Author Topic: The most difficult to get an image accepted (Read 8767 times)

Alatriste · « **on:** March 18, 2008, 09:34 »

Hello.
Greetings, this is my first post.

Wich is the site with the lowest acceptance ratio for you?

For me, IS is the lowest. I dont know why but I hardly get an image accepted on IS but they are approved without difficulties in other sites like SS, DT, FT, CT...

Any thoughts?

Seren · « **Reply #1 on:** March 18, 2008, 10:06 »

Lucky Oliver!

iStock I find pretty easy and predictable now.

Alatriste · « **Reply #2 on:** March 18, 2008, 10:13 »

Really?

The last batch I uploaded to LO I had an 100% acceptance

In Istock Im having an 20%

Peter · « **Reply #3 on:** March 18, 2008, 10:16 »

istock, definitely.

on FT, SS, StockXpert I have about 90% acceptance, on DT 70%, but on IS about 50%!

stokfoto · « **Reply #4 on:** March 18, 2008, 10:27 »

IS for sure! my acceptance rate is now:73% there but most of the time I find their rejections reasonable (of course with some exceptions from time to time.) but among all, their reviews are the most consistent to my point of view

snoozle · « **Reply #5 on:** March 18, 2008, 10:28 »

Istock overall is my lowest with about 60%, although I find if I reduce my image sizes to 3000 X 2000 pixels a lot less of them are rejected for artifacting.

Recently however StockXpert seem to reject everything I send them.

Seren · « **Reply #6 on:** March 18, 2008, 11:23 »

Quote from: Trebuchet on March 18, 2008, 10:13

Really?

The last batch I uploaded to LO I had an 100% acceptance

In Istock Im having an 20%

Mine is the other way round, with about a 35% acceptance on LO.

vonkara · « **Reply #7 on:** March 18, 2008, 12:23 »

Istock and I don't know what happen whit the overfiltred thing... they become crazy about this. I think more and more to make black and white pictures because it seem that the color that come out of my D300 whit all settings to zero are already too saturated or a thing like that. It's becoming annoying and the scout process is long

sharpshot · « **Reply #8 on:** March 18, 2008, 12:41 »

Image Vortex makes istock look easy.

Waldo4 · « **Reply #9 on:** March 18, 2008, 13:22 »

FT for me. Once I figured out what IS wants my rate has been pretty good, FT OTOH, I have no idea, they only take about 30% of my shots.

Alatriste · « **Reply #10 on:** March 18, 2008, 16:45 »

Quote from: sharpshot on March 18, 2008, 12:41

Image Vortex makes istock look easy.

Agree. I gave up that extrange site.
I dont understand IV, my approval ratio was 0%.
I know Im not Iofoto but... $:-\$

stokfoto · « **Reply #11 on:** March 18, 2008, 17:19 »

removed my initial post as found the answer in the thread on IV

takestock · « **Reply #12 on:** March 18, 2008, 17:46 »

For me, DT is tough enough!

madelaide · « **Reply #13 on:** March 18, 2008, 18:37 »

59% in IS, 68% in DT, 86% at FT, 97% in BigStock.

Is there a way to see it in StockXpert? I believe it must be something around 80%.

Regards,
Adelaide

a.k.a.-tom · « **Reply #14 on:** March 19, 2008, 16:16 »

Maybe I'm going out on a limb on this one... but...
mine is going to vary as I don't submit the same portfolio to all agencies.
For example, I know some will take pix that others won't. We've all been down that road. SS takes, IS won't and then some, IS takes, SS won't. I've got stuff Alamy took, DT wouldn't... so it's pretty hard to come up with an equal playing field to compare who is the toughest. At least for me.

I've got a much better acceptance rate at IS than DT, why? I'll float stuff to DT that I wouldn't to IS.

And then you have the review factors like "not stock material" (in the current reviewer's opinion) "got too many of this" "not what we want".... One will take a pic of a frog dancing on a red ball and another won't. Those kinds of rejections are going to skew your ratio. And how many times have I personally had a pic rejected as "not stock material" only to resub it a month or so later, have it accepted and selling....

all in all I have the toughest time with IS...... BUT, IS also allows me the opportunity to correct many images which they subsequently accept.

Am I shipping crap to some? Yup.... sure am. But, they sell it.... so why not? One man's trash is anothers treasure. However, on some sites.... it'll always be trash!!! LOL LOL So I don't send it there.

The only way you can get good numbers on this is if you submit the exact same pix to every agency.

My measurment would be this. What agencies do I think I need to be more particular in what I send in order to maintain a high acceptance.

IS & SS

Of course there is something to be said here as well. Which agencies do I make the largest sales on? Same two. IS & SS.
Maybe there's a lesson here and I shouldn't send so much crap to the others

I won't say which ones I think take anything I send them. [insert smile here

]

=tom

jeffclow · « **Reply #15 on:** March 19, 2008, 16:28 »

I concur with other's comments as it seems to vary by month. Lately I have also seen StockXpert reject almost everything after approving 90% of my shots previously.

Overall, I have found SS to be the toughest, with IS second toughest.

The easiest by a large percentage has been LO and it suprises me greatly that others are having a low acceptance rate there.

And what's up with FT? They reject a ton of shots for "not exactly what we're looking for"......even though similar shots in my portfolio at their site sell week after week (for example, travel shots on a sandy beach).

Interesting reading - thanks for starting this thread.....

RacePhoto · « **Reply #16 on:** March 19, 2008, 21:43 »

Quote from: Waldo4 on March 18, 2008, 13:22

Once I figured out what IS wants my rate has been pretty good,

What do they want? I see comments and people saying the same things, SS takes mine, IS doesn't. Some people are fine with IS and can't get in the door at SS.

What's the secret of getting accepted at IS?

a.k.a.-tom · « **Reply #17 on:** March 20, 2008, 16:09 »

Quote from: RacePhoto on March 19, 2008, 21:43

Quote from: Waldo4 on March 18, 2008, 13:22
Once I figured out what IS wants my rate has been pretty good,

What do they want? I see comments and people saying the same things, SS takes mine, IS doesn't. Some people are fine with IS and can't get in the door at SS.

What's the secret of getting accepted at IS?

Don't know if there is one.. as for me... took 3 or 4 batches of submissions to get into SS... but I got accepted at IS with my first batch. No clue why. Same pix.

=tom

Waldo4 · « **Reply #18 on:** March 20, 2008, 17:38 »

Quote from: RacePhoto on March 19, 2008, 21:43

Quote from: Waldo4 on March 18, 2008, 13:22
Once I figured out what IS wants my rate has been pretty good,

What do they want? I see comments and people saying the same things, SS takes mine, IS doesn't. Some people are fine with IS and can't get in the door at SS.

What's the secret of getting accepted at IS?

For me there are two types of decent pictures, the "that might make a good stock shot" and "wow, what a great picture." Most sites don't take "wow, what a great picture", especially FT, they haven't taken one yet. IS OTOH, takes them, and has taken every one that I've submitted. However "that might make a good stock shot" gets accepted elsewhere to varying degrees, with SS and IS being the toughest, and I have a pretty low rate at IS with them. My secret to getting shots accepted at IS, if I love it, chances are they do too. It is the only site that I feel this way about, though DT seems to take a high % of them and SS a fair #. When it comes to shots that I take purely for stock and not because I love taking pictures to admire, the checkers at IS can see right through it and reject them.

a.k.a.-tom · « **Reply #19 on:** March 20, 2008, 18:04 »

I don't know if any others would agree... but as I think about it.... I am able to place my more 'artsy' stuff on IS.. I know one pic in particular, a shot of a series of mountain ranges in the Blue Mountains... It's raining, foggy in the valley's... to be honest, it is kind of a grainy shot. Most others shot it down for artifacting or focus. IS took it and it is one of my better sellers there.
any others find this to be true? RacePhoto, were you talking about 'artsy' shots?

=tom

RacePhoto · « **Reply #20 on:** March 21, 2008, 18:22 »

Just trying to figure out why some people have major problems with IS and others say, it's easy. Same people who get on well with IS, can't break down the door at SS.

Now I'm beginning to understand that creative and artsy shots may do better at IS and stock, stock does better at SS.

Next time I try to get accepted at IS, I'll stop sending my best "stock" photos, food photos, plain objects and isolations and send in something more artistic or different. Maybe that's where i was going wrong.

Oh wait, I'll just go through the SS rejects.

a.k.a.-tom · « **Reply #21 on:** March 21, 2008, 20:06 »

Quote from: RacePhoto on March 21, 2008, 18:22

Just trying to figure out why some people have major problems with IS and others say, it's easy. Same people who get on well with IS, can't break down the door at SS.

Now I'm beginning to understand that creative and artsy shots may do better at IS and stock, stock does better at SS.

Next time I try to get accepted at IS, I'll stop sending my best "stock" photos, food photos, plain objects and isolations and send in something more artistic or different. Maybe that's where i was going wrong.

Oh wait, I'll just go through the SS rejects.

Well, you've got nothing to lose except some time... I was hoping to get a little more input on that thought... artsy vs IS....

At least I have found this to be true in my case. Let me know how you make out, sir.

=tom

sbonk · « **Reply #22 on:** March 21, 2008, 20:28 »

I keep a running % comparison if photos accepted at each site. I use SS as a guide so at SS I am always at 100%. The other sites vary based on the % above or below SS.

My lowest acceptance rate is CREstock at only 64%. Listing some in order I have:

SV: 118%
LO: 117%
BS: 107%
123: 107%
CS: 105%
SS: 100% (Of course, this is my base)
XP: 100%
FT: 96%
DT: 80%
IS: 78%
CRE: 64%

rinderart · « **Reply #23 on:** March 22, 2008, 15:06 »

Good thread, I find that there basically all the same. First and foremost is the image being submitted. Lot's of folks forget that very important point. also If your in this to make money and not just a hobby then it's up to you to understand what each site wants or needs. do this by looking at the top images selling and that changes. This is a business and must be taken like a business. You get back what you put in.

Alatriste · « **Reply #24 on:** March 22, 2008, 19:02 »

Forgeting image vortex (always 100% rejected

), my lowest ratio was IS and StockXpert but last batch I uploaded to StockXpert has been almost 90% approved.
What a surprise!!

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: The most difficult to get an image accepted (Read 8767 times)

Alatriste

Seren

Alatriste

Peter

stokfoto

snoozle

Seren

vonkara

sharpshot

Waldo4

Alatriste

stokfoto

takestock

madelaide

a.k.a.-tom

jeffclow

RacePhoto

a.k.a.-tom

Waldo4

a.k.a.-tom

RacePhoto

a.k.a.-tom

sbonk

rinderart

Alatriste

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors