joined for an afternoon, jumped ship as quick as i could

chan

New Member

« on: July 03, 2007, 23:24 »

#link

stupid site with dated / sensored rules...
photos of a girl in a full cami...no breasts, no butt, no naughty bits.."rejected" due to "sexual content". Pulled ALL of my portfolio immediately. Avoid these guys like the plague or bring your holy water to the alter.

...unless you have lots of fuzzy puppies and flowers....


	Ignore \| Logged

CJPhoto

« Reply #1 on: July 04, 2007, 01:40 »

#link

StockXpert earn me quite a bit. I think my problem is that I know no hot girls willing to pose for me (for the camera anyway Wink

)


	Ignore \| Logged

sharply_done

« Reply #2 on: July 04, 2007, 01:53 »

#link

Wow, you sure showed 'em!


	Ignore \| Logged

leaf

Premium Member

« Reply #3 on: July 04, 2007, 02:49 »

#link

It's their site, I don't have a problem with them setting the standards for what images they want to accept. I have been quite happy there.

also remember that what is 'sexual content' in one country may be an 'normal content' in another.


	Ignore \| Logged

CJPhoto

« Reply #4 on: July 04, 2007, 04:47 »

#link

Quote from: leaf on July 04, 2007, 02:49

also remember that what is 'sexual content' in one country may be an 'normal content' in another.

Exactly. You never know when the arab market will take off.


	Ignore \| Logged

a.k.a.-tom

Premium Member

« Reply #5 on: July 04, 2007, 06:50 »

#link

"My football, my rules"... you don't go into another man's(woman's) house and tell them how to live. when in rome.... do as the romans...

there's a million of them that apply...

It's the nature of life and ...this biz. The same can be said of rejection for "not stock material= not commercial material" ... and yet on other sites, I sell it by the hundreds... it's their site, their choice.
If pulling your pictures is a statement of your principles, I respect that. You did the right thing.
On the other hand, I respect the rules of the individual sites I hope will sell my work. I am happy with StockXpert. Cool

-tom


	Ignore \| Logged

chan

New Member

« Reply #6 on: July 04, 2007, 08:09 »

#link

I appreciate all of your sentiments. It just angers me whe censorship, on THAT level, rears its fat moral minority head...and "yes" I DO support stem cell research : )


	Ignore \| Logged

sim

« Reply #7 on: July 04, 2007, 08:21 »

#link

Dear Angry

Withdrawing your entire portfolio will only effect you as a statement of your own principles in protest of their upload censorship principles (ironic). It's a shame that you have reacted in this way, they are one of the better sites, I hope that you reconsider and decide to upload plenty of flowers and puppies, they sell well there for me ;-)

Best of luck and hope your day gets better

Regards Sim


	Ignore \| Logged

digidave

New Member

« Reply #8 on: July 04, 2007, 08:22 »

#link

They are based in Hungary I think. Eastern European values and etiquette may be different than ours if catering for a different market.


	Ignore \| Logged

CJPhoto

« Reply #9 on: July 04, 2007, 09:09 »

#link

Quote from: digidave on July 04, 2007, 08:22

They are based in Hungary I think. Eastern European values and etiquette may be different than ours if catering for a different market.

I never thought the eastern Europeans were prudish??

Anyway, I think Jupiter (who ownes StockXpert or at least 51% of them) have now migrated the data to servers to the US.

Disclaimer: I have been wrong before and will be wrong again.


	Ignore \| Logged

chan

New Member

« Reply #10 on: July 04, 2007, 09:14 »

#link

first of all, if they're based in Hungary, they are certainly not OWNED by anyone there:

Jupitermedia Corp.
23 Old Kings Highway S
Darien
CT
06820
US

they're owned by Jupiter (which makes it all the stranger because my images sell GREAT on their site...that's why i assumed they would be a good bet).

And "yes MS. Happy", I am ticked...not sure how many times you had to read my post to deduce that (sarcastic stab...I really don't mean it). And you are correct, my action does nothing to them (except reduce the amount of monies we BOTH could make), it simply is in protest. And if taking photos of flowers and puppies didn't bore me to tears, I would gladly snap away

Bottom line is I felt the need to vent, I stand by my reasoning that they are hyper-conservative, and not the place for anything other than the status quo..

TAH DAHHHHHHHH! : )


	Ignore \| Logged

vicu

« Reply #11 on: July 04, 2007, 10:39 »

#link

istock accepts soft porn, so maybe you should explore them as a new outlet for your work.


	Logged

w7lwi

« Reply #12 on: July 04, 2007, 11:17 »

#link

I, too, have been disappointed with sales at StockXpert. However, I don't fault the site, but rather what/who they are marketing to. Each site has its own business plan and they direct their sales towards different segments of the market. I track all my images by sales at each site. After a while, it becomes clear that, whether an image is accepted or not, certain ones do well at one site and poorly at others. And an image that is selling very well at, say iStock, will not necessarily do well at StockXpert, or SS or whomever. It all depends on who is looking at the site for their images, and that depends on the site's marketing strategy and execution. Some images have a more universal appeal and will do well everywhere. Others (like mine Sad

) are more directed and don't have this broad appeal.

What I do is stick with a site for a year, while tracking results on an image-by-image basis. After that year, I then review the pattern of sales. If, overall, the site is doing poorly, I may delete everything and leave. If one particular type of image seems to be doing well, I'll adjust my uploads to more of that particular type of shot. If sales appear to pretty well cover the entire spectrum of my uploads, I just leave everything alone and continue as before.

You indicated your images do well at Jupiter, but you're disappointed with the same at StockXpert. This should come as no surprise. Jupiter is a Macrostock agency while StockXpert, even though owned by Jupiter, is a microstock agency. While there is some overlap in the images each accepts, they each serve a completely different market, with different needs and requirements. I rarely submit the same image to both a micro and macro stock agency. The two just are not the same (to say nothing of RM versus RF requirements). Again there are some photographers who, because of the nature of their shots, are able to submit the same image to both types of agencies. But these are the exception rather than the rule. If a photographer specializes in one or two particular types of images, say nudes for example, and he knows site X doesn't accept this type of image, why should he keep butting his head submitting the same type of shot and only getting rejections. Move the images to a site that does accept them. Then look a site X to see what they do sell and, if possible, upload those types of images. Go with the flow.


	Ignore \| Logged

chan

New Member

« Reply #13 on: July 04, 2007, 14:10 »

#link

understood

Happy 4th to all.

C


	Ignore \| Logged

steve-oh

« Reply #14 on: July 05, 2007, 08:49 »

#link

Chan,

We don't have a content filter on StockXpert, so we have to be a bit more conservative with what we accept. We have a few projects in progress (which we will roll out in the coming months) that take precendence over a content filter right now. Maybe down the road we will implement one.

Thanks for your understanding!
-Steve


	Ignore \| Logged

chan

New Member

« Reply #15 on: July 06, 2007, 00:03 »

#link

thank you Steve for being the voice of reason with your firm...it would really be nice to see your site support more than "the usual"...if you knew my clients, you would quickly implement a "content filter". I've read the forums enough to know it's not just me. If you build it, they will come (gag).

Thanks for your patience and please forgive for the rant.

Best wishes

C