MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Too many like this  (Read 3635 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RacePhoto

« on: February 06, 2009, 15:40 »
0
I suppose that's a legitimate reason if I was doing sliced fruit or vegetables isolated on white or person with headset and the rest.

Reason: This is a very well covered subject in our data base or the subject of your image is too specific. We are looking for images that exceed the technical quality and creativity of the images already online. Please take a few minutes to browse through the best selling images online (on this subject) and go deeper, play, have a more creative, more personal approach to it, also keeping in mind the technical quality of the image.

I went and looked, there was one matching image with the specific subject, and it wasn't even the subject, it was something in the keywords, that was a minor element. There were pages and pages of generally similar presentations of other subjects. It's like saying, we have too many isolations on white, even though you have the only one of this particular item.

I won't be re-submitting, I respect their decisions, however the same image is now accepted on every other site that I submit to.

Does "too many of these" come down to reviewers taste or do agencies have a a guide for the reviewers that tells them to refuse general methods, regardless of the subject in the shot?

How do I get a too many of these rejection for something that they don't have any of full frame?


« Reply #1 on: February 06, 2009, 15:52 »
0
I think that more often than not, the photographer is just focused on the specifics on the image (as opposed to the big picture) when he/she objects to a 'too many of these' rejection. An example of this might be a picture of a beach sunset in Bali. Sure, the agency hardly has any 'beach sunset in Bali' shots, but they have a surplus of generic 'beach sunset' shots, which is why the image was rejected. You don't hint at what was in the image, but maybe that's what happened to you, RacePhoto?

RacePhoto

« Reply #2 on: February 06, 2009, 16:18 »
0
I think that more often than not, the photographer is just focused on the specifics on the image (as opposed to the big picture) when he/she objects to a 'too many of these' rejection. An example of this might be a picture of a beach sunset in Bali. Sure, the agency hardly has any 'beach sunset in Bali' shots, but they have a surplus of generic 'beach sunset' shots, which is why the image was rejected. You don't hint at what was in the image, but maybe that's what happened to you, RacePhoto?


Pretty much covers it.   ;D

1800 shots of "whatever subject" and 1800 shots done in this type format and only one of them that's both. Wait, make that none, it was rejected.  ::)

But thanks for the answer, that explained it perfectly.

tan510jomast

« Reply #3 on: February 06, 2009, 16:42 »
0
can you show us what WAS rejected, race?
my latest were of isolated fruits and they were approved, all of them.
so perharps, as sharply_done pointed out, it's probably not meant to be specifically
your type of images but generically speaking.
i had some of the same rejection reasons, but when i reshot with a different compositional style they were approved. so perharps you could try a different perspective. hope that helps.

« Reply #4 on: February 06, 2009, 23:38 »
0
Am I the only one annoyed by the rejections that include 2 completely opposite reasons - "too many or too specific", "edges are too feathered or too sharp", or "too much noise or overuse of noise reduction". Well, which one is it?

--=Tom

« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2009, 23:45 »
0
I think it depends on which agency you are talking about.

e-person

« Reply #6 on: February 07, 2009, 08:02 »
0
For what it's worth, I have stopped uploading there and in six months time I will delete my images for the second time. This time I will not have any second thoughts and I will not believe people on forums, pushing minor agencies for who knows what reasons.

« Reply #7 on: February 07, 2009, 08:30 »
0
Am I the only one annoyed by the rejections that include 2 completely opposite reasons - "too many or too specific", "edges are too feathered or too sharp", or "too much noise or overuse of noise reduction". Well, which one is it?

No, you're not the only one annoyed. But my opinion is that there are so many people trying to cash in on microstock that the reviewers have become so overwhelmed and they just want to cover their butts. A lot of times my rejections don't make sense, and I long ago gave up trying to figure out what they mean. I still upload to 5 sites and one very major reason is that if a photo gets rejected on one site the other 4 will approve it.

And if I get too many rejections from one site that seem like total bullsh-t, I will do what e-person is doing. So far, that hasn't happened to me.


« Reply #8 on: February 07, 2009, 09:13 »
0
It is annoying but when you consider how many images there are to review it must be difficult to be so specific. I know istock occasionally tell you reasons why the image in particular was rejected but I dont expect it so specific otherwise reviewing would be much much slower

« Reply #9 on: February 07, 2009, 09:54 »
0
Your rank on DT depends on your approval rate...at least it's what I heard. So, I think that people who have low approval rate are not satisfied with DT. I had 4 sales yestarday with 230 images online. That's enough for me to be satisfied

tan510jomast

« Reply #10 on: February 07, 2009, 12:08 »
0
yes, that makes sense (ie. not worry too much if one site rejects you, because most times the other sites will not).
then also, i will pay more attention if say i get rejections from ALL sites. this would tell me that something is generally wrong here, as you seldom get all 4 sites rejecting one image.
given that, i would say, OK i get the message this image stinks  ;D

RacePhoto

« Reply #11 on: February 07, 2009, 12:29 »
0
yes, that makes sense (ie. not worry too much if one site rejects you, because most times the other sites will not).
then also, i will pay more attention if say i get rejections from ALL sites. this would tell me that something is generally wrong here, as you seldom get all 4 sites rejecting one image.
given that, i would say, OK i get the message this image stinks  ;D


Pretty much the same as I feel. I'm uploading a batch of 50 new shots to the big seven. So far 100% accepted at SS, which I find amusing in the face of what some people call a rejection explosion.  ;D IS takes most, rejects some, but with good reasons. Funny that they see purple fringing in one shot and the next one passes, when they were both made at the same time and edited identically. No problem though, just building and learning. FT took a bunch and then one day, refused a bunch. I wrote a polite note and asked why they were refused for copyright when the last 25 were accepted. Next day, all appeared as approved. DT took about 10, then refused about 10. Pretty much the same situation.

An odd one here and there is rejected at one site, accepted at the other six. No big deal, it's only one photo.

What I don't understand is a broad rejection for a batch, when the similar shots have just been accepted the day before. I generally attribute this to reviewer opinion or interpretation of the guidelines. Yes, my DT percentage was over 70% and climbing. 100% in January. In the early days I uploaded some photos that I'd never send out to the worst site. My mistake, I'm trying to slowly recover.

But sharply_done covered the best reason. I was thinking individual photo, not the bigger collection of photos of that style.

My answer is Reviewer Roulette  ::) a game we play on all the sites, from time to time.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2009, 12:52 by RacePhoto »

tan510jomast

« Reply #12 on: February 07, 2009, 12:41 »
0
removed.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2009, 12:55 by tan510jomast »

tan510jomast

« Reply #13 on: February 07, 2009, 12:53 »
0
removed by me, answering your PM.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2009, 13:01 by tan510jomast »

« Reply #14 on: February 13, 2009, 18:13 »
0
I know istock occasionally tell you reasons why the image in particular was rejected

istock USED to actually attach a jpg of the area that had a problem, back in the good old days! That was great because you knew EXACTLY where to look for the problem. But I can see where they can't possibly do that now.


 

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results