Nav: Home
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 27, 2012, 02:03

Login with username, password and session length

MicrostockGroup

Microstockgroup Sponsors


« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print

Topic: LCV is back.  

(Read 2093 times)
patrick1958
« on: April 28, 2008, 05:52 »

Hi,

while nothing has changed to my shooting style, studio setup, lights, keywording, editing out of the dark got 9 out of batch of 15 and 8 out of batch of 10 rejected for : Composition--Limited commercial value due to framing, cropping, and/or composition.

Below some excamples from those approved on another site :









I'm puzzled... anyone else noticing same rejects lately.?.

Patrick H.


Ignore | Logged


DepositPhotos.com
mantonino



« Reply #1 on: April 28, 2008, 08:19 »

All red X....


Ignore | Logged


Contakt


iStock Gauge
« Reply #2 on: April 28, 2008, 08:36 »

Maybe one of the reviewers on there doesnt like men Smiley to b honest they' are a bit cheesy those shots no offence


Ignore | Logged


mantonino



« Reply #3 on: April 28, 2008, 08:39 »

no reason those should be LCV. 


Ignore | Logged


patrick1958
« Reply #4 on: April 28, 2008, 11:06 »

Maybe one of the reviewers on there doesnt like men Smiley to b honest they' are a bit cheesy those shots no offence

No offence taken, but what do you mean with "cheesy".....?...

Patrick H.


Ignore | Logged


jsnover


« Reply #5 on: April 28, 2008, 11:09 »

to b honest they' are a bit cheesy those shots

Take a look at what SS accepts and one might think that cheesy and oversaturated should be two new category choices for them. I don't know why they'd think these don't have commercial value. I don't think the shots of the woman on the leopard print rug would sell as well as the guy with his shirt off, but I'd definitely have approved them (assuming the technical stuff was OK at 100%)

Logged


sharply_done


iStock Gauge
« Reply #6 on: April 28, 2008, 11:28 »

While I agree that these are technically superior images that should have been accepted, I think two of the shots ('worker woman' and 'guy with champagne') contain awkward elements that may limit their appeal.

FWIW, I've been bitten by the LCV bug, too. Whatever...
« Last Edit: April 28, 2008, 11:31 by sharply_done »

Ignore | Logged


patrick1958
« Reply #7 on: April 28, 2008, 11:39 »

to b honest they' are a bit cheesy those shots

Take a look at what SS accepts and one might think that cheesy and oversaturated should be two new category choices for them. I don't know why they'd think these don't have commercial value. I don't think the shots of the woman on the leopard print rug would sell as well as the guy with his shirt off, but I'd definitely have approved them (assuming the technical stuff was OK at 100%)

I'll put my hand in fire for the technical stuff... you can always check at fotolia portfolio with zoom function.

Patrick H.


Ignore | Logged


digiology


« Reply #8 on: April 28, 2008, 12:41 »

I had to read this thread 3 times to figure out what LCV meant.  Grin

Logged


patrick1958
« Reply #9 on: April 28, 2008, 13:31 »

Hi,

After contacting support I got a go to resubmit them, apparently there was no model release attached to the pictures.

Patrick H.


Ignore | Logged


RacePhoto



« Reply #10 on: April 30, 2008, 20:56 »

Hi,

After contacting support I got a go to resubmit them, apparently there was no model release attached to the pictures.

Patrick H.

Would have been nice to tell you the reason in the first place?  Sad

My most common rejection this month is "we have too many photos like that already" which means I'm basically dull, unoriginal and still wet behind the ears. They are right!  Wink

You've always had sharp well lighted photos.



Ignore | Logged


Envateo Photo ToolsMicrostock Insider
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


TinyPortal v1.0.5 beta 1© Bloc