Ok now I dont understand this, but I'm wondering if anyone else has found this to be the case.  I submitted an initial 10 images and 8 got accepted, which is fine.  I submitted another 28 and only 4 got accepted, with the others being rejected for "poor lighting/ composition".  Now these images that I uploaded were all accepted by other agencies, so I'm wondering if 123rf is just plain picky or what?   If that's the case, then I just wont bother with them.

I had also some strange rejections at 123rf recently ...

me to

a litany of complaints here. a new direction for them?

http://www.microstockgroup.com/123royaltyfree-com/anyone-else-having-increased-sales-at-123rf/msg128513/?topicseen#new

for this new decade, i work this way accordingly down the line:

1) the more you approve my work, the more you get.
2) some rejections some  sales   = you  get some images .
3) rejections but no sales.  =  open trash can, you belong to 2009
and you stay there, you are no coming into the new decade with me.

i think it will work for me, as this way i am slowly ending up with only 2 or 3 Big 6, therefore giving me more time to concentrate on  Alamy

Quote from: PixelsAway on January 09, 2010, 06:26
I had also some strange rejections at 123rf recently ...

Same here!... "poor lighting / composition" seems to be the new over used rejection button of 123rf reviewers lately 

Yup...same here..I hardly upload there any more...very few sales, but I do find it some what strange when they accept some of the same photos in a series and when you upload some in a separete upload....so the don't do the ""to many similar images" on you....they turn them down for poor lighting or composition. I sometimes wonder if some of the reviewers need to have their monitors calibrated.

Me too.

Sounds like they fired half of reviewers or outsourced it all together.

You know I can understand rejects with some of the big 6 but when pictures are accepted at all of the big 6 and rejected at some of these smaller agencies, I really wonder if they just got some brand new reject keys and they gotta test them out.....lol

Quote from: PixelsAway on January 09, 2010, 06:26
I had also some strange rejections at 123rf recently ...

Me too, and I'm almost 5 years with them. I guess they hired a stray reviewer.

i've had exactly that poblem too -- whole batches rejected for 'lighting' - when i asked if they were training new reviewers i got an abrupt reply telling me their reviewers were highly trained and that many of them had large portfolios themselves!  then next 2 batcdhes of over 50 images were rejected the same way. 

that's it for me - 123 has been a poor perforer, even when they took a reasonasble approach to reviews; it's no longer worth my time

your mileage may vary

s

The same here... Poor lighting/composition.

I haven't checked recently but last time I did I think my total earning with them was $8.00 +. I really don't mess with them anymore because they are a waste of my time.

  My  last  3  were  the  same  PL/Comp.  2  of  the  3   were  accepted  by  another  big  6  above  them.

I just joined 123RF this fall and uploaded couple hundred images to them.

Huge rejection rate, in the neighborhood of 70%, and the funniest part is that they accept the images that are iffy, not good sellers anywhere else.

And yeah, all the rejections are for poor composition/lighting.

I might hang onto the rest of my portfolio until they figure out what's up.

let me look into the crystal ball of the past to see:

hmm,  atilla did some christmas moonlighting for 123 too.
oh, gee,... is that the editor from the demised Zymmetrical sitting in the reviewers chair for 123 ?

Quote from: PERSEUS on January 10, 2010, 19:53oh, gee,... is that the editor from the demised Zymmetrical sitting in the reviewers chair for 123 ?

There were no Attilas with Zymm. All rejections I had (not that many) were all justified by long and man-made explanations why. 123RF just rejected many of my new 5DII images that even iStock accepts without remarks. That's bad since 123RF as a low performer is not really in a position to throw away salable material like iStock now and then does. That wasn't their policy before. I won't object since the time it takes to email and give them examples, I can better use to edit my large backlog of images and upload to the real seller sites. I might even stop uploading to 123RF, until they sorted things out.

Beware to 123rf sometime they reject dark color images (not dark because lack of lights) such as brown, black etc. They reject my black forest cake because of poor lighting even though if I lift the exposure by small amount will over exposed the white part of the image.

ah so it appears to be a common theme!  I guess I wont bother wasting anymore time submitting there for now then.

Hi All,

If you feel strongly that your image is a good seller please email us. We're always happy to hear you out and perform a re-evaluation.

Wow, a thread about 123RF being picky!!

One unavoidable truth about image inspecting is that there are only 2 options. Approval or rejection. Its one or the other, with very few grey areas in-between. Unfortunately, one of the biggest factors in deciding whether to approve or reject any certain image is the strength of your previous uploads. Ie. if you have a proven track record of approvals and/or sales, the inspector will most likely be (much) more inclined to approve those borderline images when the decision to do so is more objective. So, if you have a 80-90% approval rating and an ok sales record then you will experience much fewer rejections, even if the composition or lighting of certain individual (or even series of) images is questionable.

Having been an editor for a few years I know that there is a lot of talent out there. One mistake is to start off by uploading too much and degrading the overall quality of your port, too early in the game. On top of having to improve your skills and tricks, you've got a massive approval deficit to improve as well. Remember, you start at the top with a 100% approval rating.

My point is that there is a 'tipping point' where if you can maintain quality over quantity for an extended period of time you have a much higher chance of getting the better of those borderline inspections.

Not preaching, just saying. I do consult a few successful contributors about these things, so if you've got any questions, drop a PM. Peace

Quote from: pixdeluxe on January 11, 2010, 09:26
One unavoidable truth about image inspecting is that there are only 2 options. Approval or rejection. Its one or the other, with very few grey areas in-between. Unfortunately, one of the biggest factors in deciding whether to approve or reject any certain image is the strength of your previous uploads. Ie. if you have a proven track record of approvals and/or sales, the inspector will most likely be (much) more inclined to approve those borderline images when the decision to do so is more objective. So, if you have a 80-90% approval rating and an ok sales record then you will experience much fewer rejections, even if the composition or lighting of certain individual (or even series of) images is questionable.

Having been an editor for a few years I know that there is a lot of talent out there. One mistake is to start off by uploading too much and degrading the overall quality of your port, too early in the game. On top of having to improve your skills and tricks, you've got a massive approval deficit to improve as well. Remember, you start at the top with a 100% approval rating.

My point is that there is a 'tipping point' where if you can maintain quality over quantity for an extended period of time you have a much higher chance of getting the better of those borderline inspections.

Not preaching, just saying. I do consult a few successful contributors about these things, so if you've got any questions, drop a PM. Peace

I agree with what you said to a degree, but when the same images they reject are being accepted by the more profitable and bigger agencies then their reveiwers need a lesson it what is and what isn't the correct exposure and composition

True, there will always be different 'standards' across the agencies. I think in the future we will see increasingly objective standards with creative content, styling, overall production values being some of the main factors determining an approval or rejection.

Its always helpful to produce a surplus of images and then split them up into weekly (or fortnightly) batches. With a surplus, you can be more selective at least on the first batches. Also, you can then mix them up from different shoots and avoid similarity rejections.

Here we go again...poor lighting/composition....