MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Fotolia director of content?  (Read 10183 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: March 22, 2010, 15:19 »
0
Does anyone know who is Fotolia's director of content and how to contact them? I used to know someone, but my old email folders got wiped out unfortunately. I am puzzled by my recent approval rates there - getting as low as 30%... I submit images of good technical quality (been told by many agencies that it's "excellent", never had a rejection on any macro sites I am working with), never submit  batches of similar images, the content has good sales potential as it proves somewhere else, and being currently #14 in the Fotolia ranking I think indicates well enough that my images are in demand by Fotolia's customers.... Am at loss why so much of my stuff gets rejected. It's getting to the point it's not worthwhile spending time on submitting... Does someone know how to address these issues?


« Reply #1 on: March 22, 2010, 16:00 »
0
 :D
« Last Edit: April 15, 2010, 18:04 by willie »

« Reply #2 on: March 22, 2010, 16:13 »
0
Well, that's not exactly what I was looking for:) I am happy with my sales at Fotolia, they are a number one earner for me, so I am not looking to leave the agency... I emailed Chad (hope I got his email address right), hopefully he can help me with solving those issues...

« Reply #3 on: March 22, 2010, 16:19 »
0
If they treat big guns like that (not only us, small unimportant worms) it must be something wrong going.

« Reply #4 on: March 22, 2010, 16:51 »
0
I contacted them via Contact us link but only got a response that it is a different department that does reviewing. I then asked if they could give me a contact of the reviewing department and they said they couldn't. I stopped at that point. If buyers really want my images they can find them on other sites.

« Reply #5 on: March 22, 2010, 17:20 »
0
Any News Elena? I ma curious as what they will tell you, Im not experiencing that (touch wood) but you never know.

« Reply #6 on: March 22, 2010, 17:34 »
0
I got a reply from Chad, he promised to look into it... asked for sample rejected images (no shortage of those:)). I am pretty puzzled about this, my approval ratio these days is above 90% on most agencies. Hope we can sort this out somehow.

« Reply #7 on: March 22, 2010, 18:42 »
0
I contacted them via Contact us link but only got a response that it is a different department that does reviewing. I then asked if they could give me a contact of the reviewing department and they said they couldn't. I stopped at that point. If buyers really want my images they can find them on other sites.

Good point
« Last Edit: April 15, 2010, 18:04 by willie »

« Reply #8 on: March 23, 2010, 03:30 »
0
I got a reply from Chad, he promised to look into it... asked for sample rejected images (no shortage of those:)). I am pretty puzzled about this, my approval ratio these days is above 90% on most agencies. Hope we can sort this out somehow.

That was quick :) (I sent have sent him 8 emails over time, friendly ones requesting info on crank you rank etc, things support have directed me to him, never once got a response :()

Please keep us informed of what he says as it interesting.

Really I surprised that the agencies dont adopt an automatic approval system for the people at the top, ie black diamond equivalent.  When you think that the top 20 people would submit well inexcess of 100k images per year and they would know what's going to sell and be acceptable, it would be a tidy saving in reviewing costs to just 'wave them through'

« Reply #9 on: March 23, 2010, 08:19 »
0
dp :D
« Last Edit: April 15, 2010, 18:05 by willie »

« Reply #10 on: March 23, 2010, 09:49 »
0
Sorry to hear that Elena. I'am lucky to I get literally everything accepted at Fotolia - maybe except some outdated stuff we uploaded accidentally or images where we mistyped the title badly... things like that. Rejection is aroud 1%. There must be some kind of a miscommunication in your case like a hidden technical parameter... or I don't know. Looking forward to hear what Chad investigates.

« Reply #11 on: March 23, 2010, 11:25 »
0
Elena, I think the issue with FL is with the subject of your picture. Don't know why it wasn't the issue before... FL is very picky on the subject - while they accept >90% of my studio (and outdoor when set up, not candid) people pictures they reject vast majority of my nature, landscape, architecture, location pictures. As you have a lot of those in your portfolio this is most certainly the issue.

I do agree that many of such pictures are perfectly sellable, you don't need to convince me :) But that's the way FL plays it...

« Reply #12 on: March 23, 2010, 11:29 »
0
Sorry to hear that Elena. I'am lucky to I get literally everything accepted at Fotolia - maybe except some outdated stuff we uploaded accidentally or images where we mistyped the title badly... things like that. Rejection is aroud 1%. There must be some kind of a miscommunication in your case like a hidden technical parameter... or I don't know. Looking forward to hear what Chad investigates.

In my early days with Fotolia I had pretty much everything accepted, too - funny, because what I do now and the equipment I use now is way better than back then. I know standards have changed, but how come my quality is good enough for Getty RM and not for Fotolia?... On Istock, we have 70-85% percent accepted and most of rejections are because of keywords which sometimes are just a matter of personal judgement.... So honestly, I don't even have a clue why suddenly they decided that my images are not good enough for them. Subject-wise, I do very little of business shots and isolated people (I do some, but that's not the majority of my port), but again, I never did that, it's not that I changed the areas I am working in. What I do still sells, and, as some of you here, I do get constant requests from agencies around the world to represent my portfolio... I do hope Chad can help me understand what's going on (I haven't heard back from him yet), but if the acceptance rate will be this low, I don't think we can justify spending time uploading more images there. We won't pull out, but time is money, and submission process on Fotolia with their branching out categories is pretty time-consuming.

« Reply #13 on: March 23, 2010, 11:45 »
0
Elena, I think the issue with FL is with the subject of your picture. Don't know why it wasn't the issue before... FL is very picky on the subject - while they accept >90% of my studio (and outdoor when set up, not candid) people pictures they reject vast majority of my nature, landscape, architecture, location pictures. As you have a lot of those in your portfolio this is most certainly the issue.

I do agree that many of such pictures are perfectly sellable, you don't need to convince me :) But that's the way FL plays it...

Yup that's the only reason I can think of, too. But then how come this wasn't a problem before?...With my port that doesn't have a lot of business shots and isolated people, I still sell a lot, on Fotolia as well - so obviously, there is market for my images. Unfortunately, some reviewers take one-dimensional approach to the content. I hope it can be changed somehow. I am not about to switch over to shooting people in the office wearing suits.. there is enough of that stuff already.

« Reply #14 on: March 23, 2010, 11:46 »
0
submission process on Fotolia with their branching out categories is pretty time-consuming.

You are not required to pick a category to submit to an image to Fotolia.

« Reply #15 on: March 23, 2010, 12:03 »
0
But then how come this wasn't a problem before?

Could it be that FT's (and other agencies for that matter) needs have changed over time?  When you originally submitted shots in the same subjects, they were accepted because they were needed.  Now your skills have advanced and your shots may be better, but FT might have decided that they are oversaturated in those topics and they (rightly or wrongly) feel they have more supply than their customers will ever demand.

My own experience with FT has been unchanged for the past 15 months or so... they've consistently accepted about 90-95% of my uploads... but then, they might just feel that they're not quite saturated in my core subjects just yet... but I imagine that day is certainly coming.

« Reply #16 on: March 23, 2010, 12:25 »
0
30% acceptance ratio !!! that's insane. I've literally seen tons of your images at 100% and they are always awesome. There must be a major screwup somewhere at FT for you to be experiencing that. I hope they get it sorted out fast for you ... in the meantime don't stand too close .. I don't want to catch your bad luck.  ;D

« Reply #17 on: March 23, 2010, 12:38 »
0
I've literally seen tons of your images ...

Literally? How much does one of Elena's images weigh then?

« Reply #18 on: March 23, 2010, 12:41 »
0
I've literally seen tons of your images ...

Literally? How much does one of Elena's images weigh then?

They're probably pretty heavy - especially at 100%!

« Reply #19 on: March 23, 2010, 13:00 »
0
But then how come this wasn't a problem before?...

That's very strange indeed, I'm seeing that with FL for at least last 9-12 months. Perhaps they did acknowledge your high rank and you did have a special treatment, and it is either over or it's a wrong inspector?

« Reply #20 on: March 23, 2010, 13:17 »
0

Why don't you call them?

Fotolia US 718-577-1321

Kone

« Reply #21 on: March 23, 2010, 13:33 »
0
30% acceptance ratio !!! that's insane. I've literally seen tons of your images at 100% and they are always awesome. There must be a major screwup somewhere at FT for you to be experiencing that. I hope they get it sorted out fast for you ... in the meantime don't stand too close .. I don't want to catch your bad luck.  ;D

Thanks:) I do take a lot of care to make sure my images are the highest quality. As to the bad luck, I don't consider it mine:) If Fotolia would insist on accepting only certain subjects (if subject indeed is the issue here, I haven't heard from Chad yet), then be it. It's their business and they are free to run it as they find suitable. I am trying to make sure it's not some kind of mistake from their side, especially when images get rejected for quality issues. It happens, and if they would be willing to fix it, good. If not, I won't consider myself "out of luck". I am extremely lucky to be able to do what I like and make a very decent living out of it:)

ap

« Reply #22 on: March 23, 2010, 13:42 »
0
hi elena:

sorry this is happening to you too at ft. great portfolio and track record so i'm sure it's a rogue reviewer on the loose.

but, i'm kind of curious as to what declined message are you getting? is it the ubiquitous "not up to our aesthetic standard" that they give to the rest of us, or is it "your photographic work is excellent, but not needed, blah, blah blah?"

« Reply #23 on: March 23, 2010, 13:53 »
0
hi elena:

sorry this is happening to you too at ft. great portfolio and track record so i'm sure it's a rogue reviewer on the loose.

but, i'm kind of curious as to what declined message are you getting? is it the ubiquitous "not up to our aesthetic standard" that they give to the rest of us, or is it "your photographic work is excellent, but not needed, blah, blah blah?"

The latest one is "quality". Which is ridiculous. Which is why I started all this:) If they say "we don't need this at this time", well it's their call. But my quality I am pretty sure about.

« Reply #24 on: March 23, 2010, 13:58 »
0
I've literally seen tons of your images ...

Literally? How much does one of Elena's images weigh then?

approx 15.8 lbs. .. we output all images to our flintstone jumbo deskpeck printer then inspect the final image with a convex lens strapped to a small piece of wood. It's a time consuming process but that's how we roll  ;D

ap

« Reply #25 on: March 23, 2010, 14:34 »
0

The latest one is "quality". Which is ridiculous. Which is why I started all this:) If they say "we don't need this at this time", well it's their call. But my quality I am pretty sure about.

so far as i know, there are three different declined messages. one for either "quality", "technical", or "type". if you received the "quality" message, it doesn't mean that it failed on technical grounds. it seems to be their catchall for stylistic rejection. i'm sure you've never received the "technical" rejection for this is where focus, noise, contrast, saturation, etc. are listed as the problems.

anyways, let us know how chad is responding to this!

« Reply #26 on: March 23, 2010, 15:52 »
0
Hi Elena,
Many people pointed out the same problem, yet, some of them keep saying that Fotolia's rejections are not insane. I think your rank at FT tells us clearly that something is wrong there,  but what....that's a hard question.

« Reply #27 on: March 23, 2010, 18:02 »
0
Very Interesting
« Last Edit: April 15, 2010, 18:03 by willie »


« Reply #29 on: March 24, 2010, 14:12 »
0
 ;D ;D
« Last Edit: April 15, 2010, 18:03 by willie »

OM

« Reply #30 on: March 25, 2010, 12:59 »
0
hi elena:

sorry this is happening to you too at ft. great portfolio and track record so i'm sure it's a rogue reviewer on the loose.

but, i'm kind of curious as to what declined message are you getting? is it the ubiquitous "not up to our aesthetic standard" that they give to the rest of us, or is it "your photographic work is excellent, but not needed, blah, blah blah?"

The latest one is "quality". Which is ridiculous. Which is why I started all this:) If they say "we don't need this at this time", well it's their call. But my quality I am pretty sure about.

FT is weird. Their 'quality' rejection means 'we don't think this image will sell'.

« Reply #31 on: April 15, 2010, 16:24 »
0
first sorry about my bad english
i have similar problems with fotolia, im just new at stockfotografy and i nearly finished my first series produced for stock, while those pics have 99% acceptance by all agencies... 12 in total, fotolia rejected 99%. they needed 2 weeks to review... in this time those fotos sold very well on toher agencies.
I dont't think i will upload the rest of the series to fotolia, is not worth the time spend for the upload... and these serie is only 100pics

jbarber873

« Reply #32 on: April 16, 2010, 08:11 »
0
 Some days everything is approved, somedays nothing is approved. There is no pattern that I can see, except maybe a reviewer that is bipolar. I recently started uploading videos, and got a new rejection- "none conformity" ( spelled that way!) The rejection goes on to talk about added type in the video ( there is none) and other things that have nothing to do with what is uploaded. In the past, FT has sold well for my print, but even that is slowing down.
Great portfolio, by the way. They should give you a free pass, you've earned it.
Keep us posted on what Chad says, which I predict will have to do with the vast numbers of files they get, how the reviewers have to make judgements, blah blah blah.

« Reply #33 on: April 16, 2010, 09:33 »
0
They don't seem to like niche/location photography, which is pretty stupid since that is some of my best-selling stuff and there are lots of under-represented areas there. I guess they think the travel market is irrelevant and it's their call. Presumably people wanting travel images shop at the other sites

« Reply #34 on: May 03, 2010, 05:58 »
0
Elena did you hear back about this?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
13 Replies
5788 Views
Last post February 21, 2009, 07:43
by cluckcluck
6 Replies
2555 Views
Last post June 23, 2011, 09:25
by caspixel
14 Replies
4052 Views
Last post September 13, 2015, 14:12
by Newsfocus1
1 Replies
1069 Views
Last post January 19, 2016, 14:45
by Justanotherphotographer
15 Replies
3137 Views
Last post September 11, 2016, 11:14
by Tryingmybest

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results