I always thought and imagined that "No clear center focal point" meant that the subject lacked at reference for the eyes of the viewer to focus on.
That it had nothing to do with the focus of the camera. As a new photographer, working out what exactly stock sites wanted, I took pics of
EVERYTHING in the beginning. And, like all new beginners, I tried to learn from my rejects.

One of the "canned" reject I sometimes received "No clear center focal point", baffled me, as the images was clearly (to me) in focus!
"How could the reviewer say this image was out of focus!?" "It's was clearly sharp as a tack!" So in my own mind, I resolved this by interpreting
the reviewers comments to mean: There is a lacking central focus point for the viewers eye.

I could be wrong, and if so I would like to hear your comments.

Thanks Ken.
So according to you, I am correct in assuming "There is a lacking central focus point for the viewers eye."

I've always taken it to mean, "We don't really want this picture, but we can't think of any other reason why we should reject it."

I've had it, on occasions, for items that I've isolated on white, that have been perfectly sharp, and it used to baffle me.

Now I don't take any notice. If they don't want something they don't want it ... full stop.

My understanding of "no clear focal point" was always of a clear subject in the image and I have seen this in many cases, but I have also seen people receiving such rejection reason for image with problem in focus itself.

Regards,
Adelaide

I call it Dominate Visual. That is just good design otherwise you just have an uninteresting scene. But IS inspectors may see it many different ways... and usually do.

Oxman I don't if this is a try to advertise your services/business (at least I saw a similar behaviour from other persons in the past) but in this case it is kind of impiously.

Have had a few spammers recently, so thats why. It's all good. Carry on.