic appeal" or tech issues. Usually have only a few rejections with Adobe. Oddly less rejections on Shutterstock recently (fingers crossed).

Thanks

Yes same here. I was fine for photo being accepted untill a couple weeks ago Now they are rejecting everything for quality issues and I can't find anything wrong (even at 100%) and the photos are just as good or better than what's in my port. I think revewers click on the wrong reasons or just not doing their job. It's no good going on adobe contrubutor forums either because they ALWAYS agree with adobe. I think they're paid by adobe.

f8 · « **Reply #9 on:** August 08, 2022, 16:04 »

Here is another thread on the topic...

https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/as-rejections/msg578887/?topicseen#new

AS the new SS

But Matt says this is not true so it must be true. Just because there are now 2 threads on the same nuisance rejections does not mean it's true.

But it is true. Between the disambiguation process at IS, the roulette wheel of acceptance as SS and now AS this business for the dimes it offers is getting incredibly exhausting.

morfon · « **Reply #10 on:** October 22, 2022, 15:22 »

Sort of offtopic, sorry, but I didn't want to start another thread, because my observation is Adobe-related.

I don't have a large portfolio at Adobe but after 2 and half years of uploading I came to the conclusion that the only — or at least most important — factor to popping up in search results is the age of your images.

The majority of my images just started to gradually show up in search results after 2 years, and this has nothing to do with Adobe's stupid keyword weight scheme. Since all DAM programs I use (mostly ACDSee but sometimes Bridge) sort keywords in alphabetic order, I didn't bother to rearrange them all on Adobe dashboard, as it takes forever. Apparently this doesn't affect sales, there's no significant difference between ordered and unordered keywords sets.

Can anyone confirm? If this is right, it's a huge a time saving to just ignore order of keywords.

Year of the Dog · « **Reply #11 on:** October 24, 2022, 08:39 »

Quote from: morfon on October 22, 2022, 15:22

Sort of offtopic, sorry, but I didn't want to start another thread, because my observation is Adobe-related.

I don't have a large portfolio at Adobe but after 2 and half years of uploading I came to the conclusion that the only — or at least most important — factor to popping up in search results is the age of your images.

The majority of my images just started to gradually show up in search results after 2 years, and this has nothing to do with Adobe's stupid keyword weight scheme. Since all DAM programs I use (mostly ACDSee but sometimes Bridge) sort keywords in alphabetic order, I didn't bother to rearrange them all on Adobe dashboard, as it takes forever. Apparently this doesn't affect sales, there's no significant difference between ordered and unordered keywords sets.

Can anyone confirm? If this is right, it's a huge a time saving to just ignore order of keywords.

https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/best-keyword-strategy-in-adobe-stock/

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #12 on:** October 24, 2022, 11:05 »

Quote from: Year of the Dog on October 24, 2022, 08:39

Quote from: morfon on October 22, 2022, 15:22
Sort of offtopic, sorry, but I didn't want to start another thread, because my observation is Adobe-related.

I don't have a large portfolio at Adobe but after 2 and half years of uploading I came to the conclusion that the only — or at least most important — factor to popping up in search results is the age of your images.

The majority of my images just started to gradually show up in search results after 2 years, and this has nothing to do with Adobe's stupid keyword weight scheme. Since all DAM programs I use (mostly ACDSee but sometimes Bridge) sort keywords in alphabetic order, I didn't bother to rearrange them all on Adobe dashboard, as it takes forever. Apparently this doesn't affect sales, there's no significant difference between ordered and unordered keywords sets.

Can anyone confirm? If this is right, it's a huge a time saving to just ignore order of keywords.

https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/best-keyword-strategy-in-adobe-stock/

Also: https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/adobe-stock-search-webinar/

Quote from: MatHayward on February 23, 2020, 12:15

Hi Everyone,

I've scheduled a webinar with our Senior Product Manager in charge of search this Thursday, February 27 at 2:30PM PST. It would be great if you can attend. We'll do our best to take as many questions as possible during our 45-60 minute conversation about Adobe Stock search. How you can use the tools to your advantage as a contributor at Adobe Stock. I hope to see you there!

https://www.crowdcast.io/e/search-tips-and-tricks

Mat Hayward

https://www.crowdcast.io/e/search-tips-and-tricks/register

1) Images initially get ranked by customer response during the first 30 days. Your keywords and title are most important during that time.

2) After 30 days, changing the keywords or order, will not have much effect on image rank, from the customers. There are other factors that still can move an image up or down.