0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Don't know about anyone else, but if I boost the saturation too much it causes posterization in some of the darker colors and looks fake. BigStock and a lot of other sites have very poor thumbnails and previews which have been leached of color when they are created on their end (to make them smaller?). Maybe they should stop blaming the lack of color on us and improve the quality of their previews.
Also have first photo in portfolio of about 700 pics rejected for bad keywords precise of too much words which do not corespond to it.Is it new politics like on CS or ...
somehow i don't think that BigStock judged photos from thumbnails. reviewers always view it at 100%; the more critical reviewers even at 200%...eg. coming back with "sorry, can't accept this, due to the license plate of a parked car in the left corner".
LOL Joyce! I had to laugh at your comment about the bird because they did a similar thing to me. I have a picture of two rhinos sleeping in the mud. They rejected it and said I should use a color enhancing software to bring out the colors. I resubmitted it with a note to review it again and said if you don't like these colors, then what colors do you want me to make them because this is exactly what colors they were. I never got a reply, but in a couple days they accepted it. LOL
Of the nine agencies I've signed up with in the last few months, BigStock is by far the least impressive. Un-user friendly website interface (everything seems hidden), very bad over-compressed thumbnails and previews with color leached out, super long review times. I'm ready to dump them already. Should I give them six months?
Many of my images that have been accepted at DT, SS, and others are being rejected at BigStock for stupid reasons. I am beginning to believe they hired the visually impaired for reviewer. BigStock is quickly moving to the top of my crap list: long approval times, stupid reject reason, and SLOW SALES.