Author Topic: Crestock acceptance (Read 9252 times)

madelaide · « **on:** October 31, 2006, 16:50 »

Am I lucky, or is Crestock more tolerant now? My latest four submissions were all approved.

Regards,
Adelaide

eendicott · « **Reply #1 on:** October 31, 2006, 17:51 »

Some of us have been a little vocal on another forum after "The Crestock Team" asked how they can improve

madelaide · « **Reply #2 on:** November 08, 2006, 18:31 »

After many uploads and just one rejection, things are back to normal: three rejections in a row!

Regards,
Adelaide

Bateleur · « **Reply #3 on:** November 09, 2006, 04:30 »

Yeah, they're tough. I've got a little over 50% rejection rate.

And unfathomable too. There's no telling what they want. I've just had a very simple, clear, almost graphic image of two meshed gearwheels against a clear blue sky rejected. It's a good, steady seller on most other sites and has an iS rating of 5/5.

And yet they have images like this: http://www.crestock.com/image/5573_Finally.aspx

(Warning: Do not click on this link if you are of a sensitive or squeamish nature)

The mind boggles.

StockManiac · « **Reply #4 on:** November 09, 2006, 07:41 »

Quote from: Bateleur on November 09, 2006, 04:30

And yet they have images like this: http://www.crestock.com/image/5573_Finally.aspx

(Warning: Do not click on this link if you are of a sensitive or squeamish nature)

That image pretty much sums up Crestock for me...

Lior · « **Reply #5 on:** November 09, 2006, 11:50 »

I am in Crestock for a few months now, after they contacted me through my website asking me to join.
I didn't upload much since there were zero sales there ( didn't upload at all for the past 3 or 4 months).
After getting 3 downloads in the last week or so, I decided to give them another chance and uploaded 55 images today. all of them are steady sellers at other sites.
out of those 55 images, 52 were rejected. mostly with the "technical issues" statement.
I sent them an email asking them to remove all my images and close my account.
I don't have the time for jokes.

madelaide · « **Reply #6 on:** November 09, 2006, 16:25 »

Lior,

Your testimonial is very interesting.

I had two more rejections, one of them, like all but one in the same series, because "isolation was not complete". Well, the images are not meant to be isolations, I don't say they are isolations in my descriptions or keywords, nor I have picked isolation as a category. The images have clear areas for copy space, but shadows are part of them.

This is one of the images in this series:

I don't mind rejections when I can understand the reason (even if I do not agree), but theirs sometimes just suck.

Regards,
Adelaide

petermccue · « **Reply #7 on:** November 09, 2006, 16:33 »

I continue submitting to Crestock mainly because I'm stubborn, and the other main reason is it's good entertainment. It's always fun trying to figure out what stupid reason they'll give for rejecting most of my next batch!

leaf · « **Reply #8 on:** November 09, 2006, 16:48 »

Quote from: madelaide on November 09, 2006, 16:25

Lior,

Your testimonial is very interesting.

I had two more rejections, one of them, like all but one in the same series, because "isolation was not complete". Well, the images are not meant to be isolations, I don't say they are isolations in my descriptions or keywords, nor I have picked isolation as a category. The images have clear areas for copy space, but shadows are part of them.

This is one of the images in this series:

I don't mind rejections when I can understand the reason (even if I do not agree), but theirs sometimes just suck.

Regards,
Adelaide

I think you misunderstand them Adelaide.
An isolation is when the object is ISOLATED on white, meaning nothing else. This is clearly a poor isolation

a.k.a.-tom · « **Reply #9 on:** November 09, 2006, 17:28 »

Quote from: Bateleur on November 09, 2006, 04:30

And yet they have images like this: ....The mind boggles.

THAT's an understatement!! That DOES boggle the mind. That's just plain unbelievable... if you had told me that picture was for sale on a stock site, I'd have never believed you. ... I don't think I'll be posting to this one...
tom

madelaide · « **Reply #10 on:** November 09, 2006, 18:13 »

Quote from: leaf on November 09, 2006, 16:48

An isolation is when the object is ISOLATED on white, meaning nothing else. This is clearly a poor isolation

I know what isolated means in stock, but the image simply was not meant to be an "isolated on white" one, with clipping path and so on. It is an image of an object, in which shadows are there intentionally. I didn't mean to "isolate" it. Given it's a near white object, in fact isolating it on white would make it a very poor subject, I think. Other sites are accepting this series (still waiting for IS and DT reviews, though) and this one had one dld already.

Regards,
Adelaide

leaf · « **Reply #11 on:** November 09, 2006, 18:29 »

sorry for being confusing........, my statement was meant to be sarcastic... hence the wink

it was a nice shot

Lior · « **Reply #12 on:** November 10, 2006, 03:57 »

this is another one that they rejected for poor isolation.
all I can say is, HUH?
:-)

doconnell · « **Reply #13 on:** November 12, 2006, 11:16 »

Crestock is fun in an odd way. I am enjoying to read the rejection reasons partly becuse I have no hope to make serious business there anyway. I have 12 images accepted on their site (all are OK sellers on other sites) and over 20 rejected (including some of my top sellers on other microstock sites). The last photo I got rejected got very good response from all five sites I am on: Top 50 of the week for weeks on SS, instant DLs and few 5/5 reviews on IS, and a kind reviewer marked it as beautiful shot on BS ( I was so happy with that , since nothing like that happened to me on BS before), Fotolia and Dreamstime sold it few times as well.
I am not sure what Crestock wants from photographers but oddly I think they do not know it either.

3pod · « **Reply #14 on:** November 12, 2006, 11:25 »

I also experience some similarity rejections on Crestock... It's a good thing they reject many images because they ensure their quality right from the start.

My sales are around 0-2/day with just 114 image online. They're starting place ads, so maybe sales will go up...

leaf · « **Reply #15 on:** November 12, 2006, 11:28 »

are you saying you average 1 sale per day there?

3pod · « **Reply #16 on:** November 12, 2006, 11:40 »

Yes:) I've registered there less than three weeks ago and I've got 16 downloads so far. I hope I find the time to upload the rest 3/4 of my portfolio there.

leaf · « **Reply #17 on:** November 12, 2006, 11:41 »

i have had about 10 images there for the last 5 months or so but have only had 2 or 3 sales. I haven't been very persuaded to spend the time uploading my portfolio yet.

3pod · « **Reply #18 on:** November 12, 2006, 11:43 »

Yeah . Maybe it's a bit soon...

madelaide · « **Reply #19 on:** November 13, 2006, 15:21 »

Five rejections in a row - I think that's my record!

Regards,
Adelaide

Egypix · « **Reply #20 on:** December 26, 2006, 02:01 »

Yes , they're very tough, rejections is a lot !!! .... for me i just upload 26 photos 16 rejected ..

madelaide · « **Reply #21 on:** December 27, 2006, 15:17 »

I had two rejections recently without an email explaining why. I'm getting bored with them...

Regards,
Adelaide

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Crestock acceptance (Read 9252 times)

madelaide

eendicott

madelaide

Bateleur

StockManiac

Lior

madelaide

petermccue

leaf

a.k.a.-tom

madelaide

leaf

Lior

doconnell

3pod

leaf

3pod

leaf

3pod

madelaide

Egypix

madelaide

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors