Author Topic: Too many photos/illustrations on the same subject or from the same series. (Read 17514 times)

penywise · « **on:** April 09, 2010, 12:12 »

Sigh. I had my entire submission for the week rejected, all with the same reason. Too many photos/illustrations on the same subject or from the same series. I don't shoot models, and mostly shoot isolated objects. Most of the objects in this particular shoot were new items I had just purchased, so I don't see how I could have had too many of the same subject or series when each was individually different involving completely different concepts (i.e., one was with a wheelchair, another with antique gears spilling out of a treasure box, etc). Unless they mean my human representative wooden model. Geeze, really? But they even rejected the ones without him.

Thanks for letting me vent.

I haven't had my entire submission rejected since I started.

sharpshot · « **Reply #1 on:** April 09, 2010, 12:25 »

Send them an email and ask for them to be reviewed again. I think they are sometimes far to strict with this. As a contributor, I have a hard time working out which image will appeal most to the buyers. The other sites seem more lenient and let the buyers decide which image from a series suits their needs. That seems sensible to me.

joingated · « **Reply #2 on:** April 09, 2010, 15:56 »

I agree, I sometimes get this and resubmit a few weeks later with no problems, I think dreamstime have been very harsh with this lately,.

KB · « **Reply #3 on:** April 09, 2010, 17:21 »

Quote from: sharpshot on April 09, 2010, 12:25

Send them an email and ask for them to be reviewed again. I think they are sometimes far to strict with this.

Not only far too strict, but also far too inconsistent. As we've seen in examples posted here at MSG, there are tons of examples where you would be hard-pressed to even be able to spot the difference between images, where a contributor uploaded (and got accepted) a dozen or even two on the very same subject.

lisafx · « **Reply #4 on:** April 09, 2010, 17:59 »

Quote from: KB on April 09, 2010, 17:21

Not only far too strict, but also far too inconsistent. As we've seen in examples posted here at MSG, there are tons of examples where you would be hard-pressed to even be able to spot the difference between images, where a contributor uploaded (and got accepted) a dozen or even two on the very same subject.

I am guessing those were uploaded before the new rules when into effect.

KB · « **Reply #5 on:** April 09, 2010, 18:21 »

Quote from: lisafx on April 09, 2010, 17:59

I am guessing those were uploaded before the new rules when into effect.

Perhaps you're right; I hope so. But, based on the OP, it seems they need to find some "happy medium" between the two extremes. Hopefully they will get there.

penywise · « **Reply #6 on:** April 10, 2010, 10:41 »

I sent in an email. We'll see what happens. I'm still scratching my head... Well, life goes on.

But it's frustrating when it now affects the upload limit and then they penalize you for having similars of items of different subjects. Makes me wonder... if I have an image of a wheelchair that I can never again have an image involving a wheelchair even if it is under a different context? Pretty soon, yes, everything in the world will have been photographed. Who keeps tabs on this stuff?

Perry · « **Reply #7 on:** April 20, 2010, 04:36 »

I just had a couple of images rejected for the same reason, very annoying. The image has the same prop as in some of my earlier photos, but the concept and composition of the images are different. Can't they understand the concept of "similar"? It's not similar if the concept and the composition are different. And I'm not talking about moving the camera an inch, I'm talking about radically different compositions.

I already nagged earlier when they wouldn't accept a horizontal and vertical composition of the same subject, now they want me to shoot just one image per concept/prop. I can't afford to get me a new prop for every picture. 1000 photos - that's 1000 props and 1000 new ideas!

I don't like the way DT is going. They lack the earlier relaxed atmosphere, they sell less than before and their pricing structure is so confusing that I don't even try to understand it anymore.

FD · « **Reply #8 on:** April 20, 2010, 07:29 »

Quote from: Perry on April 20, 2010, 04:36

I don't like the way DT is going. They lack the earlier relaxed atmosphere, they sell less than before and their pricing structure is so confusing that I don't even try to understand it anymore.

You are not the only one. No further comment.

gostwyck · « **Reply #9 on:** April 20, 2010, 07:50 »

Quote from: Perry on April 20, 2010, 04:36

I just had a couple of images rejected for the same reason, very annoying. The image has the same prop as in some of my earlier photos, but the concept and composition of the images are different. Can't they understand the concept of "similar"? It's not similar if the concept and the composition are different. And I'm not talking about moving the camera an inch, I'm talking about radically different compositions.

I already nagged earlier when they wouldn't accept a horizontal and vertical composition of the same subject, now they want me to shoot just one image per concept/prop. I can't afford to get me a new prop for every picture. 1000 photos - that's 1000 props and 1000 new ideas!

I don't like the way DT is going. They lack the earlier relaxed atmosphere, they sell less than before and their pricing structure is so confusing that I don't even try to understand it anymore.

I'd agree. I don't think I can even be bothered to upload to DT anymore. It has simply become more hassle than it is worth for the ever-dwindling returns and the frustration of having perfectly good stock images rejected simply because there was more than one or two from the same shoot.

I'd love to be able to spot the one image from a series that will be most popular but the truth is that nobody can and indeed the performance of individual images varies hugely between agencies. My business model pretty much relies on getting 3-6 images from a shoot to be economically worthwhile. A couple of years ago I remember Serban actually expressing disbelief on the forums why anybody who has a Downloads-per-image of 4 or higher wasn't uploading as many images as they could.

cathyslife · « **Reply #10 on:** April 20, 2010, 08:08 »

Quote from: Perry on April 20, 2010, 04:36

I just had a couple of images rejected for the same reason, very annoying. The image has the same prop as in some of my earlier photos, but the concept and composition of the images are different. Can't they understand the concept of "similar"? It's not similar if the concept and the composition are different. And I'm not talking about moving the camera an inch, I'm talking about radically different compositions.

I already nagged earlier when they wouldn't accept a horizontal and vertical composition of the same subject, now they want me to shoot just one image per concept/prop. I can't afford to get me a new prop for every picture. 1000 photos - that's 1000 props and 1000 new ideas!

I don't like the way DT is going. They lack the earlier relaxed atmosphere, they sell less than before and their pricing structure is so confusing that I don't even try to understand it anymore.

Do you have the images all named the same thing? I know I have gotten rejections on similars because of that. As soon as I changed the name to something different, it was accepted. Just wanted to mention.

stockastic · « **Reply #11 on:** April 20, 2010, 09:52 »

Same thing .

11 images of a collection of related objects - not a series, or similar, but actually a set that I'd carefully put together so they could be bought in groups and tiled together as desired. And the descriptions explained that. DT accepted the first one, just to mess with my head I guess. The remaining 10 sat in the queue for another day, then were rejected.

SS accepted all 11 and has already sold a few.

FD · « **Reply #12 on:** April 20, 2010, 11:06 »

Quote from: gostwyck on April 20, 2010, 07:50

A couple of years ago I remember Serban actually expressing disbelief on the forums why anybody who has a Downloads-per-image of 4 or higher wasn't uploading as many images as they could.

The new gizmo is "collages" (of similars). I want to give that a try honestly in view of the level system, but only on DT. IS hates collages.

penywise · « **Reply #13 on:** April 20, 2010, 12:24 »

As a follow-up, I was told that I had too many images incorporating my little wooden men as human-stand-ins (regardless of concepts), and that I needed to diversify into other areas.

So, in summary, I'm in the same boat of being able to use one prop for only one image ... good grief. Not very realistic, but apparently this is their reality. I feel sorry for the poor chap that has to cross-reference everyone's files to see if they've submitted any photo with that particular prop. I try not to use similar names for files (object+date), but maybe I should start naming them via concept instead of subject.

FD · « **Reply #14 on:** April 20, 2010, 12:30 »

Quote from: penywise on April 20, 2010, 12:24

I feel sorry for the poor chap that has to cross-reference everyone's files to see if they've submitted any photo with that particular prop.

They use some tools for that.

- Small hint: EXIF date/time info, metadata match.
(PS - great port!)

Perry · « **Reply #15 on:** April 20, 2010, 12:36 »

I think I'll submit my images again, but I'll remove exif data and keyword a bit weakly so the other images in the series won't pop up. Alternatively I could remove some keywords from my earlier images and add them afterwards.

gostwyck · « **Reply #16 on:** April 20, 2010, 12:46 »

Quote from: penywise on April 20, 2010, 12:24

As a follow-up, I was told that I had too many images incorporating my little wooden men as human-stand-ins (regardless of concepts), and that I needed to diversify into other areas.

This contributor's work seems to do well from little men concepts;

http://en.fotolia.com/p/180138

Interesting how his stuff appears to sell more than 10x better on FT (and IS) than on DT though.

penywise · « **Reply #17 on:** April 20, 2010, 13:02 »

Quote from: FD-amateur on April 20, 2010, 12:30

Quote from: penywise on April 20, 2010, 12:24
I feel sorry for the poor chap that has to cross-reference everyone's files to see if they've submitted any photo with that particular prop.
They use some tools for that. - Small hint: EXIF date/time info, metadata match.
(PS - great port!)

Thanks so much!

As for the exif info, these shots weren't taken in the same series, or the same date, or anything the same other than my wooden guys. Shrug, the loopholes we need to jump through just to get a few images approved to get our .05$... Well, at least I understand this loophole a little better.

And Gostwyck, I was wondering the same thing as there are several contributors out there that only use one or two main figures for their images. I guess I just need to get more creative.

FD · « **Reply #18 on:** April 20, 2010, 14:23 »

Quote from: gostwyck on April 20, 2010, 12:46

Interesting how his stuff appears to sell more than 10x better on FT (and IS) than on DT though.

Let's not forget Lumaxart, who uses his golden little men all over. As a side note, he stopped uploading on DT.

sharpshot · « **Reply #19 on:** April 20, 2010, 14:50 »

This doesn't seem like a good policy for the contributors or the buyers. DT must be losing a small fortune doing this. I just can't understand why? They might want to make DT different from the other sites but I think this makes them much worse, not better. They could accept series of images and only put one in the main collection, with a link to the other alternatives. Taking the choice away from the buyers and making it frustrating for us isn't going to work. If they want to keep their position as one of the top sites, I think they need to make changes quickly.

stockastic · « **Reply #20 on:** April 20, 2010, 14:54 »

Quote from: sharpshot on April 20, 2010, 14:50

They could accept series of images and only put one in the main collection, with a link to the other alternatives.

That is exactly right. Like other microstocks they seem to be stuck with a lot of simplistic one-size-fits-all rules and business models. But why spend time and money enhancing the site when you can just reject everything and still take in 100,000 more images next week...

luissantos84 · « **Reply #21 on:** April 20, 2010, 15:30 »

same here, they are being pretty strict but in fact I agree a little with them..! In my case was a picture of two signs (accepted), then I upload not a crop but just 1 of those signs, so they said that the designer can crop from the other previous photo, but honestly he won't have a "big" size, instead of 10megas it would have like 5...

Randy McKown · « **Reply #22 on:** April 20, 2010, 16:59 »

Quote from: penywise on April 20, 2010, 12:24

As a follow-up, I was told that I had too many images incorporating my little wooden men as human-stand-ins (regardless of concepts), and that I needed to diversify into other areas.

So, in summary, I'm in the same boat of being able to use one prop for only one image ... good grief. Not very realistic, but apparently this is their reality. I feel sorry for the poor chap that has to cross-reference everyone's files to see if they've submitted any photo with that particular prop. I try not to use similar names for files (object+date), but maybe I should start naming them via concept instead of subject.

Just looking at the last couple hundred uploads you made on DT it looks like 60-70% of them used the little wooden man. I don't think you are wrong in wanting to make the most of your props in order to increase your profits from an individual expense .. it's a very smart thing to do. However, with DT's new policy your uploads of it are extremely obvious (and basically they are tired of seeing the same prop over and over and over. I would try mixing it up more .. just let those wooden guys sit back on your drive for awhile and upload other things .. then once your little wooden families have been away on vacation have a couple pop in for a surprise visit. In the meantime .. they can sell on other sites.

penywise · « **Reply #23 on:** April 21, 2010, 12:07 »

Thanks Randy for the feedback! At least now I know they're not banned forever, lol. So, they're off to a nice vacation, and I'm off searching in my creativity box for my next idea. I can certainly understand why the reviewers could be tired of seeing the same props over and over; it didn't occur to me that only one or two people might be reviewing my photos. I'll try to mix it up better in the future.

stockastic · « **Reply #24 on:** April 21, 2010, 16:26 »

It's been a few weeks and maybe I've calmed down enough to try submitting some more isolated objects to IS. I have a nice new bunch for them to reject, and I'm building a collection of "too feathered or too rough" rejection emails.

This set is of a collection of objects and could either be one very large image or a series of smaller images which can be tiled if desired. It's not a bunch of 'similar' shots of the same thing - each individual image stands alone and contains different objects. If I combine them, the buyer won't get as much resolution.

Yes, I know that whichever way I go, they'll reject it and want it the other way. And when I do that, they'll say it contains artifacts. But, I have to try.

What is IS's position on sets like this?

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Too many photos/illustrations on the same subject or from the same series. (Read 17514 times)

penywise

sharpshot

joingated

KB

lisafx

KB

penywise

Perry

FD

gostwyck

cathyslife

stockastic

FD

penywise

FD

Perry

gostwyck

penywise

FD

sharpshot

stockastic

luissantos84

Randy McKown

penywise

stockastic

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors