MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Low acceptance ration  (Read 2499 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

NoNameIsGood

« on: December 04, 2021, 12:07 »
+2
I just started to upload there and it accepted 60 images from 400. Most of them are because of technical issues. Typically Dreamstime acceptance is 70% for me. It makes me wonder if it's like shutterstock thing or they normally accept better quality photos.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2021, 12:10 by NoNameIsGood »


For Real

« Reply #1 on: December 04, 2021, 14:16 »
+4
I just started to upload there and it accepted 60 images from 400. Most of them are because of technical issues. Typically Dreamstime acceptance is 70% for me. It makes me wonder if it's like shutterstock thing or they normally accept better quality photos.

Most sites today want the highest quality possible due to the millions of already existing images. You can go on the Adobe forum but I will tell you that they tend to be harsh and refer to the technical requirements (https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/photography-illustrations.html) thus not too helpful for new folks.

why not send us a few here and we can assist you in technical and commercial value? 70% on Dreamstime is kind of low percentage. For example this year I have 943 images accepted and 3 rejected. Been doing this business over 10 years.

Hope this helps you...
« Last Edit: December 04, 2021, 20:56 by For Real »

« Reply #2 on: December 05, 2021, 02:41 »
+2
Having just been submitting again after a break now that I've new content after moving back to Sydney, I found Adobe to be good - even generous with accepting my content (videos in this case).   

« Reply #3 on: December 05, 2021, 04:41 »
+8
I just started to upload there and it accepted 60 images from 400. Most of them are because of technical issues. Typically Dreamstime acceptance is 70% for me. It makes me wonder if it's like shutterstock thing or they normally accept better quality photos.

Dreamstime have very low standards these days.

Shutterstock are nuts

Adobe do at least try to apply some kind of quality standards.

If you have 60 out of 400 accepted you need to rethink your photography standards.

« Reply #4 on: December 05, 2021, 05:39 »
+3
I get about 98% of my images accepted at Adobe.
Dont upload to much variations and don't over process your images.
Hope it helps. 

For Real

« Reply #5 on: December 05, 2021, 09:19 »
0
all well stated! Weird how they ask a question and disappear on us  8)

NoNameIsGood

« Reply #6 on: December 05, 2021, 10:16 »
0

« Reply #7 on: December 05, 2021, 11:21 »
+4
I just started to upload there and it accepted 60 images from 400. Most of them are because of technical issues. Typically Dreamstime acceptance is 70% for me. It makes me wonder if it's like shutterstock thing or they normally accept better quality photos.
DT is accepting EVERYTHING.
If you only have 70% acceptance rate with them, then you seriously have to revisit your technique.

« Reply #8 on: December 05, 2021, 12:16 »
+3

For Real

« Reply #9 on: December 05, 2021, 13:31 »
+1
Only saw comic con images...

« Reply #10 on: December 06, 2021, 03:39 »
+2
Adobe recently rejects images that were accepted by all agencies including SS and Alamy. What frustrates me is that they simply use technical issues as rejection reason. There weren't any technical issues. Can't they just say that they don't want a photo like that because they already have thousands of them. Why can't they just be honest? But Bigstock is in my opinion the biggest joke. They reject images for being similar when even the content is different. A straight on shot of a mug with marshmallows. All you can see is the mug with marshmallows. The other one is a top shot of a hot chocolate in the same mug. You can clearly see the hot chocolate and a few marshmallows. Both shot on white. They rejected the photo shot straight on for being similar. They totally lost the plot. Just recently the same but the photos were even more different from each other. However, when I started DT was brilliant for me. They clearly wrote explaining why they rejected a photo and what was wrong with it. They also were so honest to write that they have thousands of photos of this object and don't want another one. They even told me that I need to buy a better white background. I am glad that I started uploading to DT only at the beginning. SS rejected a photo for being out of focus that clearly wasn't out of focus and was accepted by Adobe and Alamy. I am really angry about that. It is an important photo, one that would sell. My advise is to upload to DT only until you get good enough to upload to other agencies. With the help of DT it shouldn't take long.

« Reply #11 on: December 06, 2021, 05:30 »
+4
I just started to upload there and it accepted 60 images from 400. Most of them are because of technical issues. Typically Dreamstime acceptance is 70% for me. It makes me wonder if it's like shutterstock thing or they normally accept better quality photos.
DT is accepting EVERYTHING.
If you only have 70% acceptance rate with them, then you seriously have to revisit your technique.
When you get rejected at Dreamstime, indeed check your file, it's probably not even an image.  ;)
They just take everything.

For Real

« Reply #12 on: December 06, 2021, 10:18 »
0
Adobe recently rejects images that were accepted by all agencies including SS and Alamy. What frustrates me is that they simply use technical issues as rejection reason. There weren't any technical issues. Can't they just say that they don't want a photo like that because they already have thousands of them. Why can't they just be honest? But Bigstock is in my opinion the biggest joke. They reject images for being similar when even the content is different. A straight on shot of a mug with marshmallows. All you can see is the mug with marshmallows. The other one is a top shot of a hot chocolate in the same mug. You can clearly see the hot chocolate and a few marshmallows. Both shot on white. They rejected the photo shot straight on for being similar. They totally lost the plot. Just recently the same but the photos were even more different from each other. However, when I started DT was brilliant for me. They clearly wrote explaining why they rejected a photo and what was wrong with it. They also were so honest to write that they have thousands of photos of this object and don't want another one. They even told me that I need to buy a better white background. I am glad that I started uploading to DT only at the beginning. SS rejected a photo for being out of focus that clearly wasn't out of focus and was accepted by Adobe and Alamy. I am really angry about that. It is an important photo, one that would sell. My advise is to upload to DT only until you get good enough to upload to other agencies. With the help of DT it shouldn't take long.

Good advice!  8)

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #13 on: December 06, 2021, 11:35 »
0
Adobe recently rejects images that were accepted by all agencies including SS and Alamy. What frustrates me is that they simply use technical issues as rejection reason. There weren't any technical issues. Can't they just say that they don't want a photo like that because they already have thousands of them. Why can't they just be honest?

Not going to disagree but I just want to point out that I have more SS rejections that are fine at Adobe (and everywhere else). I just had one of those strange opposites, where SS accepted the image and AS says it has Technical Issues. No wonder it makes us crazy. There's no consistency or reliable way to know. I can say that Adobe still has Humans who actually look at images.

Only thing I've found for "Technical Issues" is sometimes, I look at 100% and check over, everything very carefully and might spot some minor flaw, but I think everyone here would agree, that something a little bit more informative would sure be nice. Like WHY? Just a hint please?

Rejections are pretty rare for me on Adobe.

« Reply #14 on: January 19, 2022, 14:58 »
+1
Adobe recently rejects images that were accepted by all agencies including SS and Alamy. What frustrates me is that they simply use technical issues as rejection reason. There weren't any technical issues. Can't they just say that they don't want a photo like that because they already have thousands of them. Why can't they just be honest?

The technical error thing is likely to be "We don't want that image". I've had aome of them too.. Then I made some extreme closeup pics of metallic Arsenic, took the lens to the limit and likelye more than that. If they were picky about actual technical errors, they would have found it in that image, nevertheless it got accepted.

Mos other agencies take everything if the exposure is OK, even if the image's potential is close to zero. Adobe pays more than most agencies, so we shopuld really expect the curation to be more severe than the cheeper agencies.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
3253 Views
Last post March 04, 2007, 04:18
by sharply_done
11 Replies
3808 Views
Last post February 11, 2014, 11:26
by Julied83
5 Replies
3895 Views
Last post March 28, 2017, 04:59
by dpimborough
10 Replies
3183 Views
Last post July 17, 2017, 18:53
by Jo Ann Snover
16 Replies
6582 Views
Last post February 25, 2019, 14:58
by Uncle Pete

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle