MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: tab62 on July 09, 2012, 09:53
-
Hey MSG Folks,
Do any of you find it difficult to get accepted pics in FT? I have had my last 3 batches wiped out by them - all tech issues. Yet, over 90% of them have passed Shutterstock and all the rest of the MS companies! What gives? Have they closed the acceptance gate?
T
-
FT are a fickle bunch. A much heard quote is that their reviewers are on drugs.
-
Despite the fact i'm not uploading to any agency recently ( more than two months ago.. working on new subjects ), the last batch on FT went thus:
- Subject Serie A: All refused
- Subject Serie B: All accepted
- 1 Isolated object: Accepted
Guess what happen when DT reviewed it... (too similiar bla bla... )
Therefore, and given the criteria for each agency, I no longer worry about the rejections and their reasons, exception made to those about some technical issue ( almost near zero ).
Returning to FT, i'm not in a hurry to upload new files, because i'm selling old files only... too old by the way.
-
Lately I find them easier than SS. Out of my last 100 images submitted there 87 were accepted, almost all for technical problems, and usually the weakest of the batch so no complaints. For comparison, SS accepted only 67 of the same images and only 2 out of my last ten (ouch!), the worst there in about the past 2.5 years. I don't think it's anything general just the luck of the draw on reviewers.
-
Lately I find them easier than SS. Out of my last 100 images submitted there 87 were accepted, almost all for technical problems, and usually the weakest of the batch so no complaints. For comparison, SS accepted only 67 of the same images and only 2 out of my last ten (ouch!), the worst there in about the past 2.5 years. I don't think it's anything general just the luck of the draw on reviewers.
SS has gone haywire lately with rejections. Whole batches 100%, of some established contributors. Its mayhem over there. Check the boards, lots of complaints.
-
After months and months of zero rejections FT seems to randomly reject something. I couldn't complain about the amount of rejections but what is rejected is often much better than what has been accepted. IS will sometimes randomly accept something having previously rejected much better stuff. DT is a bit like FT except they do it more often. So far, SS appears most consistent in that, when they reject, it's the weaker ones get rejected.
-
Most interesting is: if one reject all, the next accept them all. In summary i have 1-2% Images what never get placed at any agency ... and i would say: 5-10% of my images havent been uploaded anywhere ;-)
-
A lot has to do with what you're submitting. I do mostly backgrounds and textures, and generally have 80% to 90% acceptance rate at all the micros except FT. My acceptance rate at FT is terrible, something like 30%. I've had two images make it into the top 50 images of the week at SS and yup, you guessed it, both rejected by FT. They've rejected many of my images that have turned out to be best sellers at the other agencies. But there's nothing I can do about it; they just don't like my style or subject matter so I rarely submit to them anymore.
-
Different experience for me lads.
FT takes about everything I upload to them, different subjects (nature, backgrounds/textures, composites, food, seasonal, business, sports, isolations, etc...)
They do not reject for absurd reasons like similars (DT), LCV (SS) or overfiltering (IS) and when they do reject it's mostly the weaker in the batch.
<24h reviews is also a plus. DT, SS and IS can take up to a week or more.
I used to care about rejections but now I feel it's up to the agencies if they want to leave money on the table or not.
FT, although only in 5th place for my income is still one of my favorite agencies because of this and I will continue to support agencies that support my work.
SS, like goodwin mentioned is still luck of the draw but has improved lately.
So there you go, to each his own experience.