pauloresende - dude,
you may not be doing anything wrong. In fact, if the same pix are on all those other sites, obviously you're doing
everything right in their eyes (or the eyes of their reveiwers) . There's nothing wrong with them there.
It's just the way it is in this business. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone here at MSG that hasn't had photo's that they sell by the dozens, even hundreds, that weren't rejected somewhere for some reason. I know I have.
Don't take it personal, bro. It's no biggie!
I have stuff published in magazines that stocks shot down as
not good enough to sell to those very same folks. I have a picture I personally sold last week, that is being used in a national ad campaign that SS and IS shot down as 'poor focus' or 'harsh lighting' & 'blown highlights' a few weeks ago. So much for those reviews.
I just laugh it off.
It's a perfect example. I made a heck-of-alot more selling it myself than I would have gotten from both of them. A LOT more. And... I'm willing to bet
there are plenty of photogs right here on MSG that can say the same thing. It's sure not unique to me.
Sometimes there is no sense in it. Sometimes there is. However, it is always smart to consider why they shot it down. Sometimes you agree, sometimes you don't. Sometimes you learn a thing or two, other times, you sit back, shake your head and pop open another beer. It's just like
dbvirago said, sometimes you just get a lame reviewer.
There's good cops, bad cops... good doctors, bad doctors, good reviewers, and ... you guessed it.
Photos are like nachos, you can always make more. Chill out, and welcome to the club! LOL Peace!
-tommodify: i looked at your linked stuff above. Nice work, I guess StockXpert just doesn't need them. I think that's the biggest rejection reason I personally get from StockXpert. If they don't want to sell them, somebody else will. LOL