pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: I've had enough.  (Read 26701 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: May 15, 2009, 22:57 »
0
I never read or post anything on iStock forums but the not stock worthy rejections for any and all raster illustrations is getting to me and I had to let off some steam. Think it will get deleted?  :-\

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=88425&page=1

Quote
The "Not Stock Worthy" rejections for nearly all non-vector illustrations is getting obsurd. I have only managed to get 14 raster illustrations accepted and at least half of those were rejected at least once and were only accepted after a scout reinspection. The 14 raster illustrations that were almost all initially rejected (not stock worthy) average more than twice the number of downloads of the photos of mine that were accepted.

Let me provide an example of one of my raster illustrations that was initially rejected. I can admit that it does seem to have limited usage. But it has brought in over $600 worth of sales in which $480 of it went straight to iStocks pocket. Not to mention it has had 10 downloads this month alone...



By all means keep the strict technical standards. All I am really asking is that you losen up a bit and let the buyers have more of a say in what is and isn't stock worthy. As it stands now, I can't submit 70% of my images. And that unfortunately makes exclusivity a non-option for me. =\

EDIT: This one was just rejected for of course not being stock worthy. I submit it for a scout review.. now I wait a month to get a response.





nruboc

« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2009, 01:18 »
0
Great images, it's their loss!! It's a good time to point out that IStock is not the end all, be all of microstock imagery. That's why I love this industry, IStock doesn't care for my images, but I truly don't give a sh_t.  They have the most tedious, biased towards exclusives, upload process.... yet their competition keeps growing and growing. My advice would be to stop caring so much about what IStock thinks of your images and focus on their competition.  As an added benefit, you're guaranteed to make more than their insulting 20% commission.

« Reply #2 on: May 16, 2009, 01:28 »
0
And as a non-exclusive it will not help to post it on their forum. All reaction that it will have is a swarm of golden crowns that will rush out of the castle in defence of their queen (her name is "artifacting").  :D
« Last Edit: May 16, 2009, 01:38 by Eco »

« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2009, 04:02 »
0
Many of their photoreviewers hate illustrations / 3d stuff.   That sucks...

I would like the scout to be reviewer instead.  95% of the files send to him get approved.   Much creds to scout :D

RT


« Reply #4 on: May 16, 2009, 04:21 »
0
Many of their photoreviewers hate illustrations / 3d stuff.   That sucks...

I don't do illustrations so may be wrong, but I always thought that sort of stuff was reviewed by different people other than normal photo inspectors

« Reply #5 on: May 16, 2009, 04:25 »
0
Many of their photoreviewers hate illustrations / 3d stuff.   That sucks...

I don't do illustrations so may be wrong, but I always thought that sort of stuff was reviewed by different people other than normal photo inspectors

Thats only for vectors I think.  3d and rasters are submitted with photos..

« Reply #6 on: May 16, 2009, 04:32 »
0
Ive had several 3d illustrations rejected for "jagged edges". It seems the reviewers are looking at it in wrong percentage.
 Scout approved em right away.    Scout rules.  To bad hes kind of busy ;)

« Reply #7 on: May 16, 2009, 05:22 »
0
And as a non-exclusive it will not help to post it on their forum. All reaction that it will have is a swarm of golden crowns that will rush out of the castle in defence of their queen (her name is "artifacting").  :D

Fantastically poetic Mr. Eco, and, sadly true . . . . . .  the queen has shown her wrath on more then a few of my images.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2009, 08:42 by etienjones »

« Reply #8 on: May 16, 2009, 05:59 »
0
I gave up trying to submit raster illustrations to IS as they seem to want only regular photos with not much manipulation. Maybe if you were accepted for vector illustrations they would be more likely to take the raster illustrations? Good to see that Scout will take some of these. I just resubmitted a couple to Scout that were rejected last year. We will see what happens. This is one of the reasons I won't go exclusive with IS. My seasonal graphics and raster illustrations do really well on SS, DT, FT, 123RF, BigStock and StockXpert.

« Reply #9 on: May 16, 2009, 06:47 »
0
I don't submit raster graphic to IS anymore, but I sell them in other places, and I must say they sell well. For example:
This image is rejected by IS, but I sold it 5 times after only 15 views on DT:



This raster graphic is also rejected from IS but it has almost 330 views and I sold it for $100 on Canstockphoto (I got $27 from it):



This image I didn't even try to submit to IS because I am sure it will be rejected, but I sold it OD on SS yesterday:



and so on....

I hope IS people will see this thread  and think once more about raster graphic. Of course, vectors sell better, but raster graphic can cell better than some photographs I think.


donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #10 on: May 16, 2009, 09:36 »
0
Kngkyle, Whitechild.......those are some fantastic images in my opinion. I can't believe they would reject them. That is downright stupid on their part. I must ask a stupid question though. What is a raster image. I'm just a plain ol photographer and never tryed anything like that.

« Reply #11 on: May 16, 2009, 09:52 »
0
Kngkyle, Whitechild.......those are some fantastic images in my opinion. I can't believe they would reject them. That is downright stupid on their part. I must ask a stupid question though. What is a raster image. I'm just a plain ol photographer and never tryed anything like that.

Its a non vector illustration . . . . not a pure photograph and of course not a vector.

« Reply #12 on: May 16, 2009, 09:56 »
0
Kngkyle, Whitechild.......those are some fantastic images in my opinion. I can't believe they would reject them. That is downright stupid on their part. I must ask a stupid question though. What is a raster image. I'm just a plain ol photographer and never tryed anything like that.


Let me google that for u ;)

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=raster+image

« Reply #13 on: May 16, 2009, 09:59 »
0
Well done Magnum . . . .  as Stevie Wonder sang "there nothing more to say . . " from Superstition
« Last Edit: May 16, 2009, 10:02 by etienjones »

donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #14 on: May 16, 2009, 10:02 »
0
Kngkyle, Whitechild.......those are some fantastic images in my opinion. I can't believe they would reject them. That is downright stupid on their part. I must ask a stupid question though. What is a raster image. I'm just a plain ol photographer and never tryed anything like that.


Let me google that for u ;)

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=raster+image


Thanks Magnum.....that helps. Just gotta go do the research now ;D

« Reply #15 on: May 16, 2009, 10:29 »
0
I remember a while ago reading that they were going to have a separate category for raster illustrations like these.  Don't know what happened to that idea.  It has never made sense to me that they reject 95% of these images, some that would sell really well but they accept a lot of bland photos that will never sell.

« Reply #16 on: May 16, 2009, 13:01 »
0
IS miss thousands of pictures what were accepted and sell well on nearly any other microstockagency. Because of their politic to reject illustrations what are not verctors. But why not, if they feel well with this....
Ther're also illustrationagencies who don't take photos, photoagencies who don't take any kind of illustration and a lot more of agencies who are more specialized.

Some month ago some of my rasterillustrations slipped through review and into my portfolio, they sold best of all my images there. But...the effort to upload und the quote of rejection is that high IS turned to an uninteresting agency for 3d pictures.

On the other hand, they sell vector illustrations like hell...and take nearly all of my work.

Maybe this is not as stupid as it seems like on the first view. They stay specialized as best agency for vectors and sell well...i don't see any competitor as big as IS in vectorworks.
 

« Reply #17 on: May 16, 2009, 17:37 »
0
How about making your illustrations in a vector program instead of a raster one? After all an artist is an artist whatever medium they use. If Illustrator is too pricey maybe Inkscape would do. I think artists need to be fairly flexible.

« Reply #18 on: May 16, 2009, 18:10 »
0
How about making your illustrations in a vector program instead of a raster one? After all an artist is an artist whatever medium they use. If Illustrator is too pricey maybe Inkscape would do. I think artists need to be fairly flexible.

averil, raster and vector graphics are very different. There is no point in using vector based program for making raster graphic. It's totally different concept and result.

« Reply #19 on: May 16, 2009, 18:18 »
0
How about making your illustrations in a vector program instead of a raster one? After all an artist is an artist whatever medium they use. If Illustrator is too pricey maybe Inkscape would do. I think artists need to be fairly flexible.


Because most are made in a 3D program.

Anyway, I just submitted this one.. clearly not stock worthy as I'm sure Istock will say.

« Reply #20 on: May 16, 2009, 18:48 »
0
How about making your illustrations in a vector program instead of a raster one? After all an artist is an artist whatever medium they use. If Illustrator is too pricey maybe Inkscape would do. I think artists need to be fairly flexible.


Because most are made in a 3D program.

Anyway, I just submitted this one.. clearly not stock worthy as I'm sure Istock will say.


OK, fair enough. I've had a couple of illustation type images made in a 3D program rejected for the same reason. It is a very different workflow I'll admit.

I actually am working through Illustrator tutorials at the moment, and largely for this very reason (istock prefers vector illustrations). My intention is to create images in Blender (the 3D app I use) and then try to recreate them in Illustrator. I guess I'm more comfortable with photography, even if it's virtual, than with creating artwork from scratch. Perhaps I'm foolish, but I intend to go exclusive with istock when I get my downloads up because, as a very part time artist, I think it makes more sense to use the larger upload allowance on one site than to spread myself over several (especially as SS has pretty well wiped me).
« Last Edit: May 16, 2009, 19:29 by averil »

Milinz

« Reply #21 on: May 17, 2009, 07:25 »
0
Istock don't need my vectors, so I don't bother with them to send rasterized versions...

But, Fotolia accepts my rasterized vectors which are above their vector size limit like hot cakes and sell some of them pretty well.

This one would never pass iStock review due to some policy known only to them as well as I don't know to comply to their 'needs' in stock illustration ;-)




BTW, this file is not long online on Fotolia aand counting more than 70 dls only there ;-) Imagine how many is total dls then on all other agencies :-)

Yes, competition is GREAT to have as alternative to iStock due double standards giving advantage to iStock exclusives... And good to have images published on other places before their exclusives (or some bad tempered people) claim that you have 'copied' them who 'copied' your own image at the first place ;-)
« Last Edit: May 17, 2009, 07:38 by Milinz »

« Reply #22 on: May 17, 2009, 07:40 »
0
I hear so much about Istock giving advantage to exclusives, that it makes me sick...
Obviously it's all non-exclusives who say that.

Let me straighten some facts:
I became exclusive on istock on september, after being independent for 3 years.
I still get about the same amount of rejections. if there is something wrong woth a file then it's rejected, exclusive or not.
Do I agree with all the rejections? of course not, but I just can't whine like a lot of people here that it would be accepted if I was exclusive...

Do I get more downloads because I'm exclusive?
No.
It was like that in the first month or so, but since BM2 was launched, I'm down to about 25% of my pre BM2 downloads. and no, I don't span and keywords are all fine...

So please, find another reason to bash istock...


btw, I never woo-yayed in istock forums, and I do have a lot of critism about it... but that's for another thread...

Milinz

« Reply #23 on: May 17, 2009, 07:46 »
0
I hear so much about Istock giving advantage to exclusives, that it makes me sick...
Obviously it's all non-exclusives who say that.

Let me straighten some facts:
I became exclusive on istock on september, after being independent for 3 years.
I still get about the same amount of rejections. if there is something wrong woth a file then it's rejected, exclusive or not.
Do I agree with all the rejections? of course not, but I just can't whine like a lot of people here that it would be accepted if I was exclusive...

Do I get more downloads because I'm exclusive?
No.
It was like that in the first month or so, but since BM2 was launched, I'm down to about 25% of my pre BM2 downloads. and no, I don't span and keywords are all fine...

So please, find another reason to bash istock...


btw, I never woo-yayed in istock forums, and I do have a lot of critism about it... but that's for another thread...

It is not bashing at iStock - istock is not 'THEM'... iStock is stock agency... Unfortunately there are some people who work for iStock as reviewers (not all of them) who keep their noses too high and due to that iStock have that 'bad voice' amongst many of us... Not iStock - just some people there are rotten apples (as there is used to be said in Fotolia forum for some rules breakers)....
« Last Edit: May 17, 2009, 07:50 by Milinz »

« Reply #24 on: May 17, 2009, 09:29 »
0
...But it has brought in over $600 worth of sales in which $480 of it went straight to iStocks pocket...

I would have my answer right there... I'm not with Istock...


 

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors