Author Topic: Encouraged to submit, but rejected when I do (Read 14217 times)

Microstock Posts · « **on:** July 11, 2010, 06:07 »

I read recently, somewhere on Cutcaster about the images wanted. Something that they want is religious and diverse stuff. I have tons of images of Eastern religions. I thought I'd submit a few to cc, as I haven't submitted in a while. I sent them just 6, 1 was accepted, the rest rejected for poor lighting. I just can't fathom how the one which was accepted had better lighting than the others. Is it a case of a lazy reviewer, hovering his cursor over the same rejection answer. Again, the old cliche, "these images were accepted in the top 6".

As much as I like Cutcaster, I don't think I have any motivation in sending anymore images. I haven't had a sale this year (a few last year), I don't mind that I'm all for giving a site time, it can take years for a site to become successful. But if they don't want my images, not much point really.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #1 on:** July 11, 2010, 06:54 »

Posting about rejections without posting samples of the images? Not much point really.

Microstock Posts · « **Reply #2 on:** July 11, 2010, 07:25 »

Quote from: sjlocke on July 11, 2010, 06:54

Posting about rejections without posting samples of the images? Not much point really.

Good point. These were rejected.

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/asianimages/4774444303/" title="Different Backgrounds by Asian Images, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4135/4774444303_18d71b397c.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="Different Backgrounds">[/url]

FD · « **Reply #3 on:** July 11, 2010, 07:27 »

Quote from: sjlocke on July 11, 2010, 06:54

Posting about rejections without posting samples of the images? Not much point really.

Speaking of silly rejections (sorry Komar to hijack your thread for a short moment) our new kid on the block, StockFresh, rejected this lifestyle image of a Muslim girl with the argument that I need to change the background. Now it is shot with a lens that produces a beautiful bokeh (Canon 24-70/2.8 ) and the tropical suburban background isn't that sloppy I figure. I can't grasp why beginning or low-sales sites are so anal-retentive in their rejects. The result is I halted my uploads to StockFresh, till they find some less ignorant reviewers.

Microstock Posts · « **Reply #4 on:** July 11, 2010, 07:27 »

Sorry I hit the post button instead of the preview. I'll try and send it again.

cathyslife · « **Reply #5 on:** July 11, 2010, 07:32 »

Quote from: FD-regular on July 11, 2010, 07:27

Quote from: sjlocke on July 11, 2010, 06:54
Posting about rejections without posting samples of the images? Not much point really.
Speaking of silly rejections (sorry Komar to hijack your thread for a short moment) our new kid on the block, StockFresh, rejected this lifestyle image of a Muslim girl with the argument that I need to change the background. Now it is shot with a lens that produces a beautiful bokeh (Canon 24-70/2.8 ) and the tropical suburban background isn't that sloppy I figure. I can't grasp why beginning or low-sales sites are so anal-retentive in their rejects. The result is I halted my uploads to StockFresh, till they find some less ignorant reviewers.

Chances are if someone uses your image, FD, it's going to be cropped anyway, so leaving all the background was good on your part. Haven't we heard from many buyers not to crop too close? Buyers want image to crop, but reviewers use it as an excuse to reject! I've given up trying to figure out what they want. I submit...if they want them, fine, if not fine. Usually 3/4s of the sites accept an image, so that works out ok for me.

Komar, I don't see why your images were rejected for lighting either. But with millions of images coming online almost every day, they can reject whatever they want.

FD · « **Reply #6 on:** July 11, 2010, 07:36 »

Quote from: Komar on July 11, 2010, 06:07

I thought I'd submit a few to cc, as I haven't submitted in a while. I sent them just 6, 1 was accepted, the rest rejected for poor lighting.

To get back on track, one of the two reasons (the second one is irrelevant in this thread) for dumping CC was that CC rejected most of my editorial (I have tons of lifestyle and culture images in the Far East) with the argument there were occasional children in the shoot. For the record, I never upload children pics where they are the main focus, but for heaven's sake, how can you keep children out of the background in an area (Mindanao - Philippines) where half of the population is under 20?

In your shots I can see some children in the background too. Maybe they forgot to reject it for that reason.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #7 on:** July 11, 2010, 07:37 »

Quote from: cclapper on July 11, 2010, 07:32

Komar, I don't see why your images were rejected for lighting either. But with millions of images coming online almost every day, they can reject whatever they want.

If their emphasis is commercial stock, I can understand it, as these look like street snapshots. More of editorial stock. They probably want well composed well lit stock concepts with the correct ethnicities in the right environments.

FD · « **Reply #8 on:** July 11, 2010, 07:47 »

Quote from: sjlocke on July 11, 2010, 07:37

If their emphasis is commercial stock, I can understand it, as these look like street snapshots. More of editorial stock.

One of their goals is Editorial. You can't have perfect studio lighting on shots like these. Although my ethnic shots where done in daylight and lately a guy with a big lightbox 2m next to me.
http://flemishdreams.com/portfolio/ethnic.html

Microstock Posts · « **Reply #9 on:** July 11, 2010, 07:56 »

Yes they want editorial, apparently! And I forgot about their no children policy, nice of the reviewer to remind me with the bad lighting hint..

This was the one accepted..

This was another rejected.

Colette · « **Reply #10 on:** July 11, 2010, 08:13 »

Rejections are part of the game. No problem with that.
But it makes a difference if what always has been accepted now recently is rejected and all for the same reason: Poor lighting.
Before CC was accepting above 95 percent of my images. These recent uploaded images are nearly all accepted at 10/14 other agencies (depending on if they are editorials or not. Not every site is accepting editorials).
Only DT has the well known rejection: too much of the same series...Even the 123 reviewer couldn't find 'poor lighting' ...

Do I have to take this kind of rejections seriously? Come on...
So I stopped uploading and try again later in the year.

Microstock Posts · « **Reply #11 on:** July 11, 2010, 10:49 »

Quote from: Colette on July 11, 2010, 08:13

Do I have to take this kind of rejections seriously? Come on...
So I stopped uploading and try again later in the year.

Yes I agree with that. The point is and yes I know I'm a small timer when it comes to submitting, but my images do well. When I submit to sites like cc, CanStockPhoto and other low earners I do so with the thought, it's good to support agencies like these, if I like them why not? I don't upload thinking i'm going to make anything with them, at least not in the near future. When I upload too ss, dt etc, I do so with the thought, well the more I upload the sooner my next payment. And the payments are slowly becoming more regular now.

As opposed to some of the big guns where they are in a position to think they are doing us the favour by even allowing us to submit. The pee shooters should realise that it's not too wise to piss contributors off especially when the current position is, they need us. We don't need them.

Colette · « **Reply #12 on:** July 11, 2010, 11:42 »

yesterday I had to laugh when I found this:
http://www.mostphotos.com/841256/Businessman-smiling
http://www.mostphotos.com/841235/Man-Praying
http://www.mostphotos.com/841241/Trendy-European-Suit-and-Tie
http://www.mostphotos.com/841260/Businessman-Making-a-Call
(I placed links for I don't know if I am allowed to copy and past photos from others)
Photos are made by Yuri Arcurs. Few examples, there are more...Seem selfportraits.

Thinking at all the comments about leaving copyspace, too much cropping, poor ligthing etc. that I would get when I had posted this... even the nose is cut off...!

Con licet jovi, non licet bovi.

When starting to submit to a stockagency they ask you a lot, but they forget to ask for your sense of humor. And that is what you just need the most!

Microstock Posts · « **Reply #13 on:** July 13, 2010, 07:08 »

Quote from: Colette on July 11, 2010, 11:42

yesterday I had to laugh when I found this:
http://www.mostphotos.com/841256/Businessman-smiling
http://www.mostphotos.com/841235/Man-Praying
http://www.mostphotos.com/841241/Trendy-European-Suit-and-Tie
http://www.mostphotos.com/841260/Businessman-Making-a-Call
(I placed links for I don't know if I am allowed to copy and past photos from others)
Photos are made by Yuri Arcurs. Few examples, there are more...Seem selfportraits.

Thinking at all the comments about leaving copyspace, too much cropping, poor ligthing etc. that I would get when I had posted this... even the nose is cut off...!
Con licet jovi, non licet bovi.

When starting to submit to a stockagency they ask you a lot, but they forget to ask for your sense of humor. And that is what you just need the most!

Yeah those photos by Yuri are crap. Now there's something you don't hear everyday! Don't forget though, MostPhotos accepts everything, even my stuff. Talking about Yuri, a few months ago I was looking for an image for my blog. I finally chose one and then saw that the photographer was Yuri Arcurs

. I hope he spent the money wisely lol!

Colette · « **Reply #14 on:** July 13, 2010, 17:40 »

Yes, I know MP has no reviews. It was only for example.
And of course Yuri has very nice images. Perhaps these are from his early days in stock. But he made the choice to upload them and not to delete them, so I suppose he doesn't think they are that bad...
I think that his images, even when they are perhaps not so good, will be accepted easier, because of having a well known name in stock.
Reviewers know that it will sell for it is an 'Arcurs'. (Or a Gagne, an Andres or so...)
No point. So it goes. But when starting with stock you have to deal with nonsense rejections sometimes. I think he (and all others when starting) has had to deal with that too in the past... (But will you still think it is nonsense in 2012?)
When uploading to a lot of agencies reasons given for rejections are sometimes really funny. I have images rejected for "Snapshotisch" with CS that are accepted as "Recommended" with PM. Images are rejected for "artefact's" with Istock, while another image that has more artefact's is accepted (and in the same batch, so I suppose by the same reviewer). So perhaps the real reason for rejection should be: "I don't like it", or "I have a headache".
Or what to think about a series of editorials uploaded and submitted in two batches. First are all accepted, second are all rejected for "Not newsworthy enough". Clearly different reviewers with different opinions!
Reviewing images seems a terrible and very difficult job to me. It is not easy to stay detached. When having reviewed a whole bunch of bad or not so sellable images and then seeing mine, a reviewer should possibly say: Oh no, not again! I have had enough! And reject the whole batch!

a.k.a.-tom · « **Reply #15 on:** July 14, 2010, 17:32 »

Quote from: FD-regular on July 11, 2010, 07:27

Quote from: sjlocke on July 11, 2010, 06:54
Posting about rejections without posting samples of the images? Not much point really.
Speaking of silly rejections (sorry Komar to hijack your thread for a short moment) our new kid on the block, StockFresh, rejected this lifestyle image of a Muslim girl with the argument that I need to change the background. Now it is shot with a lens that produces a beautiful bokeh (Canon 24-70/2.8 ) and the tropical suburban background isn't that sloppy I figure. I can't grasp why beginning or low-sales sites are so anal-retentive in their rejects. The result is I halted my uploads to StockFresh, till they find some less ignorant reviewers.

At least Stockfresh is looking at your images.. i've heard nothing yet from them... anyone else besides the uber-groups?

=tom

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Encouraged to submit, but rejected when I do (Read 14217 times)

Microstock Posts

Sean Locke Photography

Microstock Posts

FD

Microstock Posts

cathyslife

FD

Sean Locke Photography

FD

Microstock Posts

Colette

Microstock Posts

Colette

Microstock Posts

Colette

a.k.a.-tom

peter_stockfresh

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors