Next question...how do you insert images from your computor on the forum??

Im sure loads of people share your frustration including me. All I can think is trying to be positive is that fotolia feel like they have so many online files now that they are getting much stricter as they want more unique images. If thats not then case then I dont no

Believe whoever is reviewing these images would possibly be harmed very badly...honestly I'd delete my account if I didn't have unpaid cash on there and it's sitting at $47.00. I don't know if you close your account rather they would go ahead and give what they owe you or not...

Yes they give you the money. I closed my account once 1 year ago and they gave me the money. They even asked why I wanted to quit. At this time the images wasn't showing under all the keywords. Now I'm back with them with less success than before.

Many people are doing great there, they are all there since a while. You probably can't doing well without having a higher canister. I get 1.32 for a L size and 1.98 for a XXL  ... This with 40% of subs

I think you can't post your pics from fotolia here because they don't have normal link. If you want to put here images from some other site, you have to use "reply" button and not "quick reply" form (if you use it anyway).
So, open the site from which you want to put the image, open the page with the image, right click on the image, choose "copy image location" if you use Firefox, or choose "copy shortcut" if you use IE.
Than, when you are in reply form, find "insert image" button, click it, and this way you will add this
Now, paste the link of the image between
It should look like this:  

Fotolia rejects many of my images as well. By now I am used to it and it doesn't bother me much. I sort of expect it. On the other hand they are a top earner for me. You get fewer images past the reviewers, but each one is worth it. I think I prefer that to the many sites that takes anything and sell nothing.

Being only a few months into this, I've had to learn how to manage the aggravation of rejections that I don't agree with.  I think you simply have to submit to several sites, which you want to do anyway if you hope to make more than bus fare. 

I remember a couple of weeks ago I submitted 3 photos (let's call them A, B, and C) to SS,DT and StockXpert at the same time.   SS accepted A and B,  rejected  C.   DT accepted C, rejected A and B.   StockXpert acccepted A and C but said B needed a property release.  I am not making this up. 

Once you realize it's all a bit crazy, it won't bother you as much.   If this were real life,  we'd be talking to actual people who would explain to us why they don't think they can sell a particular product we've made.  But in this Bizzarro-world of dot-com insanity we have disinterested reviewers, somewhere, with eyes glazing over as they click accept or reject on thousands upon thousands of photos submitted by unknown photographers who are never allowed to meet actual customers, but are supposed to keep guessing what the market actually wants.

I'm not new to the stock agencies...I've been doing this since 2007..I'm currently on 11 microstock sites including fotolia and two macro stock sites so this isn't new to me...They are the only stock agency that I constantly get rejections from...always 1 or 2 make it through but not the best ones. I've just about decided I'm going to remove myself from their site..they aren't worth the effort of uploading. I think I have to wait 90 days since the last upload. Out of the 15 two were accepted. I'm still waiting on a review of my images and some real reason's from Fotolia forum...so far no response by any one, not even other photographers.

That one made me smile...lol....I withdrew my photos from Crestock within the first month I joined...Fotolia is getting as bad or worse than Crestock and is ending up with the same bad reputation. Fotolia is going to ring it's own neck just like Crestock.  You know what's kinda funny about it all...with the economy the way it is you'd thik they would want to increase their data base.

If you don't like FT don't submit your work there. Each of us have our "horror site".
Why aggravate yourself to get FT to "want" your photos? Go where your images are getting approved. Either that, or shoot something else. Most times, if your images are well exposed, well composed, but rejected continually. It's more than you're giving them images they don't need.

I've decided that I don't need the frustration.....I think I have to wait 90 days to delete the photos that were recently accepted..so in 90 days I'm gonna ask for what they owe me and close the account...Maybe I'll get lucky and I'll sell ONE or TWO more pictures in the mean time.......lol....I really doubt it.

So what was the outcome?

Those silly rejections. I have also cancelled my account and I am happy

But they would make much more if their reviewers had some real world experience what sells and what not.

Or at least a consistent and meaningful application of what is technically and "aesthetically" acceptable.

Quote from: Perry on August 10, 2009, 10:21

But they would make much more if their reviewers had some real world experience what sells and what not.

Or at least a consistent and meaningful application of what is technically and "aesthetically" acceptable.

I agree KB.  It is the inconsistency that is hardest for me to deal with.  It's impossible to improve or know what to select to upload there because there is no discernible pattern to the rejections.

In my experience, FT just favours photos with people in them. People doing things. Nothing more, nothing less.

I quit reading rejection notices, and take them as "if you don't want them, fine - it's your loss". Roughly 90% of those rejected images had no people in it. The reasons stated made (makes) no sense at all, so I can relate with you there. Those notices don't teach you anything, except that they don't want them. They're as meaningless, perhaps, as some of the - beyond reasonable doubt - flawed, images I've submitted and got approved, featuring people.

I've tried resubmitting rejected images, but FT got a pretty fail-safe system in spotting previously rejected images, and they will be rejected again.

I guess it's Fotolia's way of diversifying themselves from their competition. Sure, the "nobody" images sell elsewhere, but FT seems to have a specific clientele, favouring images with people in them, and they serve me well for those images.

I can't get anything approved that remotely looks like a background, but I had one squeak through a while ago (someone likely was fired for that one)  and it happens to sell surprisingly well.

Yes the "too similar" rejection is hurting the photographer who maybe wants to submit 2-3 definate variations of a theme. As normally FT will only select one. It makes it very hard to build up a decent portfolio with only single images. Also makes the shoot less cost effective!

Peter, you're always the first to say this in every rejection thread.

i dont bother to post to ft anymore, and BigStock has gotten almost as bad with these sorts of rejects -- dt is more realistic.

i dont try t figure it out-- if i upload to an agency, i send them all of each batch, and they can accept it or not

steve

I quit uploading at FT earlier this year, because I felt it was too much wasted effort for a 50% approval ratio.

However, with the recent drop in DT sales, FT climbed solidly into my #3 best earning site (despite their having the fewest of my images of any agency). So I started UL'ing there again recently.

Oh, how I long for the days of a 50% AR!  Now I'm seeing more like 10%-20%, and that is simply unacceptable.

I've been doing stock for over 3 years. I''m submitting images to FT that have been accepted everywhere else and have sold well on at least 2 of IS, SS, and DT.

I understand that my "type" of images are not the ones that FT prefers. But it's clear from my own sales on FT that they are images that do sell there. So what in the world do they intend to gain by rejecting 80%-90% of them?

Perhaps I'm not alone in feeling this way. I was just submitting images, and 4 of the 5 were being rejected while I continued to submit more! It seems like there are so few images being uploaded that reviewers are just waiting for images to be submitted (so they can reject them?). 

Congratulations, Dan! 

But the only thing I find surprising is that you had a problem with rejections before. Those are a type of images I thought FT likes, so while perhaps 100% acceptance is a bit surprising, it isn't surprising that most all of them would be accepted.

Nice job. 

Congratulations, Dan! 

But the only thing I find surprising is that you had a problem with rejections before. Those are a type of images I thought FT likes, so while perhaps 100% acceptance is a bit surprising, it isn't surprising that most all of them would be accepted.

Nice job. 

Hey KB... yeah.. it's funny that all my latest (and accepted) images were shot in my new studio. All the shots before weren't and I have A LOT of rejections! I was also focusing on more artistic photographs but I want to start earning some serious money so I'm shooting more stock-related photographs now!

Go to "My Files" at the bottom of the list on the right there is a link that says "Show Deleted Files". Click there and the files will appear in the mix with your regular files. They will have a red ball to indicate that they were rejected/deleted.

I'm always amazed when reading these fotolia-rejection posts, since my acceptance ratio there is (and has always been) 90%.  Do I have a secret?  May-be, but I don't know which one it would be.  So here's my uploading "technique" :  my uploads are 20 to 25 images per week, uploaded during the weekend, and ALWAYS in a complete variety of subjects.  NEVER more than 2 images of the same shoot.  About 15% has people in it, not because FT doesn't like people, but because I don't have that many people shots.
I don't read my rejection reasons, but after a look at my collection of FT rejects, I can say that they're mainly :  backgrounds, graphics, infrared images, landscapes and flowers, and darker images.  In all other cases, the images were also rejected by other sites, so they must've been really bad.  Oh, and one other thing :  Fotolia does not like sad or distressing images (about war, death, suicide ... unless it's a halloween picture).
Also :  all images are keyworded the Fotolia-way, so with the 7 main keywords at front.
Last remark :  my absolute rank = 138, my relative rank = 99.
Now you tell me :  where's the secret?  Certainly NOT the image quality, which is definitely not superior to the forum members with lots of rejects.  Subject matter?  I live in Europe, which influences subject matter of course and Fotolia's origin is European. 
Also :  Fotolia is my second best seller.  I have sent requests to FT about changing the EL value of ALL my images (I did that twice in a year), and they reacted positively whithin 4 days.  So Fotolia likes me, and I like Fotolia. 
Do I have a secret?  Tell me which one!

Hi Anyka
I found your secret! You live in Europe and you shoot great European photos
Smiling Jack

I can't complain about Fotolia rejections. But as I do mostly 3D stuff this is not really comparable to photography. But it seems to be a natural law for microstock sites that bestsellers at site A will be recjected at site B and vice versa. Just scratch your head and move on.

And this is the very reason why I reject exclusivity at one single site. They might review their review standards, and all of a sudden you will have most or your images rejected and can do nothing about it.

Regards,
Oliver

has anyone gotten this rejection reason from ft? "Your photographic work is excellent but does not meet the needs of the Fotolia customer base."

it's almost like a compliment isn't it? from ft who likes to ridicule our work as not aesthetically pleasing. there's a first for everything.

has anyone gotten this rejection reason from ft? "Your photographic work is excellent but does not meet the needs of the Fotolia customer base."

it's almost like a compliment isn't it? from ft who likes to ridicule our work as not aesthetically pleasing. there's a first for everything.

no i don't think it's meant to ridicule your work. i usually get pretty close to 100% approval with FT
but whenever i get the odd batch of rejections this is the reason. i don't find it insulting . I use the same line when i turn down someone whose work i think is excellent but i have no need for their collaboration at this moment.
we all have certain clientele and FT is no diff. it only means your work is great, but try submit the types of images they want, while maintaining your standards.

my suggestion to you is to either go elsewhere, or if you're really interested in FT, then submit the kind of images they take . they are unlike many of the Big 6 consistent in this sense.
in fact, i can almost be sure they would accept my work , which is why my approval with them has been high, but every once in a while i do push my luck to send them something not FT friendly
to see if they go for it. that's when I get this rejection reason.

chins up. don't try to read what is not there. just submit what they want.

I think we should be prepared to see more rejections across the board. Simple there is too many photographers trying to upload every possible subjects in mass amounts. Do you think agencies really need more photos? Most of them still have images smaller than 4mpix. Apparently customers do not need anything better. Also how likely is that customer would pick something from below couple top search pages? In result best sellers sell even more and newcomers are not even noticed. The only situation that you might have good selling image now is when you discovered something which is in high demand among customers but it is not represented in database which is very unlikely. Otherwise you  can only count on agency messing up their search engine :-)

hi perseus,

i think you misread my message also. i think because you rarely get ft rejects, you don't know the different types that there are. there's the the quality of photo reject based on aesthetic consideration, the not needed photo due to too many already in their library and then this one where they actually compliment your photo as excellent. it's the first for me on this last one. so, i'm not dejected at all. i think others will know where i'm coming from.

how do you get your 100% approval? all people?

my portfolio is very prolific, so i cannot say it's all xxx or all xxx.
other ppl i network with also have close to 100% approval , even though their port is diff from mine.

what we all did is submit a variety of our styles, and watch which of these concepts, as they call it in glamour photography, FT tends to like.  from there, we submit those to FT.

and yes, many of those that are favorites of the other Big 5 are usually rejected by FT.
it doesn't surprise me either, as FT clientele is diff from them.

Fotolia has always been my worst site. Funny thing when I cashed out my "$54.00" in June I was going to delete my account. Well within a week I sold $13.00 worth so I'm still with them till I make it again...maybe within the next 5 years...lol. Next time I'll close the account the same day I cash out!

lol, maybe you should keep planning to delete your account.
mine's even funnier, or ironic... everytime i get a rejected batch, which is not often, but it does, ir's always followed by a sale.
so, i wish for more rejections. ... but damnnnn, no chance ... they keep approving my uploads 

Fotolia is doing well for me. They have climbed solidly into the #3 spot, and I am just weeks away from officially being Silver. (I sold > 1000 long ago, but with all those 1/4 sub sales, it takes a lot more than 1000 sales to reach Silver.)

So I've got an odd situation with them. They sell well, but they don't want my stuff (my AR last year was about 30%). And it isn't like they are being picky. If I resend the same rejected images over and over, they eventually are accepted and begin to sell.  But I don't do that often, so my portfolio there is almost half the size it is at IS.

It's a lot of work, and it sucks to be treated that way. But at least they do sell well for me. 

i gave up reading the fp reject reasons lng ago - they're just too arbitrary - i submit when i have some spare time, like during commercials while watching tv. 

they come in about #5 or 6 each month for me - fighting it out with is, 123 and BigStock

steve

God forbid you should upload a pair of boots and a pair of shoes....they would reject them for being to many like images. Last time I looked a pair of boots and a pair of shoes don't look quite the same. But if you upload in small batches being careful not to include those "like" images together then it's more likely they will get through. Sad but true....

Fotolia is consistently no 1 for me in earnings and take just about anything that I send them even if some of the other sites don't take them all.

i think based on your statement fotographer and a handful others, it's quite obvious SOME of us are giving images that FT likes .  i have to be honest that FT is the one site along with IS that i only started contributing, therefore making less money than say DT , StockXpert , BigStock.  also, FT takes almost close to 100% of my new works while initially rejecting most of my work in my early days when i simply uploaded the same images to DT BigStock and StockXpert.    the same with IS which i think is pretty much in line with FT in their preference of certain images.

perharps this disparity is the cause of why so many love to hate FT. but i think it's wonderful because it enables me to have a bit of a niche with FT which i cannot with DT and BigStock .
i sell a lot more with DT but needless to say, i have a lot more with them too.

as for consistently, FT is consistent for sure . they will take a certain type of images
and for most times, their rejection reasons are vague with that disposition code button that the reviewers no doubt push to spew out that rejections list that we cannot figure out which they meant.

thankfully i don't get many of that.  but i can relate to the frustrations of getting a list of one or all of the above rejection email.
for what it's worth, IS has just started to approve more of my work, ...
and when they don't, the reviewer took the time to actually explain and point out to me why they don't like it.  so i simply corrected it, and resubmit. which they approve rather quickly.

but then again, like FT, i have sent far less to them because they also initially found more faults with my work.   i don't take this as an insult, but more so, that they don't like my work...
so i just give other sites like Alamy, DT, most of it and give them and FT far less.

it's so much simpler this way, rather than try to convince yourself that they are wrong to reject so much of your work.  ego is a double edged sword... at worst,
at best, it wastes  a lot of energy solving nothing.

ok, that's all from my buddha muse rofl... i need a sinful mug of Guinness now

I can so relate to this.  Many of my best sellers that carry on selling and selling would never be approved today. Those of us that got in early have a huge advantage over the newbies.

. One of my best selling shots on there are three cans of vegetables....it's a horrible picture...some of the details of the brands are still on the cans. Today there would be no way they would approve it...(believe me I have tryed with just about everything photoshoped out.) But it sells over and over again.

My thoughts exactly! It's too risky.

And this is the very reason why I reject exclusivity at one single site. They might review their review standards, and all of a sudden you will have most or your images rejected and can do nothing about it.

Regards,
Oliver

Quote from: Allsa on January 09, 2010, 15:40

My thoughts exactly! It's too risky.

Quote from: olikli on November 18, 2009, 14:45

And this is the very reason why I reject exclusivity at one single site. They might review their review standards, and all of a sudden you will have most or your images rejected and can do nothing about it.

Regards,
Oliver

.

i haven't been with micro stock long enough . but maybe the oldies here can help with this question.

in my observation, i know that SS and IS are completely contrary to each other. ie. IS high ratio approved contributors fail most with SS and vice versa due to post processing preference of either site.  also, lately IS and FT seem to be sharing one brain. iow, what IS approves FT does and vice versa. 
maybe their reviewers are identical, except it may not be so since i thought that IS exclusives review indies submissions; unless these same IS exclusives are moonlighting as FT reviewers.
not another conspiracy theory, just too many coincidences to ignore. coincidences that work for me to get my approval rate consistent with FT and IS.

but i wonder if the installation of ex IS CEOs to FT has anything to do with this sudden change in review behaviour.

That's not the case with me because most of the same photos that are uploaded to fotolia get rejected whereas they are accepted in istock.

Perseus
Fotolia was one of the first sites I got on and started selling right off the bat. That stopped shortly after and it wasn't untill last June that I was able to cash out $54.00. I signed on over two years ago..Now I got a whoping total of $26.75 on there so they have always been at the bottom for me. I gotta take that back....123RF is worse of course I haven't been with them that long and I only  upload to them when I don't have any thing else to do...so Fotolia ranks 5th for me in earning