MicrostockGroup

Yap, SS and BigStock changed policies on this.

Anyone have a text or pdf version? I went to the Getty site and got a dead link. I can't find my IS link to the Property release. All I need is a generic that I can modify and use on SS in the future. Somehow I'm coming up at a loss and I know it's something that should be easy to find. Maybe even here in resources. Here's the IS version, but I want something with just the release.  http://www.istockphoto.com/docs/languages/english/propertyrelease.pdf (and that I can edit. This is a PDF) Here's the SS version http://submit.shutterstock.com/property_release.pdf

Then there is this:

ASMP has never seen a statute or a legal case that requires a release for property.

Association. The first theory is that a person’s identity might be connected to the property. Take a picture of a house and use it in an article about drug users, and the owner might get angry enough to sue. Why? because everyone on the block knows whose house it is, and, since the house is not actually connected with drugs, the image was used out of context and paints the owner in a bad light. If the owner sees the use of the image as defamation of character, a lawsuit might be the response.

Conversion. The second theory is that there is an offense called conversion, which means that you used another’s property to your own personal gain without the owner’s permission. It is a bit like copyright infringement, which covers intangible property, except it covers tangible property. If I rent out your house while you are away without your permission, I have converted it to my personal gain. That is conversion. The question is this: Is it conversion if I rent out a picture of your house for an advertisement without your permission? The picture of your house is not your tangible property. Is the photo of the house the equivalent of the house (at least for these purposes)?

We know of no case that has ever settled those kinds of questions. ASMP advises that property releases be acquired whenever possible because we don’t want to see you be the test case.

There's the argument that no one wants to be the test case.

I've been getting a lot of rejections lately, and SS used to accept darn near everything I submitted. However, maybe it's a coincidence, but on two occasions lately, I submitted on the weekend as apposed to a weekday and both times everything was accepted. Different reviewers who are smarter, I mean more tolerant, working on the weekends?

Because SS will sell your images and you'll collect money on the web, while BigStock will make few or no sales, and they will collect cobwebs. That's why SS is pickier. 

Having things accepted doesn't equate to having more sales. I sell more on SS in a month that I do on BigStock and StockXpert put together, in a year, and the last two have twice as many "acceptable" images. Oh I feel good that some places will take my photos, but feelings don't put gas in the car or food on the table!

Me too.  and I really don't understand.  I NEVER expected to see an entire batch rejected.  I was POSITIVE that the entire batch would be accepted???

Desperate times call for desperate measures ... I just started re-uploading my port to Fotolia ... as much as I hate their arrogant attitude. 

Might send the rejects to Thinkstock.   

Keep going with that. If you have 7 or more accepted across all previous batches its working contacting them - they let me upload a batch of my previously accepted images and I was accepted. More here: http://www.microstockgroup.com/shutterstock-com/approval-of-new-photographers-applications/

Regarding acceptance ratio, FT used to be one of the most difficult sites for me, and SS one of the easiest.
Now it's the opposite.

They changed attitude, not me. So I don't care at all if they accept or reject my pictures: if they like to waste their time with random 100% acceptance or 100% rejection every other day, it's their business, not mine. After my initial self-assessment on my pictures, I keep on sending everything to everybody, and the only thing that matters to me as an independent is the overall revenue across all agencies.

Random rejections are statistically equal for all contributors: they only damage the agency itself, not us. By the way, SS is still my #1: given their search algorythm if they reject more new pictures older ones keep on selling more. I'm sorry for newbies.

Sometimes you can take advantage of reviewer inconsistency... I re-submitted some stuff rejected on some sites a few months ago and they were approved... I'm assuming by a different reviewer.  Works on most sites.  I never re-submit more than twice, however.  If I don't get something through, I'll try again in a few months, and once more around a year after it was originally rejected.  More than 75% are approved after re-submitting.

I think @microphoto got it right. Unless all agencies uses same reviewers and got exactly same policies there is no way to guarantee that image is going to be accepted across the board. Also agencies sit on millions of images covering almost every possible subject so they do not need images unless something extraordinary shows up. I think in future acceptance will be even lower unless they start pruning their collections.

My acceptance ratio has been around 75% since I returned to SS.  That's about what it was on my last uploads at iStock, so I personally don't see much of a difference.

they all invite resubmission after all issues have been fixed, not just waiting some time and retrying

I wait awhile and change the file name...usually ending with a RS...for resubmit.