MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Photography Discussion => Topic started by: Asthebelltolls on May 29, 2014, 12:13
-
I know we all have our "reviewer" stories. I thought I'd share my most recent one with you....
I've tried and failed a number of times to get on with IS. My last attempt included three images that have been with SS for approximately 18 months. Collectively they've sold 517 times and earned me $417.40 with SS alone. I've sold the same three images many times with other agencies but SS is by far my most successful agency.....
Those three images were rejected by IS because: "We feel your images are not up to IStock standards...."
Really? They're obviously up to everybody else's standards including, most importantly, the buyers' standards.
It's another example of the reviewer crap shoot. Did they base their opinion on the current submission or on past failed attempts? And most importantly, is this an agency that I want to be judged by?
-
its IS-business, you feel more special if they accept you after 3rd try.
And maybe you be happy to sell and not be sad of 20% commission.
lol thats bad business istock style
-
I thought they only checked for copyright / IP these days and will accept any old crap otherwise - unless the initial test (and only the initial test) still requires a certain standard?
-
I know we all have our "reviewer" stories. I thought I'd share my most recent one with you....
I've tried and failed a number of times to get on with IS. My last attempt included three images that have been with SS for approximately 18 months. Collectively they've sold 517 times and earned me $417.40 with SS alone. I've sold the same three images many times with other agencies but SS is by far my most successful agency.....
Those three images were rejected by IS because: "We feel your images are not up to IStock standards...."
Really? They're obviously up to everybody else's standards including, most importantly, the buyers' standards.
It's another example of the reviewer crap shoot. Did they base their opinion on the current submission or on past failed attempts? And most importantly, is this an agency that I want to be judged by?
Wells, these things goes both ways. An image that in my indie times was rejected by SS has sold more than a thousand times at IS (now as S+). You never know.
-
its IS-business, you feel more special if they accept you after 3rd try.
And maybe you be happy to sell and not be sad of 20% commission.
lol thats bad business istock style
That's right. IS takes photos that SS rejects. That's their style.
-
its IS-business, you feel more special if they accept you after 3rd try.
And maybe you be happy to sell and not be sad of 20% commission.
15% for base-level indies.
-
I only contribute (small time) to Istock and Shutterstock. What I've found is I edit slightly differently for each (well I used to). Istock didn't want the images sharpened or too much colour, they seemed to want a more neutral but high quality photo with no noise or CA where as Shutterstock liked a little more editing for pop, a little more contrast and some sharpening from raw. Now Istock does seem to take anything once you are a contributor, they really relaxed their acceptance standard last year sometime but my understanding from posts in the critique forum is the initial acceptance is just as tough as it always was. If you post your photos on the critique forum at Istock I have seen people get some support there to get accepted when reviewers seemed to be being really silly.