MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: I wish.....  (Read 1871 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

PZF

« on: May 16, 2014, 02:46 »
0
there was a possibility to add a 'note for editor' when submitting to Canstock, like there is on some sites. At the moment, everything with differential focus (eg flowers, bugs) where the background is deliberately out of focus, seems to be being rejected for ..... shallow depth of field. Shame!
Unlikely ever to be big sellers, these photos I know, but some are NOT well covered in the database and others in the past have occasionally resulted in a decent value sale.
Onward.....!


Beppe Grillo

« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2014, 02:50 »
+1
I confirm.
I have just had 3 photos with the subject perfectly in focus, but with the background deliberately out of focus, rejected for "shallow depth of field"

I sent them a ticket
Let's see

Ron

« Reply #2 on: May 16, 2014, 03:57 »
+1
I confirm.
I have just had 3 photos with the subject perfectly in focus, but with the background deliberately out of focus, rejected for "shallow depth of field"

I sent them a ticket
Let's see
The answer you will get is that they cant see rejected images and if you feel the review was in error you can resubmit. But there is no guarantee it was pass a second time.

The OP is right, weshould be able to add a note.

I think the reviewers at CanStockPhoto lack a serious understanding of photography. In regards to your example, I submitted an image once of bokeh christmas lights, as you see tons on other agencies, and it was rejected for being out of focus.

« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2014, 04:01 »
0
I've had too many rejections as well lately with Canstock

« Reply #4 on: May 16, 2014, 07:42 »
0
I agree with all of the above.  Usually I have very few rejections on Canstock, but today had 6 out of ten rejected.  Four of those were for focus even though the focus on all four was fine.  One of them was a panorama of 14 images, each of which was in perfect focus.  I was amazed at how sharp the original panorama was at 180 Megapixels, and I downsized to around 25 Mpx for submission so the focus was perfect.  So far no other rejections for focus on any other agency including SS.  Either Canstock has a blind reviewer or they are using some faulty software (which is my suspicion).  Ordinarily I don't bother about rejections at lower-paying agencies but if this is happening to a lot of people suddenly then letting them know would be good.  On the positive side at least reviews are fast and so far this month they are number two for sales after SS (due to some high-value sales including one for $27).

« Reply #5 on: May 16, 2014, 07:53 »
0
I went from 800 initial images and made $25 a month.  I have 3000 now and I make $25 a month. Not worth my time to argue with them when they reject.

PZF

« Reply #6 on: May 16, 2014, 12:47 »
0
Nice enough email from them but:

 "focus is one of the important factors considered......it's best to submit images that have a sharp focus on all of the elements. A graphic designer may prefer a sharp image for any Photoshop editing work".

Nowt to do then!

Differential focus not wanted on voyage!



Ron

« Reply #7 on: May 16, 2014, 13:02 »
0
If you submit horizontal and vertical images they reject it for being similar not understanding full page and two page spreads. So for focus they think of designers and for orientation they dont.

As if a designer is going to create bokeh from a sharp image.

I shot the bokeh from the lights of the city. Somebody show me how you get that done in Photoshop from the same image.




« Reply #8 on: July 31, 2014, 06:30 »
0
same here, they just starting to reject half of my stuff in the last 2 weeks

« Reply #9 on: July 31, 2014, 16:55 »
0
i was with them ,as pointed out in the other thread of CST, but like the other CST (crestock??? lol), they were as demanding as SS at the beginning. only that they don't get the earnings that comes with this strict curation. so i closed my account. but during that time, i noticed they took everything that is isolated ..whether it is a cup of coffee or a ballerina or CEO, and no, they don't like flowers, landscapes and never a shallow depth of field. in fact SS still don't either (shallow DOF).
also, when i was living where they were based, most of the photos outside their office were mostly squirrels and sundry, (photo magazine type photos).  it is a one man business, and it is a good company but i did not find it worth my while since SS is earning the money for me on those images too.
but yes, i love to see CST succeed, as the owner , if he is still there, was pretty decent chap.
but decent chap, we have lots of them ... all to the right with single digit .  still i wish them well.
.. as i see alot of my old colleagues are still giving Canstock the benefit of the wait.

maybe it is because they are not selling much that they are still trying to raise the bar,
hoping the quality will attract new buyers.

it sure beat those which approve everything that moves.


 

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors