Author Topic: Fotolia rejects for similar photograph (Read 10088 times)

mantonino · « **on:** April 06, 2008, 11:07 »

I can't get over my Fotolia rejects lately.

Normally I can understand what they're saying. But lately it's all the same rejection - "similar photograph already submitted" I understand that they get a lot of the same stuff but how was ONE of these shots accepted? I mean ok - if it were the same thing, fine. But one is metric, one is standard. Obviously designers could have a specific need for CUPS OR LITERS no?

Am I like entirely crazy here or is this "similar photograph" rejection just an easy out when a reviewer (who reviewed 20 images in less than 30 minutes) wants to just hit the button.

I'm afraid this reviewer is always online - do I resubmit? Not resubmit? Protest with Fotolia? This is a joke. I had 18/23 rejected for "similar photograph" in like 20 minutes. That's nuts. Is this going to be common? Because I can't waste time on a site that produces $15 a month for me if I get 70%+ rejected for no good reason.

And the black ink photo - could someone link me to a photo that's "similar" on fotolia? I searched ink splash, black ink, neon ink, purple ink - NOTHING.

Peter · « **Reply #1 on:** April 06, 2008, 11:10 »

first 2 are simmilar. rejection is justified. it does not matter if it is metric or standard... that is not the main subject. main subject is a cup. not its scales. if you didnt say, I wouldnt (and most of buyers) even see the difference....

third one is "Type of photo" but someone probably hit the wrong button.

Peter · « **Reply #2 on:** April 06, 2008, 11:12 »

deleted...

ups... hit wrong button, reply instead of modify

mantonino · « **Reply #3 on:** April 06, 2008, 11:16 »

So if you were illustrating a recipe site you wouldn't know the difference between a cup and a liter? I'm not eating your food. lol

"Type of photo" is another generic "crap" answer. All of Fotolia's are. Let's think about what they are:

"Did not meet our technical specifications" (something's wrong...we're not telling you what but we don't like it.)

"Type of photo" (we couldn't think of a better way of saying we don't want this)

"Similar photograph" (rejected by an inspector who's "sick of isolations")

If they don't want anymore photos, why let us upload?

Peter · « **Reply #4 on:** April 06, 2008, 11:23 »

well, there is Academy board forum on Fotolia.com to ask if you dont understand what is wrong with your image.

If I were reviewer, I would also reject one of those 2 cups as simmilar, and third one as "type". Lets face it - what is it anyway? Some ink in glass of water with strawberries, in poor composition and lightning? I mean, who would possibly need that? I wouldnt accept it even in to a free section! LOL!

Sorry for me being a little bit harsh, but this third image is simply not stock material. It is an amateur snapshot. Nothing more.

First 2 images are decent enough, but simmilar. You should put (in photoshop) both cups as 1 image

maco0708 · « **Reply #5 on:** April 06, 2008, 11:41 »

I agree with mantonino: I think the scales make it quite different and I think there is use for both images. I think a measuring container with cups looks stupid in a European magazine.
I can't comment on the last one since it is too small to judge the technical quality.

I am one of the few people that has the LOWEST acceptance rate on Fotolia from ALL agencies. It's not by much but still. I don't really care anymore, I got used to it. I only get mad when they reject a really nice image that I worked on for a long time.
I think every agency has their faults and we have to learn how to live with them.

Peter · « **Reply #6 on:** April 06, 2008, 11:54 »

Quote from: maco0708 on April 06, 2008, 11:41

I agree with mantonino: I think the scales make it quite different and I think there is use for both images. I think a measuring container with cups looks stupid in a European magazine.
I can't comment on the last one since it is too small to judge the technical quality.

I am one of the few people that has the LOWEST acceptance rate on Fotolia from ALL agencies. It's not by much but still. I don't really care anymore, I got used to it. I only get mad when they reject a really nice image that I worked on for a long time.
I think every agency has their faults and we have to learn how to live with them.

come on! you are talking against Fotolia, and they accepted from you something that nowhere could be accepted:

do you know that such logos are copyrighted? LOL! This is hard braking the rules, and you are talking that fotolia has lower acceptance ratio...

try to upload this on istock, or dreamtime, SS, StockXpert... and tell me if it would pass? Not in a million years!

ichiro17 · « **Reply #7 on:** April 06, 2008, 12:17 »

Fotolia review is crap. Period. They don't explain anything and when you e-mail them for an answer, they give you more censored generic crap. Pardon my language. I am just enraged with that site because it used to be my 3rd best earning site, now its falling out of the top 5.

Crap. Again, I'm a bit angrier than normal. But still - stupid rejections happen all the time there.

Maybe its me though - maybe for 2 years I've been producing technically inferior photos that reviewers at iStock and Shutterstock just don't see.

Hoo-ra for better agencies.

That is my rant.

Seren · « **Reply #8 on:** April 06, 2008, 12:18 »

Quote from: mantonino on April 06, 2008, 11:07

I can't get over my Fotolia rejects lately. Normally I can understand what they're saying. But lately it's all the same rejection - "similar photograph already submitted"

Am I like entirely crazy here or is this "similar photograph" rejection just an easy out when a reviewer (who reviewed 20 images in less than 30 minutes) wants to just hit the button.

Same here, I was submitting shots earlier and they were being reviewed literally as I was submitting them, and loads and loads were knocked back for being too similar! Sometimes designers need different views of the same subject! I've noticed often places like SS and IS I'll get multiple downloads of the same subjects within minutes.

rjmiz · « **Reply #9 on:** April 06, 2008, 12:42 »

I find that if you leave a comment for the reviewer to point out the differences and why you uploaded both, you stand a better chance.

The MIZ

PS - Most of the time they are in a hurry to get on to the next image and don't initially see the differences on their own.

maco0708 · « **Reply #10 on:** April 06, 2008, 12:47 »

Quote from: Chode on April 06, 2008, 11:54

Quote from: maco0708 on April 06, 2008, 11:41
I agree with mantonino: I think the scales make it quite different and I think there is use for both images. I think a measuring container with cups looks stupid in a European magazine.
I can't comment on the last one since it is too small to judge the technical quality.

I am one of the few people that has the LOWEST acceptance rate on Fotolia from ALL agencies. It's not by much but still. I don't really care anymore, I got used to it. I only get mad when they reject a really nice image that I worked on for a long time.
I think every agency has their faults and we have to learn how to live with them.

come on! you are talking against Fotolia, and they accepted from you something that nowhere could be accepted:

do you know that such logos are copyrighted? LOL! This is hard braking the rules, and you are talking that fotolia has lower acceptance ratio...

try to upload this on istock, or dreamtime, SS, StockXpert... and tell me if it would pass? Not in a million years!

You are right about my image. It should not have been approved and it was indeed rejected at IS,.... For my defense, it was in the first 10 images that I uploaded almost 2 years ago. But it just shows that fotolia reviewer made a mistake.

fullvalue · « **Reply #11 on:** April 06, 2008, 13:03 »

I have yet to figure Fotolia out. I get a lot of rejections from them. Files that are accepted everywhere else? They rejected a series of model released construction photos saying "we don't need this subject matter." OK Silly me. I also get a lot of "too similar or subject matter rejections."

I went and searched their site once to see how many of this particular subject they had. ONE!

As a designer, they're out of their mind if you think I'd take the time to change the scales. I'd find one more suitable to my needs.

I do find that the faster they get "inspected" the faster they get "rejected". Coincidence?

mantonino · « **Reply #12 on:** April 06, 2008, 15:38 »

So I went out. I thought about this. Time to man up - I was wrong. Not on the cups/liters, which I think *would* look stupid to use the wrong one anywhere but in the US. I think the "similar photograph" rejection was probably ok on almost all my images.

It dawned on me why too - NOOBSYNDROME. When people get their first camera they run out to take photos of sunsets, babies, flowers eyes, feet and sunsets. Again. I'm shooting too many "sunsets" (images that people already have) and I should continue to grow past that and shoot something good.

I do hate the generic rejections. I didn't know I could leave a note for Fotolia inspectors.

fotografer · « **Reply #13 on:** April 06, 2008, 15:45 »

I also agree that both should have been accepted. Different countries use different types of measurements.

Quote from: maco0708 on April 06, 2008, 11:41

I agree with mantonino: I think the scales make it quite different and I think there is use for both images. I think a measuring container with cups looks stupid in a European magazine.
I can't comment on the last one since it is too small to judge the technical quality.

I am one of the few people that has the LOWEST acceptance rate on Fotolia from ALL agencies. It's not by much but still. I don't really care anymore, I got used to it. I only get mad when they reject a really nice image that I worked on for a long time.
I think every agency has their faults and we have to learn how to live with them.

Secretariat · « **Reply #14 on:** April 06, 2008, 17:29 »

I too agree that the first two should have been accepted. As for the last one, I think the strawberries will have to go, especially if theyre any other color than red as here (Im thinking you played with the colors here), as they mess up the composition: what are you supposed to look at, the strawberries or the ink?

That said, I too agree that fotolias rejection reasons are bad - in fact, the worst ive seen. But at the end of the day, its their privilege to reject and its not their job to teach us how to be better photographers. Their rejections are either unhelpful or meaningless but I cant really blame them - its their site, not ours. I think - and I suppose its only natural - that we tend to focus on yourselves and the buyers and that whole relationship, and forget about the "middle man" or the distributor.

madelaide · « **Reply #15 on:** April 06, 2008, 19:22 »

Quote from: Chode on April 06, 2008, 11:10

first 2 are simmilar. rejection is justified. it does not matter if it is metric or standard... that is not the main subject. main subject is a cup. not its scales. if you didnt say, I wouldnt (and most of buyers) even see the difference....

I disagree with you Chode, obviously different scales cater different clients. Maybe that wasn't obvious (given that FT ignores description, if I am not confused), but mantonino may have them approved if requesting a review.

Regards,
Adelaide

mantonino · « **Reply #16 on:** April 06, 2008, 19:24 »

The point on the third wasn't whether it was a good image or not. lol The point was it was rejected for "similar photograph" Which means someone just got into a pattern of hitting that button or something. lol

Doesn't matter - 33/48 on SS approved! Onward, upward.

I may resubmit the metric cup - not sure yet. I don't usually resubmit anything.

UncleGene · « **Reply #17 on:** April 06, 2008, 20:54 »

My impression is that FT has two types of inspectors: crazy and dumb. Former reject everything, latter - accept everything; and lately they fired most of dumb ones....

I have photos rejected almost everywhere, and accepted at FT; but acceptance rate lately goes very close to zero (going up on all other sites)

Seren · « **Reply #18 on:** April 08, 2008, 08:31 »

Quote from: UncleGene on April 06, 2008, 20:54

My impression is that FT has two types of inspectors: crazy and dumb. Former reject everything, latter - accept everything; and lately they fired most of dumb ones....

I have photos rejected almost everywhere, and accepted at FT; but acceptance rate lately goes very close to zero (going up on all other sites)

I got hit by the crazies again. Just rejected about 25 images in the space of under one minute (that's what time the rejection notices say) for almost exactlym alternately "quality, similar, quality, similar, quality..."!

They were shot with my DSLR on ISO100... good English lighting... unusual subject. I don't get it!

phildate · « **Reply #19 on:** April 08, 2008, 10:10 »

I have started getting some shots rejected for "Too Similar" but there is no point worrying about it, even if we as the contributor know there was a difference between the shots. I tut and move on.

fotoKmyst · « **Reply #20 on:** April 08, 2008, 13:26 »

Quote from: mantonino on April 06, 2008, 11:07

I can't get over my Fotolia rejects lately.

Am I like entirely crazy here or is this "similar photograph" rejection just an easy out when a reviewer (who reviewed 20 images in less than 30 minutes) wants to just hit the button.

I'm afraid this reviewer is always online - do I resubmit? Not resubmit? Protest with Fotolia? This is a joke. I had 18/23 rejected for "similar photograph" in like 20 minutes.

wow , thanks mantonino, i feel better already,

i just joined and i got 11.76% approved rate.
i was crapping when i saw 23/25 rejected with 1 free accepted
. almost quit that night.

must be the same reviewer who hit me with that too. 15 minutes.
irony is that one of the shots he rejected, he selected another of the same setting only slight different.
but he wrote me saying for the first, "not material for selling".
so how was the other material for selling? LOL

strange world this business.

Peter · « **Reply #21 on:** April 08, 2008, 13:59 »

can we see some of those images?

madelaide · « **Reply #22 on:** April 08, 2008, 16:35 »

Quote from: UncleGene on April 06, 2008, 20:54

My impression is that FT has two types of inspectors: crazy and dumb. Former reject everything, latter - accept everything; and lately they fired most of dumb ones....

The dumb one is often assigned to me.

123RF is much tougher on similars for me.

Regards,
Adelaide

DanP68 · « **Reply #23 on:** April 09, 2008, 00:46 »

I never have any of these problems with Fotolia. I find they have an acceptance rate about 10-15% higher than SS.

I think Chode is right. And he should know, because he has 1 more eye than the rest of you do.

Some of the images they accept would never pass inspection at SS, DT, and IS. If you are having a lot of problems getting accepted at Fotolia, you need to look hard at the quality of your images and see what can be improved.

Alatriste · « **Reply #24 on:** April 09, 2008, 04:52 »

In the past, my accpetance ratio in fotolia and SS was similar. Now, AR in SS has rised and fotolia is almost the same.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Fotolia rejects for similar photograph (Read 10088 times)

mantonino

Peter

Peter

mantonino

Peter

maco0708

Peter

ichiro17

Seren

rjmiz

maco0708

fullvalue

mantonino

fotografer

Secretariat

madelaide

mantonino

UncleGene

Seren

phildate

fotoKmyst

Peter

madelaide

DanP68

Alatriste

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results