MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Weird rejection on composition  (Read 3364 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Poncke v2

« on: May 12, 2013, 14:24 »
0
I just had a weird rejection on an image rejected for 'File does not appear to be professional in composition.'

What is a professional composition?
Rejecting for not appearing to be something is quite vague. As if the reviewer wasnt sure him/herself.

The image was composed using rule of thirds.

I am not posting the image tho, because some people here cant give normal critique.


tab62

« Reply #1 on: May 12, 2013, 14:40 »
0
this almost looks like a GL or DT comment- really have to see the image.   By the way what is a normal critique lol!

T

« Reply #2 on: May 12, 2013, 14:48 »
+1
It is frustrating to receive such funky rejection notices but it would really help you and all of us to understand better what we're dealing with here if you show the image in question.

Consider the slight chance that we can all learn from this...

« Reply #3 on: May 12, 2013, 14:50 »
+2
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 14:07 by Audi 5000 »

Poncke v2

« Reply #4 on: May 12, 2013, 15:30 »
+1
I think Leaf said if you aren't going to post your image you shouldn't whine about rejections.
I am not whining, just posting a normal comment. Stop being so obsessed with me. Otherwise send me a PM with your email address and I'll send you a signed photo of me for your bedroom wall.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2013, 15:43 by Poncke v2 »

Poncke v2

« Reply #5 on: May 12, 2013, 15:41 »
0
I dont mind getting critique, I just cant deal with being made a fool out of because an image has flaws.

« Reply #6 on: May 12, 2013, 16:16 »
0
Sounds like its a replacement for their earlier one about being "too snapshotish" Rejections seem to have gone up lately at Canstock

Poncke v2

« Reply #7 on: May 12, 2013, 16:20 »
0
Hmm, thanks, that does sound feasible, I dont think its a snapshot composition tho, it was composed with thought.

« Reply #8 on: May 12, 2013, 22:06 »
0
one of the latest rejected for unprofessional composition ;D


« Reply #9 on: May 12, 2013, 23:47 »
0
one of the latest rejected for unprofessional composition ;D




I can only speak from my own experiences with ss rejections. I think your image was rejected because the umbrellas are too close to the left and bottom border. I've had similar images rejected too and I assumed it was for that reason. Having said that, you know how overly fussy ss can be and they will reject images that don't abide by their rule book, often to the point of not looking at the image as a whole and asking the question how well will it sell. IMO your image is far from unprofessional in composition and it would still sell well, despite it not fitting perfectly with the rules their reviewers are given.

« Reply #10 on: May 13, 2013, 00:32 »
0
one of the latest rejected for unprofessional composition ;D




I can only speak from my own experiences with ss rejections. I think your image was rejected because the umbrellas are too close to the left and bottom border. I've had similar images rejected too and I assumed it was for that reason. Having said that, you know how overly fussy ss can be and they will reject images that don't abide by their rule book, often to the point of not looking at the image as a whole and asking the question how well will it sell. IMO your image is far from unprofessional in composition and it would still sell well, despite it not fitting perfectly with the rules their reviewers are given.


too close? whatever man, SS took it so I am not really worried about CanStockPhoto ;)

« Reply #11 on: May 13, 2013, 01:19 »
0
too close? whatever man, SS took it so I am not really worried about CanStockPhoto ;)

Oh yeah ss took it, hence the big ss watermark, Lol! I just woke up when I wrote that. Think I better go back to bed.  :D

« Reply #12 on: May 13, 2013, 01:56 »
+2
"SS took it so I am not really worried about CanStockPhoto" is the correct answer I think time spent worrying about rejections is time wasted.

Poncke v2

« Reply #13 on: May 13, 2013, 03:31 »
0
I had an image accepted yesterday, but I deleted it to retouch the model's dark lines under the eyes. When I resubmitted it was rejected for File shows too much noise (a.k.a grain).  Its the exact same image and its noise free. So from one reviewer to another, they are inconsistent.

« Reply #14 on: May 13, 2013, 05:21 »
+1
My experience is that when an image is borderline acceptable it can go either way.  If it is a stunning no brainer super image it will get accepted both times, if the reviewer says.. mehh.. then it is just a matter of chance and mood if they reach for the reject or accept button.

Poncke v2

« Reply #15 on: May 13, 2013, 05:54 »
0
Agree on composition, composition is a subjective matter. But noise is there or it isnt.

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #16 on: May 13, 2013, 07:24 »
+1
So from one reviewer to another, they are inconsistent.

Good that you have discovered hot water
;)

Reviewers are inconsistent, incoherent, uneducated (artistically), insensitive to the meaning of concepts.
They only apply rules that they don't understand themselves
« Last Edit: May 13, 2013, 07:27 by Beppe Grillo »

« Reply #17 on: May 13, 2013, 07:40 »
0
So from one reviewer to another, they are inconsistent.

Good that you have discovered hot water
;)

Reviewers are inconsistent, incoherent, uneducated (artistically), insensitive to the meaning of concepts.
They only apply rules that they don't understand themselves

I would like to add automatic approval script for favorite contributors, there is one that started back in 2008 and she has like 50 similar (not people but objects/flowers) for each batch, perhaps an inside cousin ;D

Poncke v2

« Reply #18 on: May 13, 2013, 07:44 »
0
You have a point there Louis, about having connections on the inside. I am convinced that happens.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
50 Replies
12651 Views
Last post February 22, 2010, 17:37
by Dreamframer
7 Replies
3392 Views
Last post March 21, 2010, 20:43
by Lizard
28 Replies
6976 Views
Last post January 30, 2012, 09:00
by Ed
0 Replies
1132 Views
Last post May 13, 2017, 20:41
by Danybot
7 Replies
1070 Views
Last post January 18, 2019, 21:34
by dragonblade

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results