MicrostockGroup

Oops,just popped over to Istock to check sales and i get an editorial sale  .That's the thing though i doubt that image will take off in best match and start to give me a regular income.The only images the company are crowing about are products shots on white.

The caption rejection is simply a waste of time for all.

I put a tester out....submitted an editorial image to DT.  Accepted no problem.  Submitted the same editorial image to Shutterstock - it was rejected twice for the caption until I finally got it straight.  I submitted that same image to iStock - the first time it was rejected for the caption so I re-submitted it with the caption I used at Shutterstock that got accepted.  It was rejected again for the caption.

I'm not going to re-caption every darn image for each individual microstock agency for the return they give.  My editorial stuff (of the right size) is all going to RM agencies where I can get a return for the time I spend captioning, keywording, and shooting.  If the images don't make the RM size requirements, then I'll submit them to DT where they will get accepted.  I haven't tried 123 RF yet.

I've just had a perfectly good editorial image rejected because I had the city and country in capitals (as Shutterstock requires) when iStock don't want capital letters...

You would have thought is would be easier for the reviewer to change them - it is only about 20 letters...

Steve

Yes, but it would also have helped if all the inspectors had read before inspecting. I had well over 30 rejections using the same caption format as all the rest, which were either overturned or accepted on resubmission with the same caption. Hopefully that inspector has been educated.

Well, to start with you aren't allowed to put the year in the dateline so it should have been rejected for that. Then they want you to repeat all the dateline info PLUS THE YEAR in the caption. Try this and see if it works:

Bray, Republic of Ireland - 12th July: People on a Chairoplane decorated with traditional artwork in Bray, Republic of Ireland, 12th July, 2011.

Of course, this contains absolutely no additional info and uses up a lot more of the 212 characters, but as you can see the 4 Ws are now in the caption (apparently they aren't interested in "why").

I can't give any assurance that my version will be accepted but I reckon it's got a much better chance.

except SS will reject if you use 12th Jul or 12 JUL or Jul 12 - apparently, they think buyers are so dumb they can only understand if the date is written JUL 12, ignoring of course the fact that much of the world handles these variations just fine

Ha, yes, for iStock (as this is the iStock forum).
Often I put loads of info (probably too much)  in the caption, but some are as short as this. I could say, "On the beach" (but you can't see the beach). There are adults and children in a group, but I can't put that they're a family as I don't know that for sure, and we've been told not to assume things, which is fair enough. The most relevant thing would be details of the traditional artwork on the chairoplane, about which I haven't yet found any relevant information (the operator didn't have a clue: he just hires it, apparently).
That said, I've still got probems with that photo in the editorial article, where there's a fairly close crop of a bloke looking out of a bus window (cropped right into the bus, no surroundings), with the caption, "Istanbul Turkey - November, 2009: A man and woman ride a tram on İstiklal Caddesi, a busy pedestrian shopping street leading to Taksim Square in Istanbul." - there is absolutely nothing in the photo which makes such a detailed location detail relevant.
I wonder if just 'on a bright summer day' would be enough of an addition.
http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=996

OK, we'll give it a whirl:

Oooh, I've never heard the name waveswinger. Wonder if that's an American term? Maybe that's the name the inspector knows for that ride and hadn't heard of the term 'chairoplane'. The CV maps 'chairoplanes' to 'carousel swings' (?!) and waveswinger isn't in the CV, but I'll try adding that as an alternative in the caption and see how it goes. Thanks for the suggestion!

Thats. definitely the sort of thing I was thinking of although I obviously have no idea whether it will pass muster.

I think I would have said "Victorian style" TBH. And included "swing ride", "fairground" and "carousel". Partly because now or later captions might affect search or 3rd party search engines (who knows ?). Good luck. Great image.

No problem, though you had me totally confused for a while!

Oh, and I remember ages ago, no doubt not long after I joined iStock, so probably 2007, reading a thread in the critique forum, that fairground rides and sideshows could not be accepted because of their traditional artwork. So only now with editorial have I even thought of submitting them. But it turns out there are gazillions of photos up there in the main collection, even fairly recently accepted. H*ck, I have loads of these - absolute camera club fodder, but I'd never even thought of submitting them because of that thread.
In fact, in checking out things I'm only now submitting as editorial, I'm astonished how many of the subjects are in the main collection, bearing in mind what I've read on that critique forum. Huh.