MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Intolerable cruelty  (Read 8433 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

eggshell

« on: October 12, 2010, 06:37 »
0
I got my first "Limited commercial value" rejection today on a credit card super macro shot . Looking through the newest images on that same subject I stumbled upon this port - http://www.shutterstock.com/results.mhtml#page=1&gallery_id=434212

I was amazed by the poor photography - lighting , composition ( the lack of ) , subject choice ...
These are pretty recent submissions , not some relics from the dawn of microstock . These are not 10-15 accidently approved shots . There's no way this port was built going through the normal approval process . What's the point of raising the quality bar if this kind of work still finds its way in agency's catalog ?


« Reply #1 on: October 12, 2010, 06:47 »
0
I have no idea why you chose to bash some individuals portfolio just because you got a rejection. And you are not even showing YOUR rejected image.

BTW I can't see anything special (either way) in the portfolio you linked. I think there are many saleable images there.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2010, 06:50 by Perry »

« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2010, 06:48 »
0
^^^ Agree. No idea what is so wrong about that portfolio anyway.

« Reply #3 on: October 12, 2010, 06:50 »
0
I understand you are frustrated about a LCV rejection. However, I don't agree with your assessment of this person's portfolio, nor with your conclusions about Shutterstock's acceptance policies. Trashing someone else's portfolio to substantiate an - as far as I'm concerned - unsubstantiated claim is uncool.

« Reply #4 on: October 12, 2010, 07:13 »
0
Way to start your journey here...

Microbius

« Reply #5 on: October 12, 2010, 07:13 »
0
You need to chill out. That's a typical SS micro portfolio. Nout wrong with it.
Sorry if you are peeved at having a rejection, but grow up.

bittersweet

« Reply #6 on: October 12, 2010, 07:15 »
0
Maybe it's time for a new monitor?

« Reply #7 on: October 12, 2010, 07:30 »
0
Maybe the link IS to eggshell's port. Who can tell, everyone is allowed to hide behind anonymous names. He/she got 6 people to have a look within about a half an hour. Seems the latest marketing tool is to bash something so that the whole internet world goes to have a look.

Personally, if someone wants to show something, I think they should paste it here. If I have to go offsite to see something, well, I'm not.

eggshell

« Reply #8 on: October 12, 2010, 07:54 »
0
I understand you are frustrated about a LCV rejection. However, I don't agree with your assessment of this person's portfolio, nor with your conclusions about Shutterstock's acceptance policies. Trashing someone else's portfolio to substantiate an - as far as I'm concerned - unsubstantiated claim is uncool.
Mind you this is not a "bitter after rejection" post . The rejection was only the reason I found that collection . I'm curious about your non pc assessment of that particular port . What's funny is that I first hesitated to post about that - for me it was too much "stating the obvious" . Apparently not

 
^^^ Agree. No idea what is so wrong about that portfolio anyway.
I have no idea why you chose to bash some individuals portfolio just because you got a rejection. And you are not even showing YOUR rejected image.
BTW I can't see anything special (either way) in the portfolio you linked. I think there are many saleable images there.

Now I know more than enough about your quality standards .

« Reply #9 on: October 12, 2010, 07:58 »
0
I have no idea why you chose to bash some individuals portfolio just because you got a rejection. And you are not even showing YOUR rejected image.
BTW I can't see anything special (either way) in the portfolio you linked. I think there are many saleable images there.

Now I know more than enough about your quality standards .

This is not about my quality standards, it's about the customers' quality standards. I'm pretty sure the person with the portfolio has sold some images.

Why don't you show us your magnificent amazing wonderful portfolio?
« Last Edit: October 12, 2010, 08:00 by Perry »

eggshell

« Reply #10 on: October 12, 2010, 08:25 »
0
Quote
Why don't you show us your magnificent amazing wonderful portfolio?

Why I'd want to do that ?!
If I had a large port based on diverse niches I wouldn't mind sharing . Mine's still very small exploiting majorly one not very well covered niche . So , pardon my selfishness but I'm not sharing . But judging by your tone you sure sound like someone with extraordinary abilities in the field of microstock . And please next time use "show me" not "show us" . You're not MSG

« Reply #11 on: October 12, 2010, 08:27 »
0
Quote
Why don't you show us your magnificent amazing wonderful portfolio?

Why I'd want to do that ?!
If I had a large port based on diverse niches I wouldn't mind sharing . Mine's still very small exploiting majorly one not very well covered niche . So , pardon my selfishness but I'm not sharing . But judging by your tone you sure sound like someone with extraordinary abilities in the field of microstock . And please next time use "show me" not "show us" . You're not MSG

No, he's right.  We all want to see your amazing stuff.  It's par for the course for anonymous newbies who are all that.  So "us" is appropriate.

« Reply #12 on: October 12, 2010, 08:35 »
0
But judging by your tone you sure sound like someone with extraordinary abilities in the field of microstock .

Sorry to dissappoint you, but I consider my portfolio only average. But I do have been around in terms of microstock in six years: been uploading, getting stuff accepted, rejected and sold. I still haven't openly bashed anyone's portfolio behind him/her back. I have given harsh (but IMO constructive) critique to some, but they have all asked for it.

But you sound definitely like someone that does have some extraordinary stuff in your potfolio by saying that some average joe has "poor photography - lighting , composition ( the lack of ) , subject choice ..." in his portfolio. The funny thing is that there are much more weaker portfolios on SS, but I won't be linking them here.

And please next time use "show me" not "show us" . You're not MSG

It's more simple than you think:

Show us = post a link here
Show me = post the link in private message
« Last Edit: October 12, 2010, 08:43 by Perry »

rubyroo

« Reply #13 on: October 12, 2010, 08:37 »
0
I'm still wondering why this thread is titled 'Intolerable Cruelty'(?)

Posting someone else's port just to be negative towards the artist speaks more to me of intolerable rudeness.  Even more so when you're so protective of your own work.

eggshell

« Reply #14 on: October 12, 2010, 08:54 »
0
Quote
But you sound definitely like someone that does have some extraordinary stuff in your potfolio by saying that some average joe has "poor photography - lighting , composition ( the lack of ) , subject choice ..." in his portfolio.

My photography ( or anyone else's ) doesn't really need to be extraordinary to be better than that .

Quote
I haven't still openly bashed anyone's portfolio behind him/her back.

A bit dramatic but let's say that's your way of seeing things . Although I don't mind it , it doesn't mean that I have to share it

« Reply #15 on: October 12, 2010, 08:55 »
0
I'm still wondering why this thread is titled 'Intolerable Cruelty'(?)

It was intolerably cruel to reject the "credit card super macro shot".

« Reply #16 on: October 12, 2010, 08:59 »
0
My photography ( or anyone else's ) doesn't really need to be extraordinary to be better than that .

Your could be worse. It's hard to judge that because you aren't showing us anything, not even the rejected credit card shot. I don't really seem to understand the point, you bash someone else's portfolio just because you think some rejected image of yours is better (than his/her whole portfolio)? You know, If you are going to be as bitter after every reject you are not going to survive in this business.

Quote
I haven't still openly bashed anyone's portfolio behind him/her back.

A bit dramatic but let's say that's your way of seeing things . Although I don't mind it , it doesn't mean that I have to share it

Do you see the owner of the portfolio here? If not, you are doing this "behind his/her back".

Okay, now I'll stop feeding the troll.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2010, 09:06 by Perry »


rubyroo

« Reply #17 on: October 12, 2010, 09:30 »
0
It was intolerably cruel to reject the "credit card super macro shot".

Ah I see... it's just overly-dramatic.   Thanks Danicek...  I thought I must have missed something. 

« Reply #18 on: October 12, 2010, 09:34 »
0
I got my first "Limited commercial value" rejection today on a credit card super macro shot . Looking through the newest images on that same subject I stumbled upon this port - http://www.shutterstock.com/results.mhtml#page=1&gallery_id=434212

I was amazed by the poor photography - lighting , composition ( the lack of ) , subject choice ...
These are pretty recent submissions , not some relics from the dawn of microstock . These are not 10-15 accidently approved shots . There's no way this port was built going through the normal approval process . What's the point of raising the quality bar if this kind of work still finds its way in agency's catalog ?

Sometimes there might be a "pissed" reviewer and reject a bunch of them.. Don't think too much, upload more or simple give up!

I honestly feel that DT is the "worst" agency these days.. but sales are going good so why not.. :P

bittersweet

« Reply #19 on: October 12, 2010, 09:38 »
0
[off-topic]shirt.woot has the perfect shirt today:[/off-topic]

eggshell

« Reply #20 on: October 12, 2010, 09:54 »
0
Quote
Okay, now I'll stop feeding the troll.
Well , if you're so willing to lose some weight

Quote
It was intolerably cruel to reject the "credit card super macro shot".
:D
It was a film reference

I should've expected all this "a newbie dares bashing another user's work" attitude . It's so more manly to stand behind some ironic remarks .

« Reply #21 on: October 12, 2010, 10:04 »
0
Ok, so you got rejected, and somebody else got approved with a similar image. And what are we supposed to do about it?

« Reply #22 on: October 12, 2010, 10:14 »
0
I was going to ignore this, but... As far as newbie trashing, no, that's not happening. I'm relatively new here as well. People here in the forum are critics. For a good reason. They know what they are talking about. For the most part, they have been around for a long time. They dont go around posting other portfolios and trash talk them (iStock debacle notwithstanding, that's a speciall case). For you to come here and complain about your magnificent pic being rejected and then follow that up with not even posting the pic, what did you expect? Sympathy and roses? 

If you drop the attitude, you might learn something here.

Microbius

« Reply #23 on: October 12, 2010, 10:15 »
0
I understand you are frustrated about a LCV rejection. However, I don't agree with your assessment of this person's portfolio, nor with your conclusions about Shutterstock's acceptance policies. Trashing someone else's portfolio to substantiate an - as far as I'm concerned - unsubstantiated claim is uncool.
Mind you this is not a "bitter after rejection" post . The rejection was only the reason I found that collection . I'm curious about your non pc assessment of that particular port . What's funny is that I first hesitated to post about that - for me it was too much "stating the obvious" . Apparently not

 
^^^ Agree. No idea what is so wrong about that portfolio anyway.
I have no idea why you chose to bash some individuals portfolio just because you got a rejection. And you are not even showing YOUR rejected image.
BTW I can't see anything special (either way) in the portfolio you linked. I think there are many saleable images there.

Now I know more than enough about your quality standards .
Well as those macro credit card shots got accepted and yours didn't, all the concrete evidence points one way re. your quality standards too.

Microbius

« Reply #24 on: October 12, 2010, 10:20 »
0
Quote
Why don't you show us your magnificent amazing wonderful portfolio?

Why I'd want to do that ?!
If I had a large port based on diverse niches I wouldn't mind sharing . Mine's still very small exploiting majorly one not very well covered niche . So , pardon my selfishness but I'm not sharing . But judging by your tone you sure sound like someone with extraordinary abilities in the field of microstock . And please next time use "show me" not "show us" . You're not MSG
The not very well covered niche of macro credit card shots?

PhotoDuneMicrostock Insider

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
14 Replies
3388 Views
Last post April 27, 2008, 18:50
by madelaide

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors