MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Adobe Stock => Topic started by: sensovision on March 04, 2008, 01:26
-
After reading these forums and articles on the web I've got feeling that IStock have much strictest rules in images' acceptance, but seems I was wrong, I don't have problems in getting my images to IS, DT and rest but Fotolia is really mean to me for some reason :)
Most of my images are get rejected in time they are accepted everywhere... (maybe because of my 4mp camera and matter that for other sites I downsize my noisy pictures but for FT my resolution is marginally accepted so submit images as is).
Wonder am I alone in this or I've just got wrong initial impression and Fotolia is more picky to images than others?
(I'm not including SS as doesn't register there and don't have any experience with them).
-
That is great that you are getting images into IS and DT. I will guess FT may be a harbinger of more difficult times ahead for you though. Eventually the camera will hold you back, especially if it is producing visible noise. I would not be surprised if soon you ran into similar difficulties at IS...and I doubt you'll get into SS considering their scrutiny over noise.
DSLR is obviously an expensive next step, but you could conceivably go with a used Rebel or 30D (if you can find one), then throw on a $70 Plastic Fantastic 50mm 1.4.
Some of the top contributors in microstock rank FT #1 or #2 in overall earnings, likely because of the high EL prices, the ability to effectively double your base image prices, and higher commission percentages. So you should definitely be interested in making things work there if you plan to be in microstock for the long haul.
-
IS is more picky. FT is more inconsistent.
-
Do you really want to say you have more problems with Fotolia? They accept almost anything of mine. On the contrary Istock refuses about half of the pictures I send there and they are really choosy. And I only send them pictures accepted at DT and Crestock.
-
I've only had a few rejections at fotolia. One was strange though. Something about their customers buying for books, magazines and web use so my picture wasn't appropriate for that sort of market. It was a picture of plant roots, and has already sold several times on other sites in the last few days since it was accepted!
Weird, huh?
-
>>>> Do you really want to say you have more problems with Fotolia? They accept almost anything of mine. On the contrary Istock refuses about half of the pictures I send there and they are really choosy. And I only send them pictures accepted at DT and Crestock. <<<
Up to about a month ago I would have said them same, now Fotolia seems to reject a lot more with more and more dubious reasons.
-
Really? I haven't noticed anything like that. But I DO hate their rejections like "type of photo"!
-
Acceptance is not the main issue for me. Ease of submission is.
Fotolia's upload process is a breeze! Istock's on the other hand is cumbersome and inconvenient.
It takes me an hour or better to upload and disambiguate 15 images on istock and it takes another hour to submit to 8 other sites COMBINED.
-
I'm surprised you have problems with Fotolia, I have found them to be one of the easier going agencies personally.
I submit the same photo's to all those agencies that I upload to, and I have four times as many images with Fotolia as I do with iStock.
-
My experience is that Fotolio rejects twice as much as SS, IS and DT. As a result, it's my lowest earner and I've been seriously considering dropping them. It's not the camera; they reject newer files shot with the Rebel as quickly as the older files. I've been thinking it might be a European vs American market thing because files they say won't sell do quite nicely elsewhere. Aggravating but their loss, move on.
-
FT They keep about 50% of what I upload. IS I'm not with them
-
I'm surprised that people are having so much trouble getting acceptances at FT. They accept almost everything I send to them probably about 99% whereas IS and DT are about 80%.
-
FT and IS are around the same for me, but at least I can understand IS's rejects
-
Thanks for reply, folks!
That is great that you are getting images into IS and DT. I will guess FT may be a harbinger of more difficult times ahead for you though. Eventually the camera will hold you back, especially if it is producing visible noise. I would not be surprised if soon you ran into similar difficulties at IS...and I doubt you'll get into SS considering their scrutiny over noise.
DanP68, I don't try myself with SS for that reason, will wait till get new camera.
DSLR is obviously an expensive next step, but you could conceivably go with a used Rebel or 30D (if you can find one), then throw on a $70 Plastic Fantastic 50mm 1.4.
People here don't sell their equipment that frequently(we tend to buy it for life I guess) and if buy it from other place like EBay, I'll pay custom taxes as for new one :)
Some of the top contributors in microstock rank FT #1 or #2 in overall earnings, likely because of the high EL prices, the ability to effectively double your base image prices, and higher commission percentages. So you should definitely be interested in making things work there if you plan to be in microstock for the long haul.
I'm not going to leave them yet, although they seems to provide lowest exposure for images from all agencies I use.
Do you really want to say you have more problems with Fotolia? They accept almost anything of mine. On the contrary Istock refuses about half of the pictures I send there and they are really choosy. And I only send them pictures accepted at DT and Crestock.
Hi peep, that's right, I've exactly opposite situation :)
I've only had a few rejections at fotolia. One was strange though. Something about their customers buying for books, magazines and web use so my picture wasn't appropriate for that sort of market.
Hello Seren, several of my rejections have same statement, and my bestseller image on IS was also rejected for same reason :P
It's not the camera; they reject newer files shot with the Rebel as quickly as the older files. I've been thinking it might be a European vs American market thing because files they say won't sell do quite nicely elsewhere.
fullvalue, I also thought that European market have different demands, at least it sound plausible to me. Now I just need to change my thinking from American to European one and get right images ;D (Just for reference I was born and live in Easter Europe all my life).
FT and IS are around the same for me, but at least I can understand IS's rejects
Exactly, IS seems to be more consistent in given reasons and if problems was corrected images get accepted.
-
My acceptance is about equal at both, it seems that IS is more open to subject but more harsh technically, FT on the other hand is very closed with regards to subject but easier going technically. FT has only rejected one or two of my shots for technical reasons, but about 75% are for type of shot. IS on the other hand has yet to reject a shot for type, all relate to technical reasons (gotta drop the sharpening and somehow use less noise reduction than none). The more I like the shot, the less likely it is to be accepted at FT, likewise that increases my chance at IS (they take my personal faves, I guess they like my shots too).
-
I'm in the same boat that FT has suddenly gotten more picky.
What I like about IS, is they take more artistic pics - like Lensbaby shots. I find those more fun to shoot.
I just wanted to point out a couple of things in this thread.
IS submission is a lot easier if you use LightStock or ImageManager for submissions. I never use the web interface anymore.
There was also mention of the "Plastic Fantastic"beign a 50 1.4. It's a 1.8 lens, the 1.4 costs a bit more and isn't so plasticky.
-
When i first submitted to Fotolia about a year ago they rejected most of my animal images, but apart from that they accept nearly everything I submit. I have an acceptance rate of around 95%.
Istock on the other hand manage to see artifacts in about 40% of everything I upload. Having said that I'm not going to complain as with around half as many images online as Fotolia they generate 3 times as much income for me.
-
What I like about IS, is they take more artistic pics
Agreed on that. When I was hunting through their photos to see what sells, especially with certain types, I was kinda shocked that many of the better selling shots are quite artistic and not the typical FT shot. The main place I was looking was architecture, the bestsellers at IS look nothing like the bestsellers at FT, much more artistic, most of those shots I would have expected FT to reject.
-
I voted IS as more problems only because of the labor-intense uploading with the stupid, slow working category requirement and the disambu thing that is sometimes really strange in not accepting certain widely-used words and word combinations.
HOWEVER, Istock = 35% of my revenue, FT = 4%.
-
As long as someone takes your image I wouldn't worry too much. Each site has their own marketing strategy. Some of my best sellers on one site are rejected on another, and vice versa.
-
What I like about IS, is they take more artistic pics
Agreed on that. When I was hunting through their photos to see what sells, especially with certain types, I was kinda shocked that many of the better selling shots are quite artistic and not the typical FT shot. The main place I was looking was architecture, the bestsellers at IS look nothing like the bestsellers at FT, much more artistic, most of those shots I would have expected FT to reject.
I guess that people which stands out would always sell so no wonder that bestsellers are not typical for FT.
As long as someone takes your image I wouldn't worry too much. Each site has their own marketing strategy. Some of my best sellers on one site are rejected on another, and vice versa.
Thanks, modellocate, I realize that it could be marketing politic so wouldn't give up and simply try to get better idea of what and where is accepted.
-
I have very little rejection problems with FT.
Regards,
Adelaide
-
As long as someone takes your image I wouldn't worry too much. Each site has their own marketing strategy. Some of my best sellers on one site are rejected on another, and vice versa.
Amen to that
-
Fotolia is a piece of cake for me to get approvals -
iStock on the other hand, I wish they liked my stuff more :) At least the crap I sneak through there usually sells decent. It's just frustrating to spend an hour submitting 10 images only to find that one has been approved, the rest denied. It's still well worth the efforts, with the returns you get over time.
I just want to break 100 images! HAHA That's all I'm asking. I'l keep trying. Takes me so long to submit to istock compared to the other sites.
-
removed
-
iStock is far better for me. I actually reduced my 'folio at FT some time ago due to my 'credits' disappearing and no satisfactory answer given to me as to how it was happening.
I believe the focus on the question is submission - FT is simpler (keyword sorting may be a problem to some, though), but acceptance ratios seem to vary given the statements here.
Other aspects such as earnings, search tool flaws and site functionalities are not (if I understand the poll correctly) in judgement here.
Regards,
Adelaide
-
FT is less problem for me, very consistent approval time and sales.
IS is more picky and unconsistent approval time.
-
Many more rejected photos at IS but many more of the accepted photos sell. Even had one rejected at Fotolia for cropping and is a flamer at IS. Every site will be differant. sometimes it seems it just matters who reviews them. Just do both. IS has strict upload limits also. Usually reviewed in a week or so. Good Luck. 8)
-
I believe the focus on the question is submission - FT is simpler (keyword sorting may be a problem to some, though), but acceptance ratios seem to vary given the statements here.
Other aspects such as earnings, search tool flaws and site functionalities are not (if I understand the poll correctly) in judgement here.
Regards,
Adelaide
sorry.... suppose I should read the entire thread before commenting. I've removed it.
-
In terms of rejections I find iStock tend to be more picky though recently they have been accepting images that quite a few of the other sites rejected.
One positive aspect of iStock is that if their is a minor flaw in a photo they will tell you and you can resubmit, whereas Fotolia rejections are very vague
In terms of uploading FT are a bit easier than iStock.
If your acceptance rate at iStock is about 50% I would recommend disambiguating after your batch has been reviewed
-
I found FT very picky and unpredictable, but it has probably to do with the fact that I do only outdoor photography. Within two weeks they rejected like 90% of what I sent them, and e.g on DT I have 80% acceptance rate. FT even rejected images taken by SS and IS.
But, what is most annoying that their rejection emails list multiple rejection reasons, like out-of-focus, noise, lighting (I don't know if they have the same template in all languages, I got mine in German). Come on, my images my not be brilliant, but it is impossible that they have so many issues, if they had been accepted by IS or SS.
I found it quite disrespectful.
I don't mind SS or IS rejections because I can learn something from them and improve my skills, but FT rejections sometimes can be really pathetic - in some cases it hasn't anything to do with the image itself, but with their thinking that they cannot sell it.
So, I quit uploading to FT, deleted some images that I have uploaded to higher-priced agencies, and I don't regret it. Anyway, I don't think FT is strong in selling outdoor photos, so no big loss. I keep my account there only because maybe I will change my subjects or they will change their profile in the future.
For the time being though, I will keep uploading to IS and SS (because they are consistent in reviewing and have many more sales), but will focus on higher-priced sites.
-
DSLR is obviously an expensive next step, but you could conceivably go with a used Rebel or 30D (if you can find one), then throw on a $70 Plastic Fantastic 50mm 1.4.
I think you meant the Plastic Fantastic 50mm 1.8, but in Europe it costs 99 EUR, which is more than 150 USD :( :( Anyway, I plan to purchase it in the near future.
The 50mm 1.4 is much more expensive, costs about 350 EUR.
-
I voted for Istock - they are definitely the pickiest. The good thing though, unless you keep repeating the same mistakes over and over (edges of your isolation are too feathered or too rough!) you can learn a little something from each and every rejection.
And when it comes to selling photos, in 12 months my best seller on Istock has 407sales, it's my 3rd best seller at FT with 14 - so what does it matter if FT refuses a few with their unsuitable for magazines response? (Note - to be fair, a similar has 19 sales and it's not on IS, so maybe I should combine their sales).
Other than the model releases that were corrupted with V2 - the only specific rejection I ever remember receiving from them was in Jan or Feb for "Morality" issues. They don't accept nudes! And they seemed to be very apologetic for it. Glad to report that some other agencies approved it though, and Zymm didn't mind putting a nude on their front page.
(http://images.quickblogcast.com/97849-90471/ZymmetricalFrontPage.jpg)
-
Would be nice if the question was more clear... is this about the submission process itself, or acceptance/rejection of the inspectors?
-
everywhere... (maybe because of my 4mp camera and matter that for other sites I downsize my noisy pictures but for FT my resolution is marginally accepted so submit images as is).
Wonder am I alone in this or I've just got wrong initial impression and Fotolia is more picky to images than others?
funny, my uncle just joined another service BigStock
which you guys all told him on this site it's the best for starters.
his shots are all shot HiRes and clean as he inspected them larger before submit.
his first submission, he just emailed me
15 submit all large and clean and clear.
15 rejects. all with the same response...
about noise and read the FAQ.
one look at the email, he said, shoot , how can the same advice be for all 15 shots. they were all different types of photos and all different dates. they can't all have the same problems to be rejected.
his first 5 perharps, he said because he has set the quality to lower when he travelled so as to get more shots on his compact flash card.
but when he's home, he set it to the highest next to last setting .
oh, his camera is 8 Mp , SLR the newer E series from Olympus.
any good advice for my uncle, other than forget BigStock?
he wanted to delete the rest which are still wiating for approval but he can't find a delete button ;D
thanks in advance people. you all sound like you know what you're talking about. so i just thought i put this in.
-
funny, my uncle just joined another service BigStock
which you guys all told him on this site it's the best for starters.
his shots are all shot HiRes and clean as he inspected them larger before submit.
his first submission, he just emailed me
15 submit all large and clean and clear.
15 rejects. all with the same response...
about noise and read the FAQ.
SNIP
any good advice for my uncle, other than forget BigStock?
he wanted to delete the rest which are still wiating for approval but he can't find a delete button ;D
BigStock has recently been training new reviewers. Unless he has monitor issues and can't see the noise in his images properly, then it is likely that he got one of these new reveiwers.
Personally I would have him calibrate his monitor and check them again. If he still sees no issues, then he should try resubmitting.
-
his first 5 perharps, he said because he has set the quality to lower when he travelled so as to get more shots on his compact flash card.
but when he's home, he set it to the highest next to last setting .
oh, his camera is 8 Mp , SLR the newer E series from Olympus.
any good advice for my uncle, other than forget BigStock?
Does the camera support RAW? I would assume that any shot taken on any camera in .jpeg that is not taken at the maximum quality settings that the camera supports would be rejected immediately, just a quick check of the exif data tells you that there will be artifact problems, an easy rejection for a reviewer, no need to even spend the time to look at the picture. CF is cheap nowadays, $100 (US), if you look for deals, can at least get you the capacity to take 1000 shots in RAW, or 2000+ at minimum .jpeg compression (superfine on a Canon) on an 8 MP DLSR.