MicrostockGroup

Of course I don't want that. I am just saying that all this isn't really the reason for rejection, because if it was, most agencies would reject those images. I know what is retouching and I do it a lot. You can see it here, but when there are so many threads about FT random nonsense rejections, few people who sell nice there can't prove me that my images are ugly because FT doesn't like them. All those images rejected at FT are sold on other agencies. But because of lots of rejections, I sold almost 10 times less on FT than on SS. So, obviously I'm the one who is at loss, but the one who is also at loss (even more) is FT...all because of few weird reviewers who can't distinguish good images from poor ones just because they see thousands of images of similar subjects. No one can prove me it's normal that FT, which is among big 6, earns me some 4% of total. That is not normal, and that is just because they accept 10-20% of my images, and almost always images that are rejected elsewhere.
Where is the logic?

I want to learn from my mistakes of course, but the problem is I don't see the logic in FT rejections and I don't know what to improve when other agencies accept my images much more than FT. The only image that has good sales at FT is image of isolated ants. Second image has almost 6 times less sales. There is no way for me to predict even closely what will be accepted at FT, which is not the case with other agencies.

If you can't understand rejections, then stop looking at them. Start looking at sales. What images of yours are selling? Why are they selling? Can you make more that will sell using these same themes/techniques/subjects?

Here's a starting point.

You've got an isolated shot of ants that sells well - that's great. Why aren't you doing something with it? The ants could be in single file, spiralling in on something. The ants could be arranged in rank and file, ready to invade. The ants could be spelling the words "ants". There could be a horde of smaller ants following a much larger "boss" ant. There could be a bunch of red ants with only one big black ant. There could be an imminent battle of black ants versus red ones.

There are so many possibilities to capitalize on, yet you are happy with only one image. You need to ask yourself why that is. This is what I mean when I say you need to take a step back.

Erm..I read it's endangered on some website about hummingbirds, where I found info about this bird. I didn't want to add any wildlife background because this way is easier for designers to isolate it if they want.

i personally would probably redo my photo like the one on the right also. but these two images also represent perfectly the style of is, the natural (left) and ss, the processed (right). since you're exclusive on is, sharply, i wonder why you don't veer towards the is style?

The only style I veer towards is the commercial style - a style that sells.

The only problem is I am sure the image on the right would be rejected at IS

Sorry Sharply. I got the point of course, but I guess I'm having hard day. Sometimes I am a jerk, I admit. Thank you for your advices and I agree with you. Don't be angry! Just keep giving good advices to people. I really mean that.

Sorry again. I didn't laugh at you. I guess I just cooled down, and I realized this thread is going nowhere, and I realized I was too stubborn. If you are willing after one angry thread of me to kick me to hell, ok. I can understand that. But you must admit that in most times I'm among people who are cooling down "too hot" threads. So, I hope you guys will find a way to forgive me that I was the one who pushed your buttons this time.

wow................       glad to see it ended on a happy note!!  .....

whitechild...   I learned a long time ago...  "it is what it is...."    you're going to disagree with some rejections and... surprisingly, find you have to agree with some others. It's a fact. I've uploaded my share of pix that got shot down and low & behold,  the reviewer was right.  Ya learn, ya move on.

On the other hand... I do not agree with a blanket charge that when there is a varying of acceptance between different agencies that this means your work is a big lump of non-commercialbility (is that a word?, it is now ). However, I have not looked at your entire 'port.
      I have been in the biz for years now and have made 'a few' bucks at it and microstock has been a very lucrative springboard for me into free lance magazine/book/publishing  work.  All that considered,  just last week I had images shot down as being  'snapshots'...    Well, to that reviewer, they were.   To reviewers at IS,  they weren't and they are already selling.  I have seen plenty of work not my own,  that should never have been shot down. The reviewer must have been smoking the funny weed...    but that's the nature of this biz.
My point..   it's not worth the bad vibes to dwell on it.   My motto is..   Photographs are like nachos.. I can always make more.  

On the final hand...  I agree with Sharply Done in the couple points he made about your images...  Personally,  I have found the man's advice to be more helpful than not by a large margin. Fact is, I don't recall ever disagreeing with his tech opinions. They are usually right on.  If you can take existing pix in your port and tweek them to a more commercial look,  why not do it?
And...  as you see the results of those efforts,  next time in the field..  take a bit more time and try to pull a better image out of the cam.

One other thing about this biz... is profitability vs productivity.     The more you pull sellable (i'm coining words all over the place) out of the cam and reduce post work, the more profit you make.

SharplyDone... great advice! =tom

There is a lot of good help to be found from some very successful 'Togs here on MSG.  (and I am not including myself in that group)

Yes...I'm gonna try harder in future. Lately I just upload without putting so much effort in making really good image. First I improved, and then I started to stagnate...

Yes, I know exactly what you mean.

It is no big deal at all...

If you get something like "Soft or lacking definition" then you should scratch your head... Especially when you uploaded very large batch as I did.

Nevertheless those reviewers was right on it 100%

;-)