MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Fotolia hates me  (Read 6859 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

WarrenPrice

« on: April 27, 2009, 17:30 »
0
I can't get an image accepted.  The ones that were accepted are setting idle.  Unless I pissed them off with negative comments on MSG, I can't figure it out.  The same pics they reject are being accepted and sold at several other sites.  ?????


tan510jomast

« Reply #1 on: April 27, 2009, 18:02 »
0
WP I don't think so.
 I joined them in November and did not get a download till February, when I got a total 11 downloads (buy and sub) for my tiny portfolio of 22 images at that time.
So I started to submit more new images to them, I get most of them approved, but yes, some still get rejected. But no more or less than the others.
Mind you, there is no correlation between what Fotolia likes and what the other Big 6 do. So don't judge your reviews on this.
Judging from my own case,I would say it takes a while before the new images get downloaded. I like Fotolia, as most of what I consider my good stuff, they approved.  But naturally, I had a few "good stuffs" rejected that I didn't agree with them as well, but isn't that what we get at times from the other Big 6+BigStock too?.

Just keep uploading, never mind the rejections. But try  pay attention to why they rejected it . That will help improve your approval percentage. Or upload a different subject from the ones they reject .
Chins up !
« Last Edit: April 27, 2009, 18:15 by tan510jomast »

« Reply #2 on: April 27, 2009, 20:27 »
0
I started at Fotolia a few weeks ago. They accepted all but a couple from my initial submission - but they rejected my best photo, because it didn't meet their "aesthetic level".   All I can say is they're looking for something different and can't really articulate what it is.  As always, the thing to do is pay no attention to the rejections unless they're for something tangible, like noise you overlooked.   
   

donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #3 on: April 27, 2009, 20:41 »
0
They don't hate you any more than the rest of us... ;D

Fotolia has it's own weird way of rejecting photo's. I really question rather the people that review the submissions are even photographers to begin with. I've been with them since late 2007...I believe that was when...not sure exactly..but it's been awhile and I have 193 files on there and have only sold 59!! The rejects always get accepted at other agencies and do great...the ones they select are usually not approved by other agencies and it is really hard to figure out the reason they reject them...so don't feel alone out there because you aren't..it's just "Fotolia's way of doing bad business".

Alot of people say it's the keywording and I've been getting the main keywords in the top seven and still no sales. I personally have about given up on them because it's more trouble than it's worth...really.

« Reply #4 on: April 27, 2009, 20:48 »
0
Fotolia doesn't hate you, they hate landscapes and nature shots, which you have quite a few of in your port.  I've given up on uploading pictures to FT, I'll keep uploading vectors though since they rarely get rejected.  But they don't sell all that well either.  Either that or I need to actually start taking stock photos with people in them.   

I just can't sit through their ridiculous category selection on a batch of photos just to have 75% of them rejected.

On the other hand I have had quite a few $20 file size purchases lately (of photos decline almost everywhere else).  So each time I see a $5 commission it reinvigorates me to keep uploading there.

« Reply #5 on: April 28, 2009, 00:52 »
0
They want special stuff. Its quite simple.  Skip the everyday/nature shots.     Theyre hard but I have the feeling they last long cause of that. 

« Reply #6 on: April 28, 2009, 03:03 »
0
Fotolia is different than the other sites. Have a look at the categories on FT site - this should give you some idea regarding what they want. And their rejections - yes, sometimes rejections at FT are a bit weird, but I wouldn't say that they are particularly harsh or demanding. They just want good quality pics which fit well within their category structure. And their category structure does not cover all possible photographic subject.

« Reply #7 on: April 28, 2009, 03:27 »
0
They dont hate you. Your images might be ugly. Please post some images so we can see what are we talking about. Thank you.

« Reply #8 on: April 28, 2009, 03:34 »
0
They dont hate you. Your images might be ugly. Please post some images so we can see what are we talking about. Thank you.

Just click on his profile and there are links to ports.

« Reply #9 on: April 28, 2009, 03:52 »
0
his fotolia profile is not working. he should enter ID number, not username.
Ih he is complaining about such images:





etc... no wonder they were rejected. First they are technicaly bad (poor lightning, overexposed, bad composition (distracting background), low color profile, low contrast, etc...), and second it is not stock material. They would never get sold on fotolia.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2009, 03:56 by Peter »

Xalanx

« Reply #10 on: April 28, 2009, 04:54 »
0
Peter is right. Those images are not gonna get accepted on Fotolia, let alone sell.
A quick look at your portfolio on StockXpert say that you really need to improve. Study the site, see what's selling there, see the level of quality and raise the bar.

No, I don't agree that Fotolia doesn't accept nature shots or flower shots. I have some nature photos accepted yesterday and among them with 1 view and 1 sale, this one.

Good luck.

tan510jomast

« Reply #11 on: April 28, 2009, 06:28 »
0
You see already so many of us here are telling you to keep at it with Fotolia. Yes, they are strict, but not just to you. And yes again, as Peter pointed out, bad lighting, poor composition, and not stock material (no pun intended). livestock is not stock material; not unless it's isolated or something outstanding, like perharps shearing a sheep,etc.  you must be careful about shooting in harsh sunlight. if you have to shoot in the shade  then shoot in the shade with a fill in. but don't include the bright sun side in the frame. as for the other picture, it's not a very good macro shot.
if macro is your interest, then invest in a good macro lense.
but this picture of the bee, you get this on flickr and everywhere else. so try to be more "stock specific".

we all have to accept the reality, and if you check the portfoilios, you will see we have more or less featured one or two types of specific stock type images eg. people picture, isolated, closeup , ... but very careful with detail, depth of field,etc..

it's painful at first, but it will benefit you too in the end. keep trying, good luck.

WarrenPrice

« Reply #12 on: April 28, 2009, 14:51 »
0
Wow... I can't believe I uploaded that stuff.  Peter must have really dug to find it ... Oh... it is on StockXpert.  Hmmm... and the bee has a download. 

Wish I knew how to post some of the rejects.  I really would like a critique on some of the actual images that were declined.  How do you put pictures up here?

Can you see images at Fotolia that they have marked as deleted?

« Last Edit: April 28, 2009, 14:55 by WarrenPrice »

« Reply #13 on: April 28, 2009, 15:37 »
0
I say, walk away. You'll feel better.

I just submitted a few to IS and got the now-expected rejections for "artifacting" on 2 of them.  There are no noticeable digital artifacts in these images even at 100%.  But, I no longer bother to appeal these things, I just move on.  My plan is to get going on several sites, take more pictures and quit trying to figure out what's going on with any of these reviewers.   If they reject for a visible trademark I may fix it and resubmit; if they say there's noise I'll take a look, sometimes that happens.  For any other reasons, I just delete the rejection email and forget about it.



« Last Edit: April 28, 2009, 15:56 by stockastic »

« Reply #14 on: April 28, 2009, 15:55 »
0
Maybe there is some truth in statements about nature shots not being FT favorite :-) For me, it seems to be mixed. I have to little downloads to judge. I got a feeling that people shots tends to get more attention there.

WarrenPrice

« Reply #15 on: April 28, 2009, 16:17 »
0


This is the one that I didn't understand.  I thought it was a pretty good image.  I guess Livestock is not really stock, huh?  ;D

I was just looking at the portfolio.  Not really much nature, mostly isolations.  My best seller (3 dlds) is an isolated twins lens camera.  Couple of steam train pictures.  Power generating station.

EDIT:  posting pictures is just not my strong point.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2009, 16:19 by WarrenPrice »

« Reply #16 on: April 28, 2009, 19:09 »
0
, and second it is not stock material. They would never get sold on fotolia.

I would never make such a drastic statement.  Any image can sell.

tan510jomast

« Reply #17 on: April 28, 2009, 19:47 »
0


This is the one that I didn't understand.  I thought it was a pretty good image.  I guess Livestock is not really stock, huh?  ;D



ha!ha!... no Warren, as i said , livestock is not the same as microstock, ha!ha!
you could get shots of the people shearing the sheep of the wool, or some closeup of lambs feeding with milk bottles or suckling their mother.
perharps that might have some stock value. definitely cute little lambs during christmas could be a sale.
or lamb chops, now, that would sell. i am sure.  food for christmas???


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
22 Replies
9503 Views
Last post February 20, 2007, 12:29
by scubabartek
4 Replies
3569 Views
Last post February 12, 2007, 05:43
by leaf
Fotolia V.2

Started by leaf « 1 2 ... 10 11 » Adobe Stock

269 Replies
60396 Views
Last post July 30, 2007, 09:32
by jsnover
3 Replies
5351 Views
Last post June 01, 2007, 11:34
by bbettina
19 Replies
6067 Views
Last post July 18, 2007, 16:42
by Mellimage

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle