MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 123rf culling images  (Read 3773 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: October 26, 2009, 15:17 »
0
FYI, I just noticed 123rf is starting to cull images for various reasons (mostly "possible copyright issues"). They do not send out notifications. However, culled images appear on the history --> Rejected page (http://submit.123rf.com/submit/myuploaded.php?displayshow=r)

I noticed, because a buyer sent me a site mail, asking where the image had gone he selected...

Oh, well, it's all for our own protection - but a email informing us of their decision would've been nice.


« Reply #1 on: October 26, 2009, 15:53 »
0
FYI, I just noticed 123rf is starting to cull images for various reasons (mostly "possible copyright issues"). They do not send out notifications. However, culled images appear on the history --> Rejected page (http://submit.123rf.com/submit/myuploaded.php?displayshow=r)

I noticed, because a buyer sent me a site mail, asking where the image had gone he selected...

Oh, well, it's all for our own protection - but a email informing us of their decision would've been nice.


Must be a slow time for their attorneys.... :D

« Reply #2 on: October 26, 2009, 15:56 »
0
Perhaps this why it takes 3-15 minutes for pages to load?  If I was a buyer I would be very frustrated these days....

« Reply #3 on: October 26, 2009, 16:42 »
0
Recently they have rejected several of my shots stating that a property release was required.
They used to accept similar images in the past with no problem, so I thought it was a glitch or the wrong button pushed, but apparently not.
Very well, I guess the buyers will have to go to DT, IS or SS...

lisafx

« Reply #4 on: October 26, 2009, 17:13 »
0
Interesting.  Seems that the other sites are following Istock/Getty's lead on this.

« Reply #5 on: October 26, 2009, 19:09 »
0
Interesting.  Seems that the other sites are following Istock/Getty's lead on this.

Hmm __ agreed. Judging by the rapidity with which this is spreading suggests strongly to me that the interest might be customer-enquiry driven.

KB

« Reply #6 on: October 26, 2009, 22:22 »
0
Interesting.  Seems that the other sites are following Istock/Getty's lead on this.
In my last batch, I had 4 images rejected for lack of PR that were (recently) accepted on IS.

Seems like they are ahead of Istock/Getty!  ;D

« Reply #7 on: October 27, 2009, 08:25 »
0
Aparently, the decision to remove images with graffiti was broadcasted yesterday, via twitter:

Quote
123rf says no to graffiti images! All past submissions without ANY property release will be removed effective TODAY. http://bit.ly/2gBcEi
Exceptions for GRAFFITI ACCEPTANCE:not captured as primary object/focus,ration shouldn't exceed 1:3 of the entire image http://bit.ly/2uA12





 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
15 Replies
6189 Views
Last post June 18, 2006, 13:55
by Quevaal
5 Replies
4898 Views
Last post March 19, 2007, 04:46
by snoozle
3 Replies
4107 Views
Last post July 11, 2007, 06:45
by fintastique
34 Replies
13234 Views
Last post August 18, 2010, 03:38
by sam100
15 Replies
10554 Views
Last post August 20, 2010, 11:22
by mtkang

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results