Ok, I thought a few images might get through the approval but all 10 were rejected !!!!! Soul destroying. Some on focus, the wrong type of focus, some not even a reason. Basicly a waste of time and I haven't the time to waste working out why AND I have to wait 30 days. I thought IS was bad enough. I know most are good images so I will try not to let it get to me. In fact, some they said were not saleable are my best selling on IS.

No reason means they were accepted.

Next to them all it says "not approved"

That's because your application was not approved. 7 out of the 10 have to be accepted for you to be accepted as contributor. If the reviewer gets to the 4th he would reject, he may not even look further. Conclusion - those without reason may or may not get accepted next time around.

Quote from: Herg on December 02, 2010, 19:58
Next to them all it says "not approved"

If 4 or more reason for rejections are given all other images might have been ok but your application is denied since you didn't make the 70% approval rate.

7 images out of ten have to have "no reason" to get you approved as a contributor.

It happens quite often that one image too much (4 images altogether) is the reason for a failed application. Simply pick new images for the ones with a rejection reason and re-upload the others without a reason next time.

Also, it could be of great help to post your initial ten images here in the critique forum. This way you can get some "damage control" by getting some feedback.

Quote from: Danicek on December 02, 2010, 20:03
That's because your application was not approved. 7 out of the 10 have to be accepted for you to be accepted as contributor. If the reviewer gets to the 4th he would reject, he may not even look further. Conclusion - those without reason may or may not get accepted next time around.

OK, I might not be on top of this one but has this been confirmed that images without a reason have not been inspected?

Are only 4 images rejected without looking at the rest?

If so, that would be awfully complicated for new contributors to figure out what the issue is with their images in case they were never reviewed assuming they are ok.

Ok, It's perhaps not that bad then but the images do sell over yonder. The first 4 images in succession were rejections but lower down reasons were given for further rejections if that helps.

In many cases it helps a lot when new applicants just show theit initial images here in the critique forum or on the Shutterstock critique forum. This will save a lot of time and frustration.

I suggest you do the same to prevent a second rejection.

I don't know how to do that here.

Quote from: Danicek on December 02, 2010, 20:03
That's because your application was not approved. 7 out of the 10 have to be accepted for you to be accepted as contributor. If the reviewer gets to the 4th he would reject, he may not even look further. Conclusion - those without reason may or may not get accepted next time around.

That statement is wrong, They still review all the images. However even those that would have been approved by this reviewer may not be approved the 2nd time around by another reviewer. Best to submit 10 new images.
And you should post them either here or on the SS critique forum.

I'm just astonished that stuff accepted on IS was rejected 

Quote from: heywoody on December 02, 2010, 22:33
I'm just astonished that stuff accepted on IS was rejected 

'twere ever thus. Even when I started on iStock, people were saying that each would accept material the other rejected.

i've had several rejections on my mission to get accepted as a contributor at SS.   had no problem at DT or Fotolia..
so this week i tried to put my attention on what exactly am i doing wrong and what exactly are they looking for.
i began randomly browsing people portfolios, sorting from the oldest to most recent.  i am AMAZED at some of the stuff thats in there.  those brilliantly set up shots we see on the front pages were no where to be found.  for the most part, i found drab images that i cant believe have any commercial value.  i found soooo many shots with horrid lighting mistakes..awful shadows and highlights.  i found tons of shots with shallow dof in annoying areas;  meanwhile i've been having my work critiqued and have become obsessive with getting perfect dof/focus.  i saw a shot of an undramatic sky with a powerline not cloned out...
soooo what? 
apparently the bar has been raised in the last year or so.. because a lot of this older stuff is shameful.

The bar has been raised considerably over the past few years. The older images were ok in their day I suppose. It has been talked about having the sites "clean house" but it doesn't happen. And contributors don't do it either. So here we are.

Quote from: Blufish on December 03, 2010, 03:16
The bar has been raised considerably over the past few years. The older images were ok in their day I suppose. It has been talked about having the sites "clean house" but it doesn't happen. And contributors don't do it either. So here we are.

Funny thing is, the old stuff sells, and not just once but again and again. Apparently it is good enough for the buyers.

Quote from: shiyali on December 03, 2010, 04:48

Quote from: Blufish on December 03, 2010, 03:16
The bar has been raised considerably over the past few years. The older images were ok in their day I suppose. It has been talked about having the sites "clean house" but it doesn't happen. And contributors don't do it either. So here we are.

Funny thing is, the old stuff sells, and not just once but again and again. Apparently it is good enough for the buyers.

Not everything accepted by a site is good, not everything rejected is bad.
There are technically perfect useless pictures which nobody buys, and slightly noisy pictures which are perfectly useable.

I had that thought in my mind when I typed, but my fingers didn't follow through

Thats my point exactly. If you have a good shot that isn't 100% sharp but works as an image on an artistic level, that should be the criteria. Like I mentioned above, the images they rejected sell well on IS so I am not going to beat myself up about it. Perhaps they want you to jump through a few hoops before they let you in to filter out the half hearted and dejected. The pain is I can't re-submit until 30 days. Whats that all about ?

i feel your pain Herg..
and sorry if this is turning into the rejects piss and moan thread but not only is the 30 day wait time annoying but it bugs me that you can resubmit something that go a '7 out of 10 must be approved' only to have the next reviewer shoot it down.  really a mixed message when you're trying to understand what they're looking for.  the keywording/categorizing is so labor intensive.  i've actually read (i think somewhere in this forum) that someone resubmitted a '7 out of 10' and when they came back rejected the 2nd time he/she contacted support and they approved them. 
well... keep at it.  if nothing else, its helping me fine tune my skills and turning me into a maniac

There is no point of nagging about rejections anywhere until we can see the images. What's the point of this thread without the images?

Quote from: Herg on December 02, 2010, 19:51
... Soul destroying. ...

You really should seperate your photo's general / artistic value from getting accepted at these place. Being rejected by a microstuck site doesn't say anything about the quality of your shots.

I've seen littleny images on another thread and they are really spectacular. I'm sure you will get in next time.

Ridiculous rejection is when reviewer rejects my vector illustration because of incorrrect white balance.

Quote from: molka on December 03, 2010, 14:07Being rejected by a microstuck site doesn't say anything about the quality of your shots.

That's what the brother of Van Gogh kept telling him. 

I see many new contributors complaining about the 30 day waiting period to re-submit. I think they want to give you some time to research and make corrections. If there were no waiting period, you can bet they would be blasted with people with little skills trying to dump their snapshots to make a few penny's. Those that are serious about photography will endure. It's separating the grain from the chaff.

When I started at SS the waiting period was 90 days, needless to say, I was rejected the first time, and 3 months was a long time to wait...made it on the second try.