Seems like they now only want one image for each subject. So if your batch has an image of a laptop, and an image that has a laptop and a phone, they'll reject one saying they're too similar.

They tightening up a bit?  New reviewer?

Sorry was thinking it was about DT...

As a first proposal I sent them a batch of 10 pictures and they accepted four of the same place (Trafalgar square), so I don't think they are limiting access to one photo per subject.

I think Fotolia has tightened up quite a bit on their reviewing in the last two months.

Mark

I noticed more rejections in the last month or so.  I had a pretty good acceptance rate at Fotolia until recently.  Hopefully this is temporary.

The few images I have submitted in the past weeks were approved, but the amount isn't significant for any stats.

Regards,
Adelaide

Fotolia take almost everything that I throw at them as do SS, DT, StockXpert, and BS but IS are getting extremely picky lately.
Sales are doing very well everywhere else  at the moment but IS have gone from averaging about 40 dl's a day to 20 a day which even the price increase doesn't make up for the loss. I almost  became exclusive at IS but find it depressing to even look at my stats there now and I had such high hopes for them.
I've recently started uploading to BS which is proving very good and is starting to make up for the loss in earnings at IS. 

9 out of 9 rejected today    - the "type of photo" & "did not reach the desired level of aesthetic quality"... I am at a complete loss... Never happened like this before, and what's that with "aesthetic quality" - define it for me please... I mean, I can understand "technical quality", but what's "aesthetic quality", and how is it different from "type of photo" and "overabundant" rejection reasons
.. Argghh!

I've had a good acceptance rate so far this year, 6% of my photos were rejected, BUT the rejected photos are some of my bestsellers at Shutterstock and iStockphoto. I had one photo rejected for "did not reach the desired level of aesthetic quality". That specific photo has had 25 downloads at SS and 7 downloads at IS. I define "did not reach the desired level of aesthetic quality" as "I the reviewer do not personally like this image", so do not allow that to bother you at all.

Thanks for support

... Frustrating though because reviewers didn't even bother to see if there are any other images of frozen Niagara Falls in winter before rejecting for "aesthetic quality"... and you know how many there are? According to the keywords search - ONE! What happened to FT?

9 out of 9 rejected today    - the "type of photo" & "did not reach the desired level of aesthetic quality"... I am at a complete loss... Never happened like this before, and what's that with "aesthetic quality" - define it for me please... I mean, I can understand "technical quality", but what's "aesthetic quality", and how is it different from "type of photo" and "overabundant" rejection reasons
.. Argghh!

The way I take the "aesthetic quality" rejection is that the image is one where there is nothing really wrong, but that there is simply nothing that really makes the photo stand out. I don't get too bent out of shape on this one as I see it as a purely judgment call from the reviewer and maybe we simply see the image a little bit differently. I much prefer getting that rejection to the "type of image" rejections where I can see hundreds of ways to use a photo. Of course, I don't like any rejections, but I'm starting to get used to them.

Had a 98% acceptance until 1 month ago. They hired Attila who now seems to know "what is and is not stock". He / she has shot down about 50% of my submissions. Will likely cease uploading there until they get re-hired back at StockXpert 

Yes, I also met Attila today, everything rejected, while I've had a 92% acceptance rate (until today).

And I thought it was only me ! Nine rejected out of ten last week-end. The good part is that Attila did it only a few hours after I uploaded them. I still wonder why he kept that one...

Attila is a very busy executioner...chop off head, kick out of way, next victim in place, repeat...

25 rejections in a row before gettinig a gift of 3 approvals which were very simple Valentine Illustrations as oppose to photos ... ugggggggggggggggghhhhhhhh

Mark

"The photographs in the Fotolia database are intended for sale as illustration of brochures, magazines, websites, and presentations. Your photographic work is excellent but does not meet the needs of the Fotolia customer base."

...well no sh*# Sherlock...I've re-dubbed the reviewer from "Atilla-the-Hun" to "Fotila-the-None"...this is really getting goofy...FOTOLIA, please make sure your reviewer is looking through the proper end of the microscope.

In last 3 days I had:

154 uploaded, 151 accepted, 3 rejected. Hm...

it is not Fotolia, it is your photos, I guess.

with FT i have had three problems: rejections due to bad lightning. they were right, i was wrong. No more rejections due to bad lightning. rejections of backgrounds: I can't predict and I can't understand how they evaluate which background is suitable for them and which is not. Still most are accepted. Third is low payments per dl. If StockXpert will start producing much more dls than FT, I will stop uploading to FT because of the low payments per dl. their pricing is not fair.

I actually went off a little bit on FT a couple of months ago in an email to them. Between the hours of 11 and 5 (EST) I had a 10% approval ratio. Everything reviewed outside of that time frame had about and 85-90% acceptance ratio. The discrepancy even included images from the same batches. I made a very polite (if you believe that) suggestion that they make sure their reviewers were on the same page and that anyone rejecting photos arbitrarily to clean up his backlog be dealt with in a stern manner. Don't know if they really paid any attention, but my rejections have been somewhat more consistent and predictable in the last month or so.

In last 3 days I had:

154 uploaded, 151 accepted, 3 rejected. Hm...

it is not Fotolia, it is your photos, I guess.

This remark comes across as elitist. Did you intend it to sound this way?

The reason I started this topic is because I've had close to a very high acceptance rate (90-100%?) at Fotolia over the past several months. Fotolia is my third highest earner of 11 sites and I like them.

However, a few weeks ago, I started getting random high rejections (50%+) on certain batches. Mostly for "similar images". While the images may have been similar in subject, they were not just a slight different angle of the same subject. They were two completely different scenes with similar objects.

Since the rejections seemed inconsistent from batch to batch my guess is they have a new reviewer.

He lives on the blood of submitters and he can only be satisfied by a number of weird and queer rejects like this is not commercial. Some days he's around DT, some days he's around SS, some days around FT.

He's been known to haunt StockXpert submitters too, saying "Thank you, but we're not looking for this type of image".

Regards,
Adelaide

anonymus, for all my new images  I made (since 3 months ago) I am not exclusive on fotolia anymore.

I was about 90-95% acceptance rate on FT until today, all 15 rejected for Type of Photograph. Nearly all were approved on SS/IS/StockXpert/DT. Don't have much motivation to upload there since the income is low and uploading is a bit of a pain. Maybe the price increase will help motivate me.

anonymus, for all my new images  I made (since 3 months ago) I am not exclusive on fotolia anymore.

Well, you sure used to rave about how cool it was to be exclusive there...must not have worked out...

My point being (as Nazdravie commented earlier), your comment simply came off as snotty...

Wow - whats up at FT? Normally don't get many rejections.

Just had six rejected for 'non-conformity', does this look so bad for stock?

Wow !!! Real sorry about your rejection... may be they have a new rule - reject everything that looks like water or flood filter?

I'm not uploading to FT for now...

I don't feel so bad now.  I'm a digital fractal designer.  I used to have pretty good approval rating.  The past few months have been horrendous and I'm lucky to get maybe 1 out of a batch of 10 approved.  Over and over 10 out of 10 rejected for a variety of reasons.   And these 'rejections' are doing fabulous on all the other Microstock sites I submit to, including SS.

I'm just on the fence with them.  I used to like them, now I dread them.  All the work to upload just to keep getting rejected over and over.  Not to mention their uploading is buggy and the descriptions are now showing up as titles.    I don't know what has happened to them, but I don't like it.  If it keeps up, considering the poor earnings per sale, I wouldn't be uploading there anymore.

That's strange. Fotolia has been pretty good to me (although the % of accepted images is the lowest) - but the reviews a fair if a bit biased toward "clean and pure" sometimes, and overall my acceptance rate is increasing rather than decreasing.

I can't believe your photo was rejected ...

I'm about ready to give up submitting to FT

I agree that it is ridiculous the apple shot was rejected.  I like it a lot, at least at the resolution we have.

However Mark, I think it is time you stop talking about who you aren't going to upload to anymore because of rejections, and up your game.  I don't mean this to sound harsh.  But a lot of us did our best to persuade you to get a DSLR now rather than later, and offered advice on how to get a cheap set up (used Rebel, plus $79 50mm 1.4 and you are nicely set up).

That you are still receiving mass rejections at Fotolia means it is time to get more serious about the quality of your images and the equipment you use to produce them.  I know you are working hard to get into Shutterstock, and I applaud it.  But leaving Fotolia because of rejections seems bizarre.  Didn't you write you are having the same problems at Dreamstime?  You can join places like MostPhotos and FeaturePics and get images accepted, but 10 of those sites will not replace the sales of 1 Fotolia, or 1 Dreamstime.

You also need to be very careful with your rejection rate at Dreamstime.  The ratio is used as part of the search algorithm, which means the more images you get rejected, the farther down you will be in search results.  It's important you either get a higher acceptance rate, or stop uploading until you have the issues ironed out.

Please use all of us for advice and critique.  My advice right now is to concentrate on your quality, and not uploading to new places.  Best of luck.

Yep, it happens from site to site now and then.  I remember StockXpert going through a similar rejection spree a few months ago when they had that massive backlog.  All they do is alienate submitters when they do stuff like that.

However if you are being rejected at Fotolia, Dreamstime, and Shutterstock, then you aren't talking about 1 reviewer anymore.  I've been there, I know what a horrible feeling it is.  You just have to get better, there is no other way.

Honestly I did not realize how much noise my Panasonic Lumix FZ20 produced until I worked with my 30D for a while, and then went back to use the Lumix for a few shoots.  Even with good exposure, there are still some dark areas with the 30D which need to be cleaned up.  But once you do it enough times, you pretty much know where to find the noise and how to get rid of it.

I think that I will stop uploading to Fotolia for a while. My last batch (7 pics) were accepted 100% at Dreamstime and refused 100% at Fotolia.

In the last few weeks, acceptance ratio is about 15 to 20 % at Fotolia and the same pictures produce an acceptance ratio of about 60 to 75 % at Dreamstime

I'll start uploading to them again when I hear from you that it's better, I did the same thing when StockExpert was rejecting almost everything.

Though I'm yet a beginner, I've run into Atilla from the start.  I still have a 100% acceptance rate at DT going, but only 40% at FT, incidentally every picture but 1 that contains a sky has been rejected (there is no noise however, the one that was accepted it quite unique and has decent application for travel agencies), but every picture that has no sky has been accepted, usually very rapidly (I had one accepted in 30 minutes the other day).  Until the reports of Atilla subside somewhat I'll probably hold off on uploading any shots of any type that contain a sky to FT, might as well wait until the acceptance chance goes up instead of having them be rejected right away.  All have been for the "type of photograph, does not fit customers needs" reason, though some definitely have a use.  Power plants seem to have an application (especially the clean coal power niche that is barely represented) for some customers, another was a shot of the GA state capitol that was definitely better than what they have, seems that there could be a use for that in an election year, another was a shot of an Olympic torch, which they have almost none of, and it is an Olympics year.  Hmmph, oh well, they want isolated objects, they get isolated objects.

Mark - just want to join the chorus that the money spend on a better PnS to hold you over to a DSLR is not a wise investment.  Many bring up how cheaply you can get a DSLR and nifty fifty, unlike a PnS though that isn't nearly enough for most things.  Memory, spare batteries (Canon batteries can run $50 each), filters (need UV and circular polarizers), tripods, flashes, remote shutter releases, pc or hotshoe cables (or pocket wizards  ), bags, sensor cleaning kits, add up to a lot of money, and no other decent lens comes close to a 50 in affordability, the next closest will cost more than the body.  Though a 50 can do a lot, there is a lot that it cannot do.  I'm sure that for most here, aside from the few that have 5D's and greater and small collections of everything else, for the equipment that they use regularly, their body is less than 1/5th the cost of their equipment.  It is 1/5th of mine, and I have serious gaps in my lens coverage and could use a second flash, which would probably bring it closer to 1/8th or less of the cost of my collection, and my setup is still fairly rudimentary, though still pretty capable.  A decent setup with a XT body that has all the shooting capabilities of a 10X PnS will run in the neighborhood of $2000-3000, though it will outperform it in every respect by a mile...but you'll need a flash (250+), a macro lens (300+), a WA lens (400+), a standard lens (80+), a tele lens (600+) and all the other little crap that goes with it, in addition to the body, might as well start building the collection with any money you have now, instead of getting something that pretty much will have no use once you upgrade.

I have had 3 refused out of my last 250 uploads.  I never upload more than a few at a time.  Maybe that is the answer, don't overwhelm them with huge batches. Reviewing is usually done in a couple of hours so it's easy to hold the images back until the first batch is reviewed.

Quote from: mwp1969 on February 03, 2008, 00:27

I can't believe your photo was rejected ...

I'm about ready to give up submitting to FT

I agree that it is ridiculous the apple shot was rejected.  I like it a lot, at least at the resolution we have.

However Mark, I think it is time you stop talking about who you aren't going to upload to anymore because of rejections, and up your game.  I don't mean this to sound harsh.  But a lot of us did our best to persuade you to get a DSLR now rather than later, and offered advice on how to get a cheap set up (used Rebel, plus $79 50mm 1.4 and you are nicely set up).

That you are still receiving mass rejections at Fotolia means it is time to get more serious about the quality of your images and the equipment you use to produce them.  I know you are working hard to get into Shutterstock, and I applaud it.  But leaving Fotolia because of rejections seems bizarre.  Didn't you write you are having the same problems at Dreamstime?  You can join places like MostPhotos and FeaturePics and get images accepted, but 10 of those sites will not replace the sales of 1 Fotolia, or 1 Dreamstime.

You also need to be very careful with your rejection rate at Dreamstime.  The ratio is used as part of the search algorithm, which means the more images you get rejected, the farther down you will be in search results.  It's important you either get a higher acceptance rate, or stop uploading until you have the issues ironed out.

Please use all of us for advice and critique.  My advice right now is to concentrate on your quality, and not uploading to new places.  Best of luck.

DanP68,

As always, I do appreciate your input. I have been concentrating on quality. The DSLR will come, as previously stated at the link graciously provided by NAZ, by hopefully May. By my waiting I hope to buy a level up above the low end DSLRs.

Regarding your comments regarding my approval rate: It has increased signifiantly at DT since that last discussion. DT continues to be one of my favorite sites and I am doing well there

I've merely been commenting on the rejections at FT since it seemed really strange for me to start getting "mass rejections" when my skills and photos have only been getting better.


Mark

You also need to be very careful with your rejection rate at Dreamstime.  The ratio is used as part of the search algorithm, which means the more images you get rejected, the farther down you will be in search results.  It's important you either get a higher acceptance rate, or stop uploading until you have the issues ironed out.

WOW! I must have missed some important memo DanP68, could you please provide more info on this??? ... please please please...

Is this from DT's official statement? Wow, if this is so - then to what extent does the ratio matter, and ... wow... then it'd mean a whole different upload approach for DT ...

Though I'm yet a beginner, I've run into Atilla from the start.  I still have a 100% acceptance rate at DT going, but only 40% at FT, incidentally every picture but 1 that contains a sky has been rejected (there is no noise however, the one that was accepted it quite unique and has decent application for travel agencies), but every picture that has no sky has been accepted, usually very rapidly (I had one accepted in 30 minutes the other day).  Until the reports of Atilla subside somewhat I'll probably hold off on uploading any shots of any type that contain a sky to FT, might as well wait until the acceptance chance goes up instead of having them be rejected right away.  All have been for the "type of photograph, does not fit customers needs" reason, though some definitely have a use.  Power plants seem to have an application (especially the clean coal power niche that is barely represented) for some customers, another was a shot of the GA state capitol that was definitely better than what they have, seems that there could be a use for that in an election year, another was a shot of an Olympic torch, which they have almost none of, and it is an Olympics year.  Hmmph, oh well, they want isolated objects, they get isolated objects.

Mark - just want to join the chorus that the money spend on a better PnS to hold you over to a DSLR is not a wise investment.  Many bring up how cheaply you can get a DSLR and nifty fifty, unlike a PnS though that isn't nearly enough for most things.  Memory, spare batteries (Canon batteries can run $50 each), filters (need UV and circular polarizers), tripods, flashes, remote shutter releases, pc or hotshoe cables (or pocket wizards  ), bags, sensor cleaning kits, add up to a lot of money, and no other decent lens comes close to a 50 in affordability, the next closest will cost more than the body.  Though a 50 can do a lot, there is a lot that it cannot do.  I'm sure that for most here, aside from the few that have 5D's and greater and small collections of everything else, for the equipment that they use regularly, their body is less than 1/5th the cost of their equipment.  It is 1/5th of mine, and I have serious gaps in my lens coverage and could use a second flash, which would probably bring it closer to 1/8th or less of the cost of my collection, and my setup is still fairly rudimentary, though still pretty capable.  A decent setup with a XT body that has all the shooting capabilities of a 10X PnS will run in the neighborhood of $2000-3000, though it will outperform it in every respect by a mile...but you'll need a flash (250+), a macro lens (300+), a WA lens (400+), a standard lens (80+), a tele lens (600+) and all the other little crap that goes with it, in addition to the body, might as well start building the collection with any money you have now, instead of getting something that pretty much will have no use once you upgrade.

Waldo4,

I appreciate your time and effort for all of the very valuable pricing and cost advice. As I stated on a different thread ...  I will ALWAYS have a need for quality pocket-size camera. I captured a shot of an overturned diesel truck the other day just by making sure I have a coat pocket size camera with me all the time.

My next step is DSLR Body + Lenses and I'm leaning towards Canon. I am very grateful for all of the suggestions about body's and lenses as I have never shot that type of camera. Obviously it is the next logical step for me with equipment.

The money and costs of being a great stock photographer are only a minor concern of mine at the moment ...

Its more about developing my skills to the point of where I feel I deserve it. So that being said ... I've been putting in my time and efforts into learning everything I can through books, manual, tutorials, forums. I've been learning about composition, lighting, manual controls, exposure, equipment, what sells, what doesn't, why it sells, why it doesn't ... everything.

This was a bit off topic for this thread but I wanted to respond to your response in the lower half of your post above ... Thanks !



Back on Thread Topic

Wasn't FT running some sort of contest that started when the hit 3 million images ... I think it was based on getting the most images approved in a certain amount of time. This may have created part of the problem with getting approvals that we've been seeing lately.

Mark

I have had 3 refused out of my last 250 uploads.  I never upload more than a few at a time.  Maybe that is the answer, don't overwhelm them with huge batches. Reviewing is usually done in a couple of hours so it's easy to hold the images back until the first batch is reviewed.

I like this idea of trying small batches to them ... I will give it a try as they do usually review within twelve hours ...

Mark

fotolia has the most easiest criteria. they accept almost anything. I think they should be even more strict in terms of image quality such as - no acceptance for images taken by compact camera, due to poor lens quality, especialy purple fringing. Like istock.

Most easiest criteria ?
Why then does the majority of people report their worst acceptance ratio with fotolia ?
They reject canon 5d mk II images so don't worry about the compact cameras I'm sure not many get through.

Either you are a fantastic photographer that's cracked the fotolia code or your a fisherman looking for bites (looks like you got a few) 

A few things:

1) As far as speed, I have OLD images uploaded to FT so I think they must work like Dreamstime in a way - where your reviews can be lightning quick if you upload them and don't push them through for a week or two.  If you upload and then 2 hrs later push them, you may wait a day or two.

2) As far as the actual reviews, FT was KILLING me last year.  I stopped pushing there entirely with about 500 images online.  Well new year, new push so I tried.  I submitted 1100 images last month and just over 900 were accepted!  So I'm pleased with that - but the images were also better as I went along so ... I hope that had something to do with it.

I also just had 4 photos rejected for "None Conformity" and one for "Artistic Photograph"