Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 27, 2012, 01:29

MicrostockGroup

MicrostockGroup » Forum » Microstock Photography Forum - General » Photo Critique » Why was this rejected?

Microstockgroup Sponsors

« previous next »

Pages: [1]

Topic: Why was this rejected?

(Read 1516 times)

pyrst

New Member

« on: September 23, 2010, 15:42 »

#link

Hi all,
am relatively new to this game, am still trying to figure out how to create the right shots... I usually try to learn from rejections, and i feel i've learnt a lot. But then this one came along, and i am lost... To me, its a great shot, you can see it here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/39997852@N06/5018114409/#

I put it up on dreamstime and got the following rejection:

- Poor lighting setup, poor contrast or incorrect exposure.

I cant get it. Should i have tweaked the light on the girls face more? I am so nervous to do anything in photoshop as it has given me rejections due to over post processing. I just thought this one was shot in a lovely natural way, but seems not? What is wrong with it?

Anne


	Ignore \| Logged

Zeus

« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2010, 15:46 »

#link

I think you should understand that sometimes the rejection reasons don't match the real reasons for rejecting an image. That said I think the image is reasonably good and the black b/g suits the mood. Generally micro agencies like bright images. Yours is not.

I think too I would remove that defocused railing.


« Last Edit: September 24, 2010, 09:43 by Zeus »	Ignore \| Logged

Xalanx

« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2010, 17:55 »

#link

Every once in a while, reviewers are coming up with stupid rejections like this one. This is especially true for Dreamstime. Imagine that I got a photo of a blonde girl rejected with reason "she does not seem blonde to me".
Your image is really good, you should try resubmitting.


	Ignore \| Logged

crazychristina

« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2010, 18:08 »

#link

To me it appears underexposed. I dragged it into PS and checked the histogram, and there are almost no values in the top quarter. Increasing contrast on the girl helps a bit too.


	Ignore \| Logged

click_click

« Reply #4 on: September 23, 2010, 21:06 »

#link

I think you're on to something. I can imagine that the composition might have also played a role in the rejection as a part of her left eye is cut off. The lighting might not be stellar but I can see her expression going hand in hand with natural lighting.
Any hardcore pro lighting would have distracted from her facial expression.

I suggest that you either cut off half of her face or show her entire head and push the levels a little bit.

The expression on her face is believable and she is a great model I'd say.

The backrest of the chair in the background is a bit distracting though.

Re-shoot if you can. I can see more good images with this model. Keep going!


	Ignore \| Logged

pyrst

New Member

« Reply #5 on: September 24, 2010, 11:08 »

#link

Thank you all for very useful input. Funny with the chair - for me it was part of the concept but it clearly seems to confuse the viewer. So will remove it...

Averil: Thing is, they did not shoot it down due to lack of composition, but of the above reasons poor lighting etc. Yes i can tweak it a bit more, move levels more to the left, but then the image will turn more intense, more yellow, and move away from the mood which i loved in the picture. But sure, i can light up her face more, just seems like very picky considering other images i have gotten thru in the past...

Am glad to hear i am not going nuts, and that the image is stock value. Am annoyed tho as i had a perfect 100% upload for the month for once, was sure that would be kept for the month when i uploaded this, and wham! Also uploaded similar from the same series and they got rejected for more or less same reasons... So down to 40% again, despite what i think are my best pics to be submitted!!

click click - thanks for kind words. Yes model is SUPER (and my daughter, so slightly partial!)

Anne


	Ignore \| Logged

Moonb007

« Reply #6 on: October 28, 2010, 13:12 »

#link

Quote from: crazychristina on September 23, 2010, 18:08

To me it appears underexposed. I dragged it into PS and checked the histogram, and there are almost no values in the top quarter. Increasing contrast on the girl helps a bit too.

I agree, the girl does not seem to pop...has a grayish look. Its a great concept image, I would also remove the bar in the background too


	Ignore \| Logged

luissantos84

« Reply #7 on: October 28, 2010, 13:21 »

#link

Quote from: click_click on September 23, 2010, 21:06

I suggest that you either cut off half of her face or show her entire head and push the levels a little bit.

do this and I am sure it will get in


	Ignore \| Logged

« Reply #8 on: October 28, 2010, 13:29 »

#link

Quote from: pyrst on September 23, 2010, 15:42

I put it up on dreamstime and got the following rejection:

That's your reason!

It's a good shot, if I were to be ultra critical both eyes would have been good. Dreamstime are a great agency but IMO they have the least knowledgable reviewers on all the sites.


	Ignore \| Logged

leaf

Premium Member

« Reply #9 on: October 29, 2010, 05:30 »

#link

Quote from: luissantos84 on October 28, 2010, 13:21

Quote from: click_click on September 23, 2010, 21:06

I suggest that you either cut off half of her face or show her entire head and push the levels a little bit.

do this and I am sure it will get in


	Ignore \| Logged

Perry

« Reply #10 on: October 29, 2010, 06:30 »

#link

The image lacks some "punch", it needs some tweaks on the curves.

The image also has an awkward composition and has some distracting elements like the back rest of the chair(?) and the colorful piece of clothing on the shoulder that draws the attention too much.

edit: oh I didn't notice this was such an old thread...


	Ignore \| Logged

Pages: [1]

« previous next »

Jump to:

Related Topics
	Subject	Started by	Replies	Views	Last post
	Rejected!! StockXpert.com	pauloresende	10	2006	June 20, 2007, 00:34 by monilu
	Really...rejected? General Stock Discussion	jcpjr	6	930	March 04, 2010, 12:20 by louoates
	Shutterstock rejected first 10 Newbie Discussion	luminous	3	1095	November 28, 2010, 11:58 by luminous
	Colored rejected as a keyword? Shutterstock.com	melastmohican	15	1384	April 26, 2011, 02:51 by Slovenian
	Rejected Can resubmit iStockPhoto.com	janecat	8	310	April 29, 2012, 18:05 by Mantis

Microstockgroup Sponsors

MicrostockGroup Email Updates

Microstock Poll Results

Site	Earnings Rating
Top Tier - Big 4
Shutterstock	100
iStock	66.7
Fotolia	34.9
Dreamstime	26.7

Middle Tier
DepositPhotos	21.6
123RF	16.3
Canstockphoto	11.2
Bigstockphoto	9.5
Veer	8.7

Low Earners
PantherMedia	6.7
PhotoDune	5.8
isignstock	4.1
Zoonar	3.5
GLStockImages	2.7
Stockfresh	2.2
YayMicro	1.8
FeaturePics	1.4
MostPhotos	1.3
ScanStockPhoto	1.1
Crestock	0.8
Cutcaster	0.6
AllYouCanStock	0.1
ClipartOf
Pond5
RevoStock
Clipcanvas
DrawShop
ClipDealer
PhotoSpin
VectorStock
GraphicRiver
Pixmac
PhotoCase
The3dStudio
photaki
SuperHug
PhotoKore
iRockStock
Vivozoom
StockPhotoMedia
Regimages
ImageVortex
Imagegate
ViscoImages

More Poll Results Updated: 2012-05-27

Advertise on Microstockgroup.com | Contact: [email protected]