Author Topic: More than usual rejections from Dreamtime (Read 25425 times)

Sion · « **on:** September 18, 2009, 19:14 »

Do you as a regular DT contributor have noticed that lately you experience sudden spikes of more than usual rejections there?

The usual reason will be: Too many photos/illustrations on the same subject or from the same series.

elvinstar · « **Reply #1 on:** September 18, 2009, 19:29 »

I try to avoid that by breaking shoots up into different batches. I upload the same number of photos every week, so I just put a couple from each shoot in the folder for each week.

takestock · « **Reply #2 on:** September 19, 2009, 04:34 »

I have been going OK there recently with my acceptance rate rising steadily.
But you never know when the pendulum will swing the other way!

lisafx · « **Reply #3 on:** September 19, 2009, 08:33 »

I had one batch about a month ago where more than half the images were rejected, but it was a one time thing. Since then my acceptance rate has been back to normal.

HermanM · « **Reply #4 on:** September 19, 2009, 20:07 »

I upload a large batch at once and then "finish" the images in small groups, four or five at a time, each day... It prevents this kind of issues.

borg · « **Reply #5 on:** September 24, 2009, 07:25 »

Hey!

Today I have this rejection reason for one of m photos...

"File approved by accident. We apologize for the inconvenience but the image needs to be removed. "

What!?

Why?

P.S.

Was mistake...

DT putted back my image...
Thanks DT!

studioportosabbia · « **Reply #6 on:** September 24, 2009, 16:12 »

Quote from: elvinstar on September 18, 2009, 19:29

I try to avoid that by breaking shoots up into different batches.

That's what I did and guess what: they checked my portfolio and rejected the files because of same subject etc....

HughStoneIan · « **Reply #7 on:** September 24, 2009, 18:54 »

A recent rejection explanation from DT:

"Image is not RF stock oriented or its sales potential is too low at this stage. Please note that Stock photography is a commercial type of imagery, so, snapshots are not Stock. There are several vital requirements that an image must meet in order to be stock oriented. An image must serve a purpose, must have a concept, must have a good technical execution in terms of composition, exposure, light setting, optical performance. Creativity is a keyword for a successful stock image, as well. It is also very important to understand that Art and Stock are two fundamentally different categories of imagery, that only meet when an artwork can adapt to a wide range of commercial usage"

Wow. Snapshot?? The SS and IS reviewers apparently didn't think so, or perhaps they thought as a snapshot it was a good enough to accept into their libraries.

ap · « **Reply #8 on:** September 24, 2009, 20:55 »

'one person's snapshot is another's stock photo.' i think confucius once said that.

anyways, it never ceases to amaze me that a photo rejected at most 2nd tier sites will actually make it through to ss or is and start garnering sales, and vice versa. it's hard to game this thing...

sharpshot · « **Reply #9 on:** September 25, 2009, 02:41 »

I stopped uploading a few months ago. If reviews become more sensible, I will start uploading again. If I keep seeing threads like this, there are lots of other sites that accept over 80% of my images and sell them.

cluckcluck · « **Reply #10 on:** September 25, 2009, 15:33 »

Just checked Oct'08 my acceptance rate was 87% then was a gradual decline over the months until March'09 when I was at a fairly respectable 70% but since April'08 I have been hovering around 40%.

For quite some time I have submitted just one image from a series at a time so all the images in a batch are different. This is acceptable to all the other major sites but DT have a rejection frenzy, over the last month I have entire batches rejected.

Its a 50/50 split so less sales for me means less sales for them as well.

gaja · « **Reply #11 on:** September 25, 2009, 15:46 »

I would have had 100% acceptance this month if I had remembered to explain that the object I photographed was mass produced, and not a single work of art. But who knows, copyright is a difficult question. So with 15 out of 16 approved, for me DT has improved lately (or I have improved

)

[email protected] · « **Reply #12 on:** September 25, 2009, 15:57 »

I've being having the same problem with rejection massacres on DT, just about anything that I gave them, 80% got rejected, but for whatever reason, this month DT have being accepting every picture I upload...you just never know anymore.

Alatriste · « **Reply #13 on:** September 26, 2009, 04:34 »

This days, I get lots of rejections for "too many of similar"

But are we judged with the same rule?

http://www.dreamstime.com/Yuri_arcurs_more-latest-adition_pg26

epantha · « **Reply #14 on:** September 26, 2009, 07:33 »

Apparently not.

PedroV · « **Reply #15 on:** December 17, 2009, 14:52 »

It's happening again, mass refusals

Quote from: studioportosabbia on September 24, 2009, 16:12

Quote from: elvinstar on September 18, 2009, 19:29
I try to avoid that by breaking shoots up into different batches.

That's what I did and guess what: they checked my portfolio and rejected the files because of same subject etc....

I used to do that but they are also rejected

cthoman · « **Reply #16 on:** December 17, 2009, 16:52 »

I had this happen to me the other day for the first time. I had 15 of 16 rejected. I just assumed it was karma for talking about iStock exclusivity.

PedroV · « **Reply #17 on:** December 19, 2009, 13:17 »

Quote from: Alatriste on September 26, 2009, 04:34

This days, I get lots of rejections for "too many of similar"

But are we judged with the same rule?

http://www.dreamstime.com/Yuri_arcurs_more-latest-adition_pg26

Definitely NOT

Look at this guy: http://www.dreamstime.com/chode_info

All his port is a very similar pictures with only a thin difference, but they are accepted

KB · « **Reply #18 on:** December 19, 2009, 14:18 »

Quote from: PedroV on December 19, 2009, 13:17

Quote from: Alatriste on September 26, 2009, 04:34
This days, I get lots of rejections for "too many of similar"

But are we judged with the same rule?

http://www.dreamstime.com/Yuri_arcurs_more-latest-adition_pg26

Definitely NOT

Look at this guy: http://www.dreamstime.com/chode_info

All his port is a very similar pictures with only a thin difference, but they are accepted

I think you're being too harsh.

For example, these are substantially different and obviously fill the needs of separate classes of buyers:

The same is true with these:

I'm sure if I Ul'd these, all 5 would be quickly accepted. I suspect any "too many similar" rejections you all got were for images that were much more similar to each other than these are.

anonymous · « **Reply #19 on:** December 19, 2009, 14:55 »

ahhh...i see your point...i've been blind to my ways

Alatriste · « **Reply #20 on:** December 19, 2009, 16:26 »

incredible....

NitorPhoto · « **Reply #21 on:** December 19, 2009, 19:14 »

Their new 'too many similar' policy is stupid. What they reject are images with similar message but different usage. Model looks at camera, smiling, looking away, laughing, close-up, vertical format, horizontal format... and just imagine the combinations of these. They are rejecting a lot from these combinations and later I am getting the emails from buyers like 'don't you have this or that image in a more wide angle and in horizontal format?'. Why don't they allow the buyer to select?!
As a protest I suspend uploading. They already have 8k+ of my images. All new images will go to other sites... ONLY. I know they don't mind... nor will I.

Albert Martin · « **Reply #22 on:** December 19, 2009, 19:23 »

It seems many of authors will get 'approved by accident' rejections soon ;-)

PedroV · « **Reply #23 on:** December 19, 2009, 20:22 »

I wonder where's Achilles, he used to write in this forum but now he remains quiet $:-\$

sharpshot · « **Reply #24 on:** December 20, 2009, 06:40 »

I much prefer it if the buyers are given the chance to decide if an image is what they want or not. DT used to be fair but I have noticed a change and I have lost my motivation to upload. My sales are down with DT when they are increasing with most sites. Perhaps the buyers like to have more choice as well? Low selling images sink down the search, I have no problems with sites deleting them after a year if they don't sell. I realised that a lot of the images I uploaded will now get rejected, so they are just stuck in my unfinished files section. Looks like I might as well delete them.

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #25 on:** December 22, 2009, 09:48 »

I discovered ShutterStock. I still get rejections but after less than one week, I have sold more there than this entire month at DT.
Free at Last.

fullvalue · « **Reply #26 on:** December 22, 2009, 10:11 »

Of all the sites DM makes the least sense to upload multiples of similars since you make more money when a file sells more often. Let the buyer contact you directly. You can negotiate a RM license then.

Dan · « **Reply #27 on:** December 22, 2009, 10:56 »

I had one that was accepted / put in a collection / started to get more views / then was told it was acccepted by accident /had a fellow poster make a discrimatory remark about it /that left me with 2 accepted and 1 sale / dt said it wasn't discrimination / i quit their site in a hurry / i was treated fairly at the beginning but they ticked me off / i don't need them to be successful at stock.

PedroV · « **Reply #28 on:** December 22, 2009, 11:05 »

Quote from: Dan on December 22, 2009, 10:56

I had one that was accepted / put in a collection / started to get more views / then was told it was acccepted by accident /had a fellow poster make a discrimatory remark about it /that left me with 2 accepted and 1 sale / dt said it wasn't discrimination / i quit their site in a hurry / i was treated fairly at the beginning but they ticked me off / i don't need them to be successful at stock.

what was the file subject? it was some kind of sensitive photo or so? maybe some that must be in editorial section? $:-\$

epantha · « **Reply #29 on:** December 22, 2009, 11:06 »

My rejection rate has been a lot lower the last few months but for a while there they were rejecting unique, one of a kind photos of isolated feathers such as barred owl and osprey wing feathers as being too similar when there were 0 feathers like that uploaded anywhere. Whatever.

ap · « **Reply #30 on:** December 22, 2009, 14:06 »

Quote from: Dan on December 22, 2009, 10:56

I had one that was accepted / put in a collection / started to get more views / then was told it was acccepted by accident /had a fellow poster make a discrimatory remark about it /that left me with 2 accepted and 1 sale / dt said it wasn't discrimination / i quit their site in a hurry / i was treated fairly at the beginning but they ticked me off / i don't need them to be successful at stock.

is this a goodbye poem? like 'i quit thee, dt'.

FD · « **Reply #31 on:** December 22, 2009, 14:47 »

Quote from: Dan on December 22, 2009, 10:56

I had one that was accepted / put in a collection / started to get more views / then was told it was acccepted by accident /had a fellow poster make a discrimatory remark about it /that left me with 2 accepted and 1 sale / dt said it wasn't discrimination / i quit their site in a hurry / i was treated fairly at the beginning but they ticked me off / i don't need them to be successful at stock.

Oh, you are that one? I remember the thread full of melodrama, and Achilles pointed the original thread out too. It was about a reject.

Quote

Komar: I remember the photo. It would get a lot of views for sure, because of it's unusual nature. It really wasn't pleasant to look at though.
You: Komar - it's on 8 other sites so your opion don't count
You: type in "cheating at golf" and you'lll see 15 simular pics
Komar: Yes similar, but yours was also quite different, unique shall we say. Unique enough for me to remember it after seeing it months ago. Anyway, the opinions of the 8 other sites which accepted it are of course more important than mine. However, I don't disagree with Dt's opinion on this one. I hope the image does well for u elsewhere.
Niseyb: Can't imagine??? I couldn't find it on the "eight other sites" either!
You: Komar - keep your opions to yourself.
Nisey - you didn't look hard enough
DT - please keep these two away!!!

It was a great read, and DT must be in deep mourning to see your port of 2 go.

Lesson: if you can't stand the heath, stay out of the kitchen.

Achilles:

Quote

You may dislike other users' opinions, but once you post on a public forum, you should expect some of the comments to be different than your opinions. And everyone to post, that is the rationale of a public forum.
As long as they are polite, you should respect other opinions and avoid replying like you did: "keep your opions to yourself." or "your opion don't count ".
Furthermore you asked admin afterwards to ban those users because of their remarks, none of which was derogatory. How fair is that?

CCK · « **Reply #32 on:** January 04, 2010, 12:50 »

I just got the result of my latest bach, with 66% rejected! I've never experienced anything like that at DT, most of the time my batched are 100% approved. All rejections except one is for composition. Perhaps Mr Hun is working there for the holidays.

willie · « **Reply #33 on:** January 04, 2010, 16:03 »

Quote from: fullvalue on December 22, 2009, 10:11

-Of all the sites DM makes the least sense to upload multiples of similars since you make more money when a file sells more often.
-Let the buyer contact you directly. You can negotiate a RM license then.

to answer in 2 parts:

=first part of your comment :
yes, i agree. in fact , it was sjlocke who gave me that advice a while back when i PM'ed him directly on a comment he made to this regard.( it was about some dude who prides himself he had 3000 samey images and almost little or sales. woo hoo, lol.)
i think Mr. Locke said, "2... and no more. give them too many choices and you water down the value of your portfolio". i feel that was very kind of him to cue me in on this.

=second part of your comment :
isn't that against your contributors' agreement?

willie · « **Reply #34 on:** January 04, 2010, 16:10 »

Quote from: CCK on January 04, 2010, 12:50

I just got the result of my latest bach, with 66% rejected! I've never experienced anything like that at DT, most of the time my batched are 100% approved. All rejections except one is for composition. Perhaps Mr Hun is working there for the holidays.

rofl but.. if i recall, Atilla is actually a Ms.

but seriously, i think we should bury Atilla , and not enigmatize her into 2010

Yuri_Arcurs · « **Reply #35 on:** January 05, 2010, 07:50 »

Report from "DT in trouble!"

I have had some bad experiences with DT lately. Beside being the only agency in the world that does not allow you to submit images on the Getty generic release, which results in massive extra paperwork, they also seem to be rejecting images based on similarity so much these days that it is almost not worth uploading to them. Having uploaded more than 6000 images over the last 6 months, my income is slightly dropping with them which is not a good sign either.
I addressed these issues with DT SEO and actually got a slightly unpleasant email back. I was very surprised by this.
We must remember that DT has an otherwise generous photographer commission and should be respected for that. Some tolerance seems in place because of this.

Lev · « **Reply #36 on:** January 05, 2010, 08:10 »

i have my monthly acceptance ratio at DT dropped from nearly 100% to about 20% last few months. all for "too similar".

i've tried to negotiate the issue with DT CEO some time ago too and got sort of "we love all our contributors and care a lot, but please back off, boy" communication. i really had an idea Yuri still gets some more special care but as i see he doesn't either.

i believe it's a wrong way to go for DT and falldown we see now is a result of very big mistake in acceptance policy. the gap between good fresh content quantity available at DT and available from others will grow. i actually used to send buyers to DT saying "most of my works are available at DT. go and buy there whichever you need". now the situation is rather "some of my recent works are available at DT". or maybe even "very few of them", so i've started to send customers elsewhere.

i believe i will probably stop submitting my newer works there very soon. no point in submitting when it all gets rejected. i don't think any argue will help, so i just have to silently wait a bit until it will be worth submitting again.

i hope DT will understand this policy is wrong and make some changes. then we will see DT coming up. i really enjoyed working with DT for latest years and really want things to normalize.

Xalanx · « **Reply #37 on:** January 05, 2010, 08:12 »

Quote from: Yuri_Arcurs on January 05, 2010, 07:50

Having uploaded more than 6000 images over the last 6 months, my income is slightly dropping with them

Now this is really scary, to say the less.

Quote from: Yuri_Arcurs

actually got a slightly unpleasant email back. I was very surprised by this.

I am not.

PedroV · « **Reply #38 on:** January 05, 2010, 09:23 »

I wonder where's Achilles, he was registered at this MSG forum and in the past answered users questions, I'd like him to answer to this post with his POV

sharpshot · « **Reply #39 on:** January 05, 2010, 09:40 »

In theory, having a high rejection rate might improve the quality of the collection and make DT stand out from the crowd. The problem is, that doesn't work in practice. Look at Image Vortex, superb quality but hardly any buyers use the site, crestock reject more and after spending lots on marketing, they still have relatively low sales.

I'm convinced that buyers want as much choice as possible, even if it means having to look through some sub par images. With DT rejecting more, wont the buyers just go to the other sites? It looks like this is already happening. I just don't get this policy, istock and SS have the most sales and they have a much higher acceptance rate, letting the buyers decide if an image is right for them.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #40 on:** January 05, 2010, 10:50 »

Quote from: dolgachov on January 05, 2010, 08:10

i have my monthly acceptance ratio at DT dropped from nearly 100% to about 20% last few months. all for "too similar".

i've tried to negotiate the issue with DT CEO some time ago too and got sort of "we love all our contributors and care a lot, but please back off, boy" communication. i really had an idea Yuri still gets some more special care but as i see he doesn't either.

I don't know if it is still this way, but at one time I think DT figured your acceptance percentage into search results placement. In addition to the waste of time uploading, if this is still the case their behavior will affect sales of the images they do accept.

I thought the whole notion of including acceptance percentage was insane anyway - how does it help a buyer find the best images? - but it'd be interesting to see if the threads about reduced sales at DT and acceptance problems are related in any way

gostwyck · « **Reply #41 on:** January 05, 2010, 10:58 »

Quote from: jsnover on January 05, 2010, 10:50

I thought the whole notion of including acceptance percentage was insane anyway - how does it help a buyer find the best images?

Surely it is not as 'insane' as Istock's various best match factors which have included exclusivity status, ratings (spawning rating clubs), limiting the number of images from a single contributor (within the first 100) and burying all the best-selling stuff miles down the search order. How did those things help the buyers find the best images?

Xalanx · « **Reply #42 on:** January 05, 2010, 12:38 »

Quote from: jsnover on January 05, 2010, 10:50

Quote from: dolgachov on January 05, 2010, 08:10
i have my monthly acceptance ratio at DT dropped from nearly 100% to about 20% last few months. all for "too similar".

i've tried to negotiate the issue with DT CEO some time ago too and got sort of "we love all our contributors and care a lot, but please back off, boy" communication. i really had an idea Yuri still gets some more special care but as i see he doesn't either.

I don't know if it is still this way, but at one time I think DT figured your acceptance percentage into search results placement. In addition to the waste of time uploading, if this is still the case their behavior will affect sales of the images they do accept.

I thought the whole notion of including acceptance percentage was insane anyway - how does it help a buyer find the best images? - but it'd be interesting to see if the threads about reduced sales at DT and acceptance problems are related in any way

My acceptance rate is above 80%, in fact last month was around 95%. However, the sales went down. Lower than 123RF, as I said. So I don't think it's the acceptance rate what is affecting Dolgachov's revenue.

My opinion is that they have not one, but more problems. Beginning with low acceptance rate and ending with SEO. At some time it was a glitch that for half a day I couldn't see my portfolio. I also PM'ed a contributor here who's portfolio was gone as well. They were back after a few hours but...

And I also think that things started to move downward when they made the last change to their best match. Some of you might remember lots of complains for pages of similar results, even from the same photographer.

And if Yuri says that after 6000 new uploads in half an year his income went down, well that's obviously not encouraging. Add all the pieces to this... puzzle and the general image of DT doesn't look pretty.

willie · « **Reply #43 on:** January 05, 2010, 13:06 »

Quote from: gostwyck on January 05, 2010, 10:58

Quote from: jsnover on January 05, 2010, 10:50
I thought the whole notion of including acceptance percentage was insane anyway - how does it help a buyer find the best images?

Surely it is not as 'insane' as Istock's various best match factors which have included exclusivity status, ratings (spawning rating clubs), limiting the number of images from a single contributor (within the first 100) and burying all the best-selling stuff miles down the search order. How did those things help the buyers find the best images?

HEAR HEAR !!

i never thought i'd live to agree with you gostwyck;
at least not so early in the new decade !

Lev · « **Reply #44 on:** January 05, 2010, 13:09 »

i don't believe acceptance rate affects sales. no way. i never said my sales are directly affected by latest moths acceptance ratio. if some of you got it this way - YOU'RE WRONG. forget it.

what i believe is constant massive rejecting of hi-quality images with high commercial value leads to much lower variety of choice for customers than competing agencies have. which leads to sales dropdown as customers will switch to other providing sources. that's my point.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #45 on:** January 05, 2010, 13:14 »

Quote from: gostwyck on January 05, 2010, 10:58

Quote from: jsnover on January 05, 2010, 10:50
I thought the whole notion of including acceptance percentage was insane anyway - how does it help a buyer find the best images?

Surely it is not as 'insane' as Istock's various best match factors which have included exclusivity status, ratings (spawning rating clubs), limiting the number of images from a single contributor (within the first 100) and burying all the best-selling stuff miles down the search order. How did those things help the buyers find the best images?

I didn't say I thought IS's best match was sane - I was commenting about DT's. I believe at one point Achilles had defended via a forum post their inclusion of this factor, tacitly admitted that it was one.

I'm an exclusive contributor at IS, not the author of all their software

However, I will note that when I try some sample searches these days with Best Match (not on subjects where I have any files so I'm not biasing my view) I see a lot of relevant files in the first few pages, and I think it's much better than it used to be in delivering useful results.

vonkara · « **Reply #46 on:** January 05, 2010, 13:15 »

Quote from: jsnover on January 05, 2010, 10:50

Quote from: dolgachov on January 05, 2010, 08:10
i have my monthly acceptance ratio at DT dropped from nearly 100% to about 20% last few months. all for "too similar".

i've tried to negotiate the issue with DT CEO some time ago too and got sort of "we love all our contributors and care a lot, but please back off, boy" communication. i really had an idea Yuri still gets some more special care but as i see he doesn't either.

I don't know if it is still this way, but at one time I think DT figured your acceptance percentage into search results placement. In addition to the waste of time uploading, if this is still the case their behavior will affect sales of the images they do accept.

I thought the whole notion of including acceptance percentage was insane anyway - how does it help a buyer find the best images? - but it'd be interesting to see if the threads about reduced sales at DT and acceptance problems are related in any way

It's still in place, Achille told that long time ago... and it's insane, because of some weird rejections you get there

Edit: I can't find the quote anymore...

melastmohican · « **Reply #47 on:** January 05, 2010, 13:23 »

Two things:
1. Economic situation which lead to layoffs so there are no reviewers to handle volume
2. Mentioned above volume, they do not need more photos

willie · « **Reply #48 on:** January 05, 2010, 14:12 »

Quote from: melastmohican on January 05, 2010, 13:23

Two things:
1. Economic situation which lead to layoffs so there are no reviewers to handle volume
2. Mentioned above volume, they do not need more photos

ah, we have an economist in our midst ! well said mela!
it's like the stocking (no pun intended) shelves in the local shops these days. shops are stocking small inventory and keeping counter space to the "cream of the crop" and the "new ideas".

it cannot be any different from micro stock. we buy less, only now we buy what we don't already have.
i don't see any flaw in that thinking.
does anyone? ... cast aside the fact that some/most of us are getting more rejections to cloud our comments...

cascoly · « **Reply #49 on:** January 05, 2010, 17:03 »

if rejects were solely on quality it wouldnt much matter - but most of my rejects at dt, BigStock and ss are for subjective reasons like "not suitable for stock" or "we didnt like your framing of the shot", etc

It’s not a trivial issue – since the process is SO arbitrary, we cant pick 1 or 2 best images as recommendedd, since our best wont necessarily coincide with a particular reviewer’s notions – and sometimes, a series of similar shots ARE accepted – eg, what if I had only submitted the 4 shots that were rejected? Instead we have to submit any shots that are technically correct and not dupes of others, resulting in more work for all of us, and reducing sales when salable images are rejected

My simple[!] solution is to err on the side of accepting MORE images, not less, and let the buyers decide. These days there’s no real costs for storing all these images. The problem instead is in generating relevant results for searches – one fairly easy algorithm would be to limit the number of images from any photographer displayed in a search result, but mark those shown with a comment “more images from this photographer]

steve

lisafx · « **Reply #50 on:** January 05, 2010, 17:14 »

Quote from: dolgachov on January 05, 2010, 13:09

i don't believe acceptance rate affects sales. no way. i never said my sales are directly affected by latest moths acceptance ratio. if some of you got it this way - YOU'RE WRONG. forget it.

Actually, it is Serban in Dreamstime's forums who has repeatedly said that acceptance ratio is a factor in search placement. Better search placement = better sales, and the reverse is also true...

FWIW I am surprised that top sellers like you and Yuri are getting these types of rejections for "similars". I figured that was mostly directed at newbies who will upload dozens of nearly identical images.

I haven't submitted anything anywhere in a month or so, but now I am nervous I may face the same type of issue.

MikLav · « **Reply #51 on:** January 05, 2010, 17:30 »

The issue is that DT has recently started to reject images that are just similar but are very far from being "nearly identical".

I am trying to avoid similar images in my uploads, but I also saw that a few times.

willie · « **Reply #52 on:** January 05, 2010, 17:33 »

Quote from: cascoly on January 05, 2010, 17:03

EDITED for comment response:

... we cant pick 1 or 2 best images as recommendedd, since our best wont necessarily coincide with a particular reviewer’s notions – and sometimes, a series of similar shots ARE accepted – eg, what if I had only submitted the 4 shots that were rejected? Instead we have to submit any shots that are technically correct and not dupes of others, resulting in more work for all of us, and reducing sales when salable images are rejected
steve

to answer your comment, i once again refer to a response i once received from Mr Locke (shown here in CAPS), which i took to heart and from then on based my editing decision NOT TO SUBMIT TOO MANY SIMILAR IMAGES... but instead, NO MORE THAN 2, 3 AT THE MOST.

to further answer your last part of your comment, not paraphrased here for sake of brevity, i paraphrase a contributor and buyer, whose name evades me at this moment,
BE OBJECTIVE AND EDIT YOUR OWN WORK. IF YOU CANNOT DO THAT, THE BUYERS WHO ARE MOSTLY EDITORS WILL CONSIDER YOU DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO CHOOSE WISELY.

neither of these are my ideas. i wish it were. but i kept these wise words which in turn have increased my approval rating substantially .

lisafx · « **Reply #53 on:** January 05, 2010, 17:34 »

Quote from: MikLav on January 05, 2010, 17:30

The issue is that DT has recently started to reject images that are just similar but are very far from being "nearly identical".

Obviously. Which is what I find surprising.

red · « **Reply #54 on:** January 05, 2010, 17:38 »

Here is the Approval Ratio discussion on the DT forums (from 2007, time flies!):
http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_7419

corepics · « **Reply #55 on:** January 05, 2010, 17:58 »

Quote from: MikLav on January 05, 2010, 17:30

The issue is that DT has recently started to reject images that are just similar but are very far from being "nearly identical".

Isn't that what Veer has been doing consequently ever since they started?

Continuing on the OP's thread:

DT still seems pretty lenient from my POV, and their level - price based system would endorse such a policy. Microstock agents, in general, seem to be gradually diversifying their target audience; either by luring people into exclusivity, or by trying to maintain a unique collection of images (and thus rejecting images for various reasons). In doing so, it looks to me like they're creating collections which are not available elsewhere. I see it as Dreamstime's - or any other agents - prerogative to be selective in a market which is overly saturated on the supply side. Microstock is changing, and so must we.

FD · « **Reply #56 on:** January 05, 2010, 18:01 »

1 - Yuri claimed that DT doesn't accept the generic Getty release. Probably he used it unchanged, as to the country of jurisdiction (where Getty is represented).

Quote

Based on the English Model Release form and with a few insignificant changes in style and some fonts, and replacing the countries of jurisdiction by "(...)", I made a blank MS-Word® 1997-2003 doc format version that you can download clicking this link.

(quoting myself)
For myself, I changed (...) by my country of legal residence, which is Belgium. DT and SS accepted this form already for several models and several photos.

2 - Of my last 14 uploads, just before new year, 13 were accepted. One rejected was an editorial for "bad framing". So, not everybody seems to have the same experiences.

3 - It has been mentioned that level 1 images just give 30%. Well, first of all, IS gives 20%, and then, the level treshold has been lowered and starting at level 3, you'll get much more. And those are selling more.

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #57 on:** January 05, 2010, 18:05 »

Quote from: taglist on January 05, 2010, 17:58

Quote from: MikLav on January 05, 2010, 17:30
The issue is that DT has recently started to reject images that are just similar but are very far from being "nearly identical".

Isn't that what Veer has been doing consequently ever since they started?

Continuing on the OP's thread:

DT still seems pretty lenient from my POV, and their level - price based system would endorse such a policy. Microstock agents, in general, seem to be gradually diversifying their target audience; either by luring people into exclusivity, or by trying to maintain a unique collection of images (and thus rejecting images for various reasons). In doing so, it looks to me like they're creating collections which are not available elsewhere. I see it as Dreamstime's - or any other agents - prerogative to be selective in a market which is overly saturated on the supply side. Microstock is changing, and so must we.

Good observations and (it seems to me) these observations support the need to remain independent. With so many images being rejected, being exclusive certainly limits the sale of your images. What is to be done with all those rejects.

corepics · « **Reply #58 on:** January 05, 2010, 18:27 »

Quote from: WarrenPrice on January 05, 2010, 18:05

Good observations and (it seems to me) these observations support the need to remain independent. With so many images being rejected, being exclusive certainly limits the sale of your images. What is to be done with all those rejects.

If it only were that simple...

It obviously is either - or, and the grass is always greener on the opposite side of the fence. I've considered exclusivity, but Dreamstime's terms are too restrictive to seriously consider (at least for me). The scale isn't just quite tipping towards iStock either, as I've got too many assets elsewhere to forfeit.

Indeed, I'm staying independent, and revising my strategy of sending everything I shoot everywhere. FT obviously has its preferences, and so does 123 - they've become obnoxiously random, recently, too. DT is nicely joining the club. Because of the painfully precise inspections at iStock, they might as well get the finest niches. In the end, everything I shoot will be accepted somewhere, and considering StockXpert still sells images of me that remain unsold elsewhere, a fair deal will be eventually sold.

To throw in another cliche: Reading the posts in the active threads suggests it's the same ball game with many of us. Either to put all your eggs in one basket, or go with the flow. Either way, I really think it's about time to quit making guesstimates - the mirror ball is just foggy, at the moment.

Just a fuzzy generalization, here. Back to the OT, please?

sharpshot · « **Reply #60 on:** January 06, 2010, 07:45 »

Some of my "similars" that have been rejected aren't really similar to anything in my portfolio and when I do a search, DT has nothing similar on the site. They also sell on the other sites. I do work in some niche areas and try to build up a collection because I have observed that this works well. Buyers often buy several images from my niche, increasing my sales. Some of the best selling contributors do this. Should I change the way I work just for DT? I wouldn't mind the rejections so much if it wasn't detrimental to my search placement, DT have the right to do whatever they want and overall I still like the site but this has become a problem.

cathyslife · « **Reply #61 on:** January 06, 2010, 08:08 »

As a buyer, I was searching yesterday for an image to use in a project I am working on. I came across multiple downloads, and I mean about 20 photos, from one contributor. All the same subject, all practically identical. I was searching the DT site and one other, but I don't recall which site it was on. Whichever site it was, I was amazed that they all got through. There was no way a person would download more than one or two of this series, they were that close. The rest of the shots were just taking up reviewers time, space on the site, and my time sorting through them.

Not insinuating that yours are that way, sharpshot, just relating the frustration for buyers that comes when contributors are allowed to upload a ton of similar images.

I got a rejection one time for a photo being similar to something else in my portfolio. I accidentally named it exactly the same as one already in there. The shot was the same subject as some already uploaded, but the angle, etc. was way different than others. As soon as I renamed it and resubmitted, it was accepted.

Achilles · « **Reply #62 on:** January 06, 2010, 08:21 »

Cclapper that is a good point. This policy also allows more diversity in the search results pages.

Sharpshot, you may believe they weren't different, but editors check your portfolio for older files. Probably they found similars. Their tolerance to similarity depends on the subject. If it's sellable they are more tolerant. As for selling on other sites they don't have our pricing system. Nobody says those files wouldn't sell with us. I said you will get less revenue due to dillution.

Uploading similars in separate batches is no longer a good technique to get the files accepted. They really need to be different. I'm not saying you did that, but it was a common technique in the past.

NitorPhoto · « **Reply #63 on:** January 06, 2010, 08:50 »

to Achilles: I see your point about the RPD and it is great that you bring it to our attention. But why don't you allow us to decide what is good for our income and what is not? In my case: I do not care RPD nor the RPI - the only measure what counts for me is the Return per Portfolio (RPP?).
I am not sure you saw my early post in this topic so I repeat it. Woman is sitting at the office working on laptop (what a great unique idea

). She looks at the laptop, looking away and thinking, looks at the camera, she looks troubled, she looks happy, she looks busy. These are variations. Because of the different customer needs you may want all of these in horizontal and in vertical format as well. If I upload these I'll get more than of them rejected. Customer wants the horizontal one where the woman is looking away - but it got rejected because it was too similar to another one what the customer doesn't need. No problem he/she will find one from another contributor... but why is this good for my income?

My second thought... Every single image costs money: model, editing, keywording, uploading. Other agencies accept the whole series so I will not decrease the number of selects from a shooting session. After spending a lot of money on a session I want to see all the best images online. Maybe they are similar but they are not identical - the only identity is the fact they all cost money. So every image you reject is a significant loss.
Additionally... I do not want to spend even more time/money for another extra super-selection process in my workflow just for DT. If I can not upload the whole series I'll upload a random selection and not the bests, and I'll still get similarity rejections because of that randomness. This leads to frustration and the failed upload is a loss of time/money again.

What I am affraid of: if DT keeps this policy some contributors may stop uploading. Please keep in mind that even if I love DT for a lot of reasons it makes less then 10% of my income. FTL, SS or IS is making 3-4 times more so the annoyance factor (and extra expense) they can reach is higher. They can have more annoying upload process or a more nitpicking reviewing - IS is a perfect example

My next point is the size/exclusivity of your collection. It is clear that many agencies are trying to build an exclusive collection of images to differentiate themself from the competition. DT's new rejection policy leads to the opposite direction: you are on the way to build a 'black out' collection: collection of high quality good stock images can be find anywhere EXCEPT Dreamstime. Are you sure this is the best way to differ from others? I see how your strategy may work in theory because the collection is more tight so it is easier to browse. It is true. But, if I translate it to a simple message it sounds like that: 'DT is great and better than others because they have less images to choose from'. Hmmm... And you are not tightening the collection by quality (this is what IS is trying to do) but by similarity. If this is the case you shouldn't accept any more 'woman with laptop' or happy business people isolated on white' kind of images. I am absolutely on your side if you want to raise the level of quality. I agree if you reject images because of bad lighting... etc. But I can not agree this 'too similar' policy at all.

gostwyck · « **Reply #64 on:** January 06, 2010, 09:18 »

^^^ That's an excellent post NitorPhoto __ my thoughts exactly.

Serban - I appreciate you have a lot of confidence in the judgement of your reviewers but my own 5 years experience tells me otherwise. I've simply lost count of the number of times that an image of mine has been initially rejected for 'not stock' or 'too many', which I've then slipped back in under the radar, for it then to go on to achieve the higher levels, EL's. etc.

If you remember, Istock announced that "Too Many has left the building" some years ago and it doesn't seem to have done them any harm as they remain the market leader by a country mile.

Of course Istock have the self-editing protection of the upload limits and personally I would far rather have upload limits than the relatively random rejection system in place now. Give us upload limits based on total sales, downloads-per-image, or some other reasonable factors and less us do our own editing as far as 'too many' is concerned. If that upsets the 'photo factories' then so be it as they are mainly responsible for the problem of massive numbers of similar images in popular subjects (because that's virtually all they produce). Upload limits will give DT a far more diverse, tightly-edited and higher quality collection than the current system.

Xalanx · « **Reply #65 on:** January 06, 2010, 09:24 »

Excellent points, gostwyck and NitorPhoto - I couldn't have said better. In my opinion the "too similar" rejection should go for photos that are mostly identical. Guy facing the camera with red cup in his hand and same guy facing the camera in identical position, with yellow cup in his hand. Those that differ only by irrelevant aspects. The shot examples given by NitorPhoto with the woman in the office are perfectly acceptable in my view.

AridOcean · « **Reply #66 on:** January 06, 2010, 09:31 »

Quote from: Achilles on January 06, 2010, 08:21

Sharpshot, you may believe they weren't different, but editors check your portfolio for older files. Probably they found similars. Their tolerance to similarity depends on the subject. If it's sellable they are more tolerant.

Achilles, as an example for strange rejections: in December I uploaded 3 high resolution relief maps of Austria, Azerbaijan and the Balearic Islands. All 3 were rejected because of "Too many photos/illustrations on the same subject or from the same series".

If I search for 'austria relief map', 'azerbaijan relief map' or 'balearic relief map' there are NO images which are even remotely similar to mine, in effect you have no relief maps of these countries at all.

So, is a buyer who needs a relief map of Austria supposed to use one from Switzerland instead (which was previously approved and is in my portfolio)?

It seems to me that some reviewers don't quite understand what the sense of the 'too similar' rule is.

PedroV · « **Reply #67 on:** January 06, 2010, 09:39 »

Achilles, what about this: http://www.dreamstime.com/chode_info

He has a HUGE number of similar accepted

and he: http://www.dreamstime.com/Antoniomp_info

and he: http://www.dreamstime.com/Hugofelix_info the same dog in different angles

Are we reviewed under the same light bulb?

PixelsAway · « **Reply #68 on:** January 06, 2010, 09:53 »

Quote from: AridOcean on January 06, 2010, 09:31

in December I uploaded 3 high resolution relief maps of Austria, Azerbaijan and the Balearic Islands. All 3 were rejected because of "Too many photos/illustrations on the same subject or from the same series".

My impression is that some inspectors are checking thumbnails only. Relief maps of different countries may look quite similar from the thumbnail perspective. I have the same rejection experience with my pictures.

disorderly · « **Reply #69 on:** January 06, 2010, 09:58 »

I'd like to add my voice to the chorus. Ignoring the expense of working with a model and the desire to recoup that expense with as many good images as possible, I believe that offering a large number of poses of the same individual in the same outfit and setting is of value to buyers. It permits them to find the pose that's the best fit for their concept, something even small differences in images can affect.

Perhaps the problem is that your search mechanisms don't offer a set of related images in a way that's convenient for the buyer, giving a few representatives on the first pass but then delivering the rest when he or she dives in. But however they're presented, I'd argue that a larger number of similar is a good thing for the buyer. By discouraging it, indeed, by reducing my ability to upload based on an acceptance percentage damaged by "too similar" rejections, you are doing clients and submitters a disservice.

AridOcean · « **Reply #70 on:** January 06, 2010, 10:04 »

Quote from: PixelsAway on January 06, 2010, 09:53

Quote from: AridOcean on January 06, 2010, 09:31
in December I uploaded 3 high resolution relief maps of Austria, Azerbaijan and the Balearic Islands. All 3 were rejected because of "Too many photos/illustrations on the same subject or from the same series".

My impression is that some inspectors are checking thumbnails only. Relief maps of different countries may look quite similar from the thumbnail perspective. I have the same rejection experience with my pictures.

Perhaps... But the Balearic Islands have an ocean around them, and even from a thumbnail you could see that Austria has not

willie · « **Reply #71 on:** January 06, 2010, 10:18 »

Quote from: Achilles on January 06, 2010, 07:14

Guys, do you understand that submitting similars will dillute dramatically your RPD? Others may accept them, as they don't have our pricing system. But if you submit two files you will see less revenue, as your RPD will fall down. Not due to search placement, but because 5 sales will be split between these 2 and the file will not reach level 2 so fast.
Also, subscriptions have a thirst for similars. You will receive more sub downloads, because buyers will download them "just in case". This is not bad, it's additional revenue but keep it in mind when comparing RPDs.
More here:
http://blog.dreamstime.com/2009/09/02/similar-images-how-to-upload-and-how-much-is-too-much_art30298

The alternative is to allow users to submit very few images. That will make them self-selective and will remove any similarity burden from our side. If this is preferred, we can definitely do it.
ortant role though.

Hello Achilles, Happy 2010. good to hear your insight to this.
I've edited to quote two of your points for emphasis in agreement.
the first one, as I kept echoing SJLocke who explicitly told me the same thing.
the second, which I think is a good idea. Same way that IS restricts our upload . At first, it may appear to be that IS does not want us indies to overwhelm their exclusives. But now that this matter of similarities and the need to be able to edit your own work objectively, I can clearly accept IS's limit , which in the long run also decreases the ratio of rejection.

Whatever the reason , mostly guesstimates here , that DT , FT, etc.. have now so viciously started to reject "similar" images, I think it is a good idea. This will definitely prevent a contributor from flooding the pages with one thousand and one rendition (colour change only) of golden men, lol..
of same poses different dresses, whatnot.

Specifically in your case, I can also see the value of not giving the subscriber too many choices. I agree that less is more in this sense, esp when an image attains a higher Level with more dls.
Although I am not sure if a higher level actually brings more future dls,as in my case, I noticed the higher the level the less dls it seem to attract. maybe it's just my imagination, or just my specific upper level images.

anyway, i digress. Quite honestly, I have to admit , like many here, there has been a conspicuous lowering of dls lately. here's hoping this is just a seasonal occurence rather than the shapes of things to expect from DT. I have in fact increased my uploads to DT as my acceptance ratio has consistently iincreased. Hopely, this higher approval and consistent increasing portfolio , still small comparatively speaking, will reflect in an equal increase in my dls.

Happy 2010 to you , Carmen and all at DT.

NitorPhoto · « **Reply #72 on:** January 06, 2010, 10:39 »

After thinking a lot, reading other posts and trying to be as open to the opposite opinion as possible I am going to think the problem is not on the conceptional level but in the practice how DT is implementing it in a day-to-day practice.
I can accept that identical images are being rejected. I also had some and I can accept it.
But I can not agree in the definition of identity. DT's current definition is something like this: if it is the same model and outfit and the image is communicating the same conceptual message in a similar composition then the image is too much similar. It still could work in theory but in practice - how the reviewers are trying to use it during that very short time they have for judging one image - it leads to unwanted rejections. This is why I think the definition is not good. Even if the conceptual message and the composition are the same the images can be very different in important details and in interpretation of the same concept. For example a model can role play a situation/concept on many different ways/facial-expressions. Some are authentic for one customer while the others seem perfect for another. While a cut/framing is suitable for one it might be useless for others. I base my opinon on rejections happened to me.

cathyslife · « **Reply #73 on:** January 06, 2010, 11:09 »

Quote

In my opinion the "too similar" rejection should go for photos that are mostly identical. Guy facing the camera with red cup in his hand and same guy facing the camera in identical position, with yellow cup in his hand. Those that differ only by irrelevant aspects. The shot examples given by NitorPhoto with the woman in the office are perfectly acceptable in my view.

Ditto this.

The photos I saw yesterday had MINOR changes, like four fingers were showing on a hand instead of three. It reminded me of that game where you get 2 photos and you have to pick out 10 differences between them. I had a hard time figuring out how one photo was different than another.

By the way, I was searching again this morning. I searched on DT for female AND wrist AND watch. I ran across another portfolio with a ton of similars. There were differences, but from a buyers perspective, the differences were not that great. I could easily pick out a better of the two or three similars.

I do agree that the reviewers do not always do the right thing. I also know that some contributors flood the system, in the hopes that quantity puts them farther up in the search results, percentage wise. Many good points on both sides of this discussion.

dbvirago · « **Reply #74 on:** January 06, 2010, 11:24 »

First, thank you, Achilles for checking in here and clarifying some of the issues.

My problem with which similars to upload comes from an experience of mine a few years a go. I went through a nice neighborhood and shot about a dozen houses. All similar, but different. I had my favorites, but that regardless, uploaded all of the shots.

Across all sites, one of these images (and it wasn't my favorite) outsold all the rest of them by a huge margin. I still don't know why. The point being if that was the similar I decided to not upload, would it have cost me hundreds in revenue?

Or to put it another way, if I always knew which image was the most marketable, I'd be a lot more sucessful at this.

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #75 on:** January 06, 2010, 11:46 »

Doesn't the "RPD" argument that Achilles presents fly in the face of his argument for Subscriptions?

Lev · « **Reply #76 on:** January 06, 2010, 11:56 »

Quote from: Achilles on January 06, 2010, 07:14

The alternative is to allow users to submit very few images. That will make them self-selective and will remove any similarity burden from our side. If this is preferred, we can definitely do it.

go for it. as IS does. would be much much smarter IMHO.

Lev · « **Reply #77 on:** January 06, 2010, 12:01 »

runamock · « **Reply #79 on:** January 06, 2010, 13:17 »

Credit to you for all of your responses today Achilles

willie · « **Reply #80 on:** January 06, 2010, 13:25 »

Quote from: Achilles on January 06, 2010, 12:37

@Perseus: Yes, the limit could be lowered. In fact it was much lower in the last months. The system allows newcomers to join easily. Keeping a very low submission limit is not really the solution. New contributors will need many months to build their portfolio. Which is unfair to them, old members already have certain advantages (levels, knowledge, etc.). Happy New Year to you too!

yes, i agree that a lower limit is unfair to new contributors.
didn't DT once base limit on approval ratio? ok., i know even that is a bit unfair for the newbie as they are not accustomed to what DT wants initially.
so, could it not be a grace period for newbies with a fixed limit , say, 90 days or 6 months, and then base the limit on approval rating.
this way, if my approval rating for these past month , which was close to 90% slipped,
i would take that my editing on my own selective process has gone subjective.
and conversely, if my approval rate increases to 100%, i know i am doing well and can continue to give you the images you want.

what i mean is, there is a consistency in DT , for me at least, and lately i grasped the kind of work your reviewers want to approve. this tells me i am going in the right direction.

for the new contributors, i would say a leeway of 6months to a year would be fair for them,
as it took me close to a year before i really know what i should not give to DT.
although, even the time factor is a bit skewed, as i am only active with micro stock contribution during the winter months, so really that one year could well be something less .

not sure if i explain my question well enough for an answer, Achilles. i have yet to get another pint , so my mind does not work well without a Guiness

Lev · « **Reply #81 on:** January 06, 2010, 13:48 »

Quote from: Achilles on January 06, 2010, 12:37

@Dolgachov: You have a point, but that stops any newcomer from joining and closes the circle. It's been done before in this industry, not really wise. We'll try to keep it lower though. But if you already know this, why don't you submit less?

how would it possibly "remove any similarity burden from your side"?

cathyslife · « **Reply #82 on:** January 06, 2010, 13:56 »

Quote

Or to put it another way, if I always knew which image was the most marketable, I'd be a lot more sucessful at this.

Amen to that!

melastmohican · « **Reply #83 on:** January 06, 2010, 14:40 »

It's conflict of interests: contributors want to have as much as possible images in their offer while agency want them to do the work and filter so they do not have to modify their search engine. On the top of that reviewers do not care about selling potential of photos cause they got paid on count of images reviewed (I guess does not matter if accepted or rejected). Figure out who is in a weakest position here?

CofkoCof · « **Reply #84 on:** February 12, 2010, 09:32 »

Well I can't understand some rejections. I contacted support and didn't get a clear answer (I asked many questions and acctually got a recommendation not to submit similar images in a batch and then later that the imges weren't rejected for being too similar. Most of my questions remained unanswered and actually got told that there is no point in continuing the discussion). I made a series of flags, first 3 sets for EU (3 files with 9 flags). Then later 5 sets of asian flags. 3 asian sets got accepted and 2 rejected. The reason for rejection:
"Too many photos/illustrations on the same subject or from the same series. Please be more selective and choose only the best shots or illustrations. Avoid submitting simple variations on the same subject or create sets of similars (several shots included within the same image). That will help the file sell better and generate higher royalties via our level-based system. "

Ok how can I be more selective? If I only select 2 sets then the buyer won't be able to buy the rest of the asian flags from me. Also how can I select only the best ones, they are (in my opinion) all the same in terms of quality. I'd understand if they would want more images in one file (the " Please submit all the elements of this series in one image. Thank you. " rejection) and then I would be able to complete the set, however that is not the case here (it happened with some other series I did and got accepted after I've put (too many) elements in one file). Also if that was the case then why accept 3 files and reject 2 of them.

PS: Here are the selected:
http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-images-asian-flags-set-4-image12795504
http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-images-asian-flags-set-1-image12795499
http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-images-asian-flags-set-1-image12795499
And these two sets got rejected:
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-45710983/stock-photo-glossy-flags-set-five-of-flags-from-asia.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-45710977/stock-photo-glossy-flags-set-three-of-flags-from-asia.html

plrang · « **Reply #85 on:** February 12, 2010, 12:08 »

Oh man similarity again and still this issue is on at DT , strange.

As i said about similarity issue at Dreamstime months ago, see nothing changed. No interface improvements, similar images still work wrong (all You can read in my mentioned post - cause they removed it from my DT blog - monsters!).

And once again for that blog article - three LOLs:

*** "-It is better to have a level 5 image than 10 level 1 images, because you earn more per download. Several similar images will always compete for downloads. "

Also it's better to have 10 images at level 5 isn't it ?

Cause i have such images DT would say similar today, right in my DT portfolio. And i've submitted them months ago thinking about variants and designers needs, also customers who would like to have slight different image than other customer but saying the same story.
And all of them are my bestsellers (had a 'fight' because one was removed by DT at level 2!)

If i do not submit those variants other people will do and they do of course, because DT is checking our portfolio and not the whole database for similarity which is slight sill.

I have series similar (as DT states, cause my similarity definition is most likely same as people have on this forum) and they sell ALL and see no problem, cause i've put VARIANTS and not CLONES.

*** "-Your portfolio looks more appealing due to a more visible variety of images."

Sorry.. then improve the interface and search engine and similarity engine as i wrote months ago (post in my blog above).
This is STOCK and not an art gallery i think. There are similar screws and other parts but they fit completely different needs.

*** "-You save buyers time so th"ey don't get bored browsing through many pages of the same subject, and having...let's say 4 images per subject instead of 12. This will also help the buyer make his/her mind faster, which results in quicker sales. "

Jeez... there was already discussion about that at DT and people (me to) suggested multiple solutions to improve and eliminate this issue, like some internal folders, series with one image selected and just this one displayed as an intro to the batch.... etc.etc.

I know DT won't listen just wanted to show to the forum that people already got right and DT was wrong with their assumptions.

Again - please read this post if You like see other point of view. similarity issue at Dreamstime

And my (mentioned in post above) rejected batch of Grunwald Battle editorial photos (20 images SELECTED BY ME from hundreds i took) sells well e.g at Shutterstock because it's COMPLETE as i wanted. It sales by 20, 10, 5 images because people have a choice and it's an editorial. And DT selected about 3 photos lol.

SORRY Achilles but You'll never get me around with this.

And this post is just a discussion and not some attack or whining of course! i'm not a microstock maniac.

Elenathewise · « **Reply #86 on:** February 12, 2010, 13:09 »

removed

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: More than usual rejections from Dreamtime (Read 25425 times)

lisafx

WarrenPrice

Xalanx

Xalanx

vonkara

lisafx

lisafx

red

WarrenPrice

Xalanx

dbvirago

WarrenPrice

CofkoCof

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors