One of the most picky agency in term of photo selection. It is a least, their reputation.
One of the most selective in term of quality, that�s for sure, but with some flaws in term of consistency, otherwise how to explain that some pictures refused everywhere else have been approved only by them (and I know where the default were in my pictures).

It doesn�t matter so much finally, we are always happy when our pictures are accepted after having work hard on it. But is quality of pictures the only and real criteria of selection by shutter ?

Well, for anybody who had been through their registration and selection process, the question makes some sense.

I have lived in countries plagued by archaic bureaucrats, narrow minded civil servants and frustrated administrators who loved nothing more than having the only little power they had in their poor life over other individuals that were requiring their services or approvals.

I was hoping these times were over, but when I went through the shutter registration process, it all came back to me, the pettiness, the useless processes, the total lack of openness and understanding of what lies outside their limited world, in short I suddenly came back in the seventies in a east European country under the yoke of a totalitarian regime.

When I finally succeeded to overcome after painstaking exchange after weeks, I was very happy to be able to send my first pictures.

But... And anybody familiar with shutterstock knows what I will talk about, when trying to connect, I had to:

1.   Enter my username and password
2.   Type some non readable catcha words to get in
3.   And then, because we are obviously dealing with highly paranoid people, I had to copy and paste a script that led me to my page....

Needles to say, they are the only ones using this torture just to connect on their website (except the FBI and CIA may be) and just for that, I almost decided not to go further with them.
But having done so much efforts, I wouldn�t give up so easily.

The upload time was just ok, key wording and so on quite similar to others, and the reviewing process fairly quick (I was afraid they would ask for my social security number to approve my pictures).

Some were accepted, some were rejected, but as you know, you need 7 out of 10 to be accepted before becoming a contributor with them. And if you fail the first test, you can�t resubmit before one month.

I wondered a bit why 7 and not 5 for example ? And why having to wait for a month before resubmitting, a unique feature in the microstock industry ?

The obvious answer would be that they have too much contributors and they try to limit the number of new ones coming in. If it�s the case, then I realized that it was perhaps not a good idea to belong to their portfolio because as a newbie there are good chances that you will be almost completely invisible among their huge base of images and contributors.

So, what was the point of all these efforts

Of course, it�s always nice to be present on one of the big ones in the microstock market and reassuring about photo quality but who is really going to make money with this kind of company ?
At the end of the day, the goal is to sell pictures, not to be proud to have images lingering on shutterstock�s website.

After careful consideration, it seems to me that all these processes and picky procedures to get accepted by shutter are just part of a big bulshit game.

If I wanted to be treated like that and have real tough reviewing process, I would go to Corbis or Getty image, wouldn�t I ? Where I would certainly make much more money than selling myself cheap with fewer guarantees in term of copyright protection.

So I would recommend not to rush to this kind of sites, but rather try the less known ones that are building their collections and offer much more visibility and prospect of growth than over bloated, paranoid process-mongers like shutterstock.

In the same vein, when I try to delete my rejected images on their website, it was impossible to do so, although one of their pretended policy is �delete rejected images after seven days�. I wrote to them about that and got no answer.

Now I could even ask myself if even my pictures are safe in their hands, or is there a pilot in the plane ?

most of it looks like a junkyard. crap lighting, that laughable stuff with inapt models posing as fashionsupermodels, flat gray skin snapshot portraits of semi ugly ppl looking like they didn't want to be photograped at all.

Can we see your images?

Quote from: FD-regular on November 24, 2010, 12:44

Quote from: molka on November 24, 2010, 12:24

most of it looks like a junkyard. crap lighting, that laughable stuff with inapt models posing as fashionsupermodels, flat gray skin snapshot portraits of semi ugly ppl looking like they didn't want to be photograped at all.

Can we see your images?

Sure. I won't post links to portfolio, because thanks, I don't want the net hostility (some psycho ppl got to amazing lenghts), but I can show some shots. Thumbs are crap anyway. What do you want to see?

Nothing would be nice.   

Far easier to be critical than creative.

...
So, what was the point of all these efforts

Of course, it�s always nice to be present on one of the big ones in the microstock market and reassuring about photo quality but who is really going to make money with this kind of company ?
At the end of the day, the goal is to sell pictures, not to be proud to have images lingering on shutterstock�s website.

After careful consideration, it seems to me that all these processes and picky procedures to get accepted by shutter are just part of a big bulshit game.

...

So I would recommend not to rush to this kind of sites, but rather try the less known ones that are building their collections and offer much more visibility and prospect of growth than over bloated, paranoid process-mongers like shutterstock.

...

Sounds like too many conclusions for someone that doesn�t have the experience of actually selling there. If this is your way of feeling good about the decline answer, then i say, you are right, not woth it believe me, you are going to do better in this bussines staying away from the big players, instead go to those new agencys out there.
Of course this is not true in any case, but hey i can�t care less.
About your statment of being the most picky on the review and also being the only one with a period of waiting for your next try, then i guess you didn�t even try IS.

Wow! I can't believe someone has bad things to say about Shutterstock. I love them. Uploads are fast. Reviews are within hours. Hardly any rejections. (at least for me) My best seller, equaling iStock.

I average 12 sales a day on Shutterstock. What's not to love?  That's my review, for what it's worth.

same here.

Quote from: molka on November 24, 2010, 12:51

What do you want to see?

Just anything that gives an idea of your style and subjects. Anything that will make your sturdy and blunt remarks about the industry a bit more than just amusing to read.

I'v got no problem with being amusing, rather that than being a * flat dull peon. For my own fun I shoot nature's beauty: serene landscape and (not so) serene gals. on commission, anything. here's one that will freak you and the rest out with that micro inspector mindset, an old fav portrait, an image made entirely of noise : ))
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2032/2464658280_3bd0caa41f_o.jpg

Quote from: molka on November 26, 2010, 06:54

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2032/2464658280_3bd0caa41f_o.jpg

And to be honest, I don't believe a microsecond that the Flickr picture you posted here is yours. 
You don't have the guts.  But that's fine. I have to do some work now.

thats kinda interesting. why? if its not mine who does it belong to, I wonder : ) guts for what? posting a few pic links.. you need to be a spartan hero for that nowadays? : ) of course I'm not looking for citique, I couldn't care less about most ppls opinion. (there are some, even here who's opinion would matter tho, sure) I just wanted to post a handful for all fairness. I might look to be a mean *insult removed*, but I always try to be fair.

for all fairness. I might look to be a mean *insult removed*, but I always try to be fair.

That's the spirit. Deep down, we meanies are really nice shy people. 
I don't blame you though, hiding your real work, little prick. 

I've just had my first week at SS and have 29 sales with 32 files - reviews are reasonable and find that stuff is reviewed AND sold before even approved on DT / rejected by IS

Excellent work. I like 'Jack and Jill'. Upload as many as you can now, sales rocket for new contributors.

Quote from: molka on November 26, 2010, 08:30

for all fairness. I might look to be a mean *insult removed*, but I always try to be fair.

That's the spirit. Deep down, we meanies are really nice shy people. 
I don't blame you though, hiding your real work, little prick. 

yee, whatever. thats not what i meant, I'm not shy or nice. now I dont really have time for this, so it's a mess, just dragged up what was at hand in lowres.
http://picasaweb.google.com/101791180493784062699

hf

http://picasaweb.google.com/101791180493784062699

Great stuff! (and great models).

Great shots, Molka - and your models are beautiful.