MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: "Attila the Reviewer" did not rest on the 7th day  (Read 11872 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: March 29, 2008, 01:52 »
0
I don't like only receiving 11% commission on my sales, so I opted out.  20% is as low as I will go and that is only because istock spend lots on advertising.  I sell at higher prices on a few sites but get at least 50% commission on most of them.


« Reply #26 on: March 29, 2008, 02:07 »
0
All,

A heads up to everyone it appears that "Attila the Reviewer" has surfaced at BigStockPhoto (BigStock). It has been seven days since my last approval (1) and 29 rejections since then. Hell ... even God rested on the 7th day.

Mark

Sometimes, improving techniques of shooting and image processing helps...

« Reply #27 on: March 29, 2008, 15:05 »
0
All,

A heads up to everyone it appears that "Attila the Reviewer" has surfaced at BigStockPhoto (BigStock). It has been seven days since my last approval (1) and 29 rejections since then. Hell ... even God rested on the 7th day.

Mark

Sometimes, improving techniques of shooting and image processing helps...

nata_rass

Clearly you did not get the joke ... or read the posts above.

With only a couple of posts to your name, and the designation of "newbie" here on MSG perhaps you are not familiar with the wanderings of "Attila the Reviewer" who has been known to crop up from time after drifting aimlessly from stock site to stock site ...

Mark

« Last Edit: March 29, 2008, 15:58 by mwp1969 »

« Reply #28 on: March 29, 2008, 15:48 »
0
I got nailed with a blanket "no commercial value" rejection at BigStock recently.  The subject was of a blind person's white cane encountering various obstacles and accessible platforms.  Too much of a niche subject for their tastes, I suppose...although the subject sells very well everywhere (including BigStock).

fotoKmyst

« Reply #29 on: March 29, 2008, 21:33 »
0
my question is what do you have to do to get this? or have to give up to get this?

Follow the link of Leaf. Check all types of licenses. Then apply this (1) to your existing port and (2) as default for your future uploads.
Do it in those two steps.

You should do it. It doesn't mean exclusivity, just more money with no extra pain.

thanks leaf,
thanks FlemishDreams 8)

appreciate you taking the time to answer my question, even though it was not related to mwp's "attila".

btw, "attila sounds  anal... ::) i hope you're all just joking!  ;D

« Reply #30 on: April 16, 2008, 18:38 »
0
I just got my first review there back.  One image (accepted on IS) rejected for being OOF, another (also accepted at IS) "too many", and a third (accepted at SS) also OOF.  I'm just laughing and might ask for a re-review on the first because it's a seller for me.  :-)

Now I can't get the site to load in order to put another batch into the que.

fotoKmyst

« Reply #31 on: April 16, 2008, 20:21 »
0
how do you know it's atilla? is he the one who deletes like 10 shots at once with "this is a snapshot" LOL

if so, ya, i just got him . most of my accepts were not him. for sure! ;D

so perharps he did rest.... i hope he doesn't wake up  ;D

« Reply #32 on: April 16, 2008, 20:24 »
0
I just got my first review there back.  One image (accepted on IS) rejected for being OOF, another (also accepted at IS) "too many", and a third (accepted at SS) also OOF.  I'm just laughing and might ask for a re-review on the first because it's a seller for me.  :-)

Now I can't get the site to load in order to put another batch into the que.

that's really strange. i got in several times this morning and i just checked . it's working for me.

maybe it's your browser. did you try typing the URl rather than bookmark.?

« Reply #33 on: April 16, 2008, 20:34 »
0
I think it's my ISP but I'm going to try a full restart. 

« Reply #34 on: April 16, 2008, 21:02 »
0
Yep, it was an ISP issue.  Silly, stupid DNS servers.  :-)

« Reply #35 on: May 13, 2008, 09:52 »
0
All,

A heads up to everyone it appears that "Attila the Reviewer" has surfaced at BigStockPhoto (BigStock). It has been seven days since my last approval (1) and 29 rejections since then. Hell ... even God rested on the 7th day.

Mark


I noticed you didn't get very many supporters on your comment.  I have been on SS for a couple of months now and have been doing pretty good.  I decided a couple of weeks ago to try the other top sites and I have to say I was quite surprised at the amount of rejection I got on pictures that had been accepted by SS and are selling well.  Out of the 10 pictures I submitted, the rejected all but one.  Quite a few were rejected due to "blurry image", which I disagree with.  From a new person's perspective, I'd say that Attila the Reviewer has taken a full time position as BigStock.

RacePhoto

« Reply #36 on: May 14, 2008, 02:42 »
0
All,

A heads up to everyone it appears that "Attila the Reviewer" has surfaced at BigStockPhoto (BigStock). It has been seven days since my last approval (1) and 29 rejections since then. Hell ... even God rested on the 7th day.

Mark


I noticed you didn't get very many supporters on your comment.  I have been on SS for a couple of months now and have been doing pretty good.  I decided a couple of weeks ago to try the other top sites and I have to say I was quite surprised at the amount of rejection I got on pictures that had been accepted by SS and are selling well.  Out of the 10 pictures I submitted, the rejected all but one.  Quite a few were rejected due to "blurry image", which I disagree with.  From a new person's perspective, I'd say that Attila the Reviewer has taken a full time position as BigStock.

I'm not going to be my usual sarcastic self on this one.

I have more photos on BigStock than anywhere else of the magnificent seven. Part of the reason is size of course, I have old photos from the old cameras, also I'll confess that I'm still more of a beginner in stock. Sites like IS, SS, DT, and StockXpert, regularly reject photos that get I accepted at BigStock.

The only thing I can guess is that while my pictures aren't the best "stock", some are even highly saturated, they are usually sharp, and that may be the problem that some others are having? 90% of them came from the Canon 10D.

I've had photos taken with the 40D and my 28-135 lens, that are rejected for sharpness. And the rejections can be justified. If I reduce the size of the same images and upload to BigStock, they are accepted.

What I'm guessing at here, since I can't see Mark's or your photos, is that maybe they are expecting crisp, sharp photos, and any softness gets them rejected.

Just a guess. But I don't doubt that both of you are taking at least equal or better compositions, so what's left? I don't sharpen images or use noise reduction. (maybe if there's a big blue sky, that would show loads of CA) in which case select whatever way you prefer and use noise reduction only on the sky.

Normally all I do is, crop, view at 100% for spots, hairs, blemishes, dust bunnies... magic healing tool is my best friend. Then search for logos and things that we can't include, blur, clone or paint those out.  Color correction for tint, then levels, black first then white. This isn't heavy editing or time consuming.

If it wasn't for stock, and I was making prints for myself, I'd possibly use the dodge and burn tools to improve areas that needed help. But more editing takes more time.

When I get sharpness rejections on images, shot on a tripod at f/8 or smaller, ISO 100, I begin to think it's the lens. Then I say to myself, this is stock! What the heck do they want for a dollar!

Always remember, if you are counting acceptance and not sales, you can upload just about anything to SV and have it accepted.  ;) Otherwise, don't expect any rational or logical consistency between the sites for what gets accepted or rejected. In fact, you can have a photo rejected, and accidentally re-submit it a second time and it gets accepted at the same site.

I don't bother playing that game or re-submitting anything, but others have taken their chances and had a different reviewer accept the same photos that have been rejected two weeks before. I don't even track my rejections anymore, just accepted and active photos.

Funniest one is a photo that was rejected everywhere except IS and they are the most consistent for reviews of anyplace, from my experience. Similar is a photo that was rejected on 8 out of 9 sites, and it's only up on BigStock. If neither of these sell, 8 of 9 sites, were right? If they do sell, then someone with a sharp eye saw the potential that all the rest missed.

Reviews are subjective, that's life.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
5322 Views
Last post June 11, 2007, 07:55
by Bateleur
1 Replies
4677 Views
Last post July 06, 2007, 19:41
by HughStoneIan
0 Replies
3338 Views
Last post July 08, 2007, 04:06
by rjmiz
2 Replies
6360 Views
Last post September 11, 2007, 02:14
by sharpshot
32 Replies
9150 Views
Last post October 07, 2011, 06:17
by lthn

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors