MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Why Do They Do This?  (Read 3966 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: May 13, 2008, 20:05 »
0
Just had this happen at SS, but it has happened at other sites as well with different images.  I submit a shot and get it rejected with the comment that " Not Approved:
Poor Lighting--Poor or uneven lighting, or shadows. White balance may be incorrect.
Please increase contrast and resubmit. Thank you!"  The please resubmit comment came from them, along with the nice thank you.

So I increase the contrast and resubmit, along with a nice note that I do feel the image is now improved with the increased contrast.  So it gets rejected again...this time for limited commercial value!

I know that each reviewer is different, but yet they do work for the same company and so there should be some consistency and respect for the prior reviewers initial comments...it is frustrating when you go back to fix the problem and then it is rejected for something that was there the first time around.

Like one I had at IS...an unidentifiable person from the back at the edge of a waterfall.  I submit it and it gets rejected, not because of the lack of a model release, but because they were concerned about a graphic on the back of the persons tee shirt that could be a copyright violation...and they invite me to resubmit if I can fix the tee shirt.  I spend 20 minutes cloning it out well and resubmit.  Then I get back another rejection that they thought it over and they really think it needs a model release after all.  Well, you could have told me that before I spent my time cloning.

Don't get me wrong, I can respect a rejection for whatever reason but don't send me back to fix what was felt to be the problem and then reject it for something else that was there and obvious the first time round.  If you are part of the same company I really think the first reviewers analysis needs to be respected.  In both instances I would much prefer it if they had just rejected it out of hand and in a final manner.

There...glad I got that off my chest :>)


« Reply #1 on: May 14, 2008, 04:06 »
0
As you get more proficient in your editing skills, I suspect what took you 20 minutes to clone out a logo, will take only 2 minutes in the future.
As far as model release? I thought it was made perfectly clear on every site, that if there is a distinguishable face then it required a MR.

Had you not seen the distinguishable face prior to uploading it, then I suggest you take some of the time you will save editing you images in the future,
and pay more attention to the contents of each image.

Good luck in the future.

Cranky MIZ

« Reply #2 on: May 14, 2008, 05:08 »
0
...an unidentifiable person from the back at the edge of a waterfall.
You are right Howard, most of the sites become paranoid and ask for MR when they consider that the person could recognise himself, even from back.

« Reply #3 on: May 15, 2008, 10:43 »
0
Had you not seen the distinguishable face prior to uploading it, then I suggest you take some of the time you will save editing you images in the future,
and pay more attention to the contents of each image.

Cranky MIZ

I think you missed this portion of the original post:

an unidentifiable person from the back at the edge of a waterfall.

« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2008, 11:30 »
0
Yes, the person was unidentifiable and the first reviewer thought so as well.

But my point is this....IMO, to maintain consistency, reviewers at any individual single micro company should respect the opinion of the reviewer that went first.  If that reviewer stated or implicitly implied "fix item x and the image will be accepted" then if item x is fixed the next reviewer should either accept it or say "item x isn't fixed well enough for it to be accepted".....not "well item x is fixed but I disagree with the initial reviewer from my own company and item y makes this unacceptable under any circumstances".  I wouldn't even mind if they said "now fix item y and we will take it". It is when item y was in plain view to the first reviewer and they thought it was OK that gets me mad.  It doesn't seem right to send the person back to fix the image and then boot it for another reason.

Ah well, what can you do?  I don't think it will change.

« Reply #5 on: May 15, 2008, 11:46 »
0
I suspect there might be a breakdown in communication between reviewers.
Perhaps there is even a total lack of communication. The right hand doesn't know what the left has done.

There is another thought that comes to mind: Even though reviewer "X" said to fix "A", when it comes
time for reviewer "Y" to look at it for a second time, the following scenarios can play out:

1.  Reviewer "Y" spots something reviewer "X" missed.
2.  Reviewer "Y" has no idea what reviewer "X" told you to fix.
3.  Reviewer "Y" did not like your image and just made up any excuse to reject it.
4.  Reviewer "X" is respecting  Reviewer "Y" rejection of your image and will not pass it under any circumstances.
5.  Both reviewers are one and the same person, this reviewer has duel personalities disorder.

Cranky MIZ
« Last Edit: May 15, 2008, 12:01 by rjmiz »

« Reply #6 on: May 15, 2008, 13:27 »
0
 :D...I think reason 5 is the most likely!

vonkara

« Reply #7 on: May 16, 2008, 09:38 »
0
It's just happened to me. Exactly the same thing whit this one


Rejected for poor lightning whit "improve contrast thank you" so I improved it taking care of noise and then rejected for poor commercial value???

« Reply #8 on: May 16, 2008, 09:42 »
0
So how do you fix "Poor commercial value" rejection?

Cranky MIZ

vonkara

« Reply #9 on: May 16, 2008, 09:59 »
0
So how do you fix "Poor commercial value" rejection?

Cranky MIZ
Anyway, how a virus you are in a forum MIZ ;)
« Last Edit: May 16, 2008, 11:24 by Vonkara »

JerryL5

  • Blessed by God's wonderful love.
« Reply #10 on: May 16, 2008, 09:59 »
0
Howard is right. Consistancy is what is needed. At DT you re-submit
after you have fixed the issues the reviewer found the first time.



« Last Edit: May 16, 2008, 12:34 by JerryL5 »


 

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors