For ShutterStock Editorial images need to be newsworthy.
You should read their articles on ShutterBuzz before you consider uploading editorial images in your initial 10.
If you don't follow their format to the letter they will bet bounced.
http://www.shutterstock.com/buzz/creating-the-perfect-editorial-caption

http://www.dreamstime.com/office-building-image19428468
http://www.dreamstime.com/office-building-and-blue-sky-image19434932
http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-photography-sesame-cracker-image18611472
(perhaps too bright on the  top)
http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-photo-the-city-and-the-art-image20238250
(crop the tents below and the arch on the right, you have another pic from the same place but sky not as vibrant as this one)
http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-images-view-of-milan-image21726114

http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-image-dried-dates-image22523886
(not the best isolation, we see some of the "plate" but like it perhaps they will too)
http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photography-instant-coffee-image18820907
(or this one, again, top of the picture, isolation doesn�t look very nice, for SS is acceptable)

http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photos-boat-trip-image19757718
(like it a lot but don�t know, low commercial value perhaps but show some artistic side from you)
http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-images-meazza-stadium-image17701614
(don�t know about the noise and it does need a top cleaning, make it pure white)

http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photo-accessories-street-stand-image20566205
(like this one too but perhaps lcv, I actually see tons of uses for it)

it would be nice to send a portrait too but not needed, overall you need to approach more stock pictures, tons of editorial and I don�t see many success browsing agencies sales, hope that I have helped a little

Standards at SS are very high and are continually going up higher yet every year if not sooner.

What you have on DT SS will probably only accept 50% if that.

Each site is different with different rules.

I checked your port, and its full of trademarks, they will never get in on SS. Why in the world do you only photograph trademarks.

I picked a few out , that I think might have a chance, IF they are well exposed, noise free and sharp. You DO have to check at 100%:

ID: 20829984
ID: 18695491
ID: 22008920 (change the colour and the trademark)
ID: 17701614
ID: 17995124 + MR
ID: 18378668
ID: 18141644 I think no MR needed, but check licenceplates
ID: 19757718
ID: 20805623
ID: 19208470 Check for trademarks

ja, they seem OK.
Except for the second: http://www.dreamstime.com/earning_det.php?imageid=19982122
which has no direct trademarks, but the shop owner can recognize it and might make a claim. Thats a risk. Shutterstock might not take it or they might. For the first 10 i wouldnt take that risk.
The rusty car might also be danged,  try it later, its risky in the first 10.

Important is that all pictures should hold water in 100%, and I cannot judge that.
You can sitemail me, and we might take it over skype, or something. If you want?

Thanks JPSDK!!! I really appreciate, but I ended up sending the first 10. Couldn't wait anymore, the wait was killing me...let's see what is the outcome! I will keep you posted!

sorry to tell but you should have taken our advices, best of luck anyway

For ShutterStock Editorial images need to be newsworthy.

Have they ever explained why they think 'newsworthy editorial' is a good angle for micro?
(how fast is their inspection?)
Surely secondary editorial is a better match for micro? (if indeed the micro model is a good one for editorial)

Quote from: trofia on January 21, 2012, 08:30

Thanks JPSDK!!! I really appreciate, but I ended up sending the first 10. Couldn't wait anymore, the wait was killing me...let's see what is the outcome! I will keep you posted!

sorry to tell but you should have taken our advices, best of luck anyway

I was not clear! I followed your advice, of course! I uploaded the last list I wrote with a couple of exceptions...not sent yet, though, I am carefully tagging the images...
If you have last minute tips, let me know!
thanks!

last minute advice would be to check them in 100%
Its impossible to see via DT, they are super over sharpened there.

none are stricter, they are different. So you cant count on anything.
When first you get used to the agencies, its pretty easy to predict what they might like, and then suddently you get unexpected rejections. So you cant really predict at all.
There are no guarantees.

Fx I have quite many rejections at FOT whenever I postprocess, fx with HDR, they dont like that. SS does, they like all kinds of fancy pictures, as long as there is no noise and shadows.

DT is super easy, and then suddently sometimes, they reject a whole bunch for an unexpected reaqson. Istock are the worst, they are completely unpredictable, when you are an indie....
They take all kind of crap right out of the camera, but are hard to satisfy with postprocessing. I dont know how many times I have had the "either to feathered or too rough" rejection.

Rux.
JPSDK = jps

he he.

I will follow the force and dare the submission in the next coming days. I am learning a lot of things searching similar images already on SS.
For example, I learned that the majority of the shots of the Colosseum in Rome are RF. Only few are Editorial, the ones with some people around the image. In my pic some tourists are visible veeeery far, so I will play safe and submit it as Editorial...
I also noticed that many photo with people in the shadow and not recognizable are submitted as RF. Strange...I wouldn't risk. I think DT is more strict about people in images and they want them to be submitted as Editorial...

As far as I can see, Editorial photos are sold RF on SS.
I think you're getting your head round what's editorial and what's acceptable as 'can be used for editorial and commercial purposes'.
I haven't looked that closely into SS, but if it's anything like iStock, there will be old shots in the 'commercial' collection which wouldn't be acceptable there nowadays, or which just 'slipped through'.

Yes, but I hit the tab "New". So they should be the newest shots accepted...

I can see that the oldest images are technically less advanced...


too bad they do not put the date!

I think DT is more strict about people in images and they want them to be submitted as Editorial...

That's not true.

The image# is how they determine old vs new.

Older images are like # 33000000 or smaller and newer are like 93000000 and larger quite easy actually.

If you are already signed with SS go to Shutterbuzz and look at the restrictions if you dare.
Here is the link and the Colosseum is not on the list of restrictions.

http://www.shutterstock.com/buzz/legal/stock-photo-restrictions

Small complication. SS and the other sites make up their own rules. Sometimes in the middle of the game. Just because they missed something, doesn't mean it's allowed (legally). Also just because they prohibit something, it doesn't mean it's not legal to sell RF images of that subject. Italy is complicated and a mess.

Italy: The Italian copyright law does not contain any exception for pictures from public places. Therefore, only "fair use" of images is permitted (according to copyright act, �70 and �70 1-bis), unless they don't portray any object still under copyright (as recent buildings, subjects to architect's copyright) nor any cultural heritage asset, subject to a fee and other restriction due to the cultural heritage and landscape law.

The following are considered cultural heritage assets: state owned things with some artistic, historic, archeologic or ethnoantropologic interest; libraries, galleries, museums and archives collections; other items declared cultural heritage by the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities unless explicitly removed on a case by case basis.

The national catalog of cultural heritage assets is not publicly accessible. 

The Colosseum Rome - Flavian Amphitheater in fact, is protected. But if the sites are accepting photos for sale, I'm sure not going to bring it to their attention. And I suspect the Italian laws and the MCHA of Italy, aren't going to complain either.

In other areas I've had things deemed Editorial only, when they aren't, and had things refused for possible copyright violation, which are clearly Public Domain. (and I won;t complain but I think there are some things they take that are clearly protected...) That's the way the ball rolls. Whatever the agency says, is their personal rule and it shouldn't be confused with the actual laws.