Author Topic: istock...arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrggh!!! (Read 29835 times)

stockastic · « **Reply #50 on:** May 09, 2010, 20:44 »

Interesting.

michealo · « **Reply #51 on:** May 10, 2010, 01:40 »

Quote from: sjlocke on May 09, 2010, 20:36

How 'bout this?
http://seanlockedigitalimagery.wordpress.com/2009/02/23/youve-been-accepted/

Sean you shouldn't be encouraging the competition ;-)

ap · « **Reply #52 on:** May 10, 2010, 02:10 »

Quote from: michealo on May 10, 2010, 01:40

Quote from: sjlocke on May 09, 2010, 20:36
How 'bout this?
http://seanlockedigitalimagery.wordpress.com/2009/02/23/youve-been-accepted/

Sean you shouldn't be encouraging the competition ;-)

maybe it's misinformation.

actually i'm sure it's all good, but what we really want to know are more details on the best match changes which they are keeping under lock and key.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #53 on:** May 10, 2010, 13:05 »

Quote from: sjlocke on May 09, 2010, 20:36

How 'bout this?
http://seanlockedigitalimagery.wordpress.com/2009/02/23/youve-been-accepted/

Excellent and covers it all. Nice work.

donding · « **Reply #54 on:** May 10, 2010, 15:40 »

I to hate their review process and the rejections for keywording, but I make the most money off this site. I haven't uploaded to them for quite awhile or any of the sites and when I last did it wasn't much, but they keep generating income more so than the rest of the sites.

Dr Bouz · « **Reply #55 on:** May 14, 2010, 06:54 »

Quote from: Perry on May 04, 2010, 09:01

They just rejected some images of a red heat-shaped thing because I had includeded word 'Love' in the keywords. Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh!

yes, i would love to be the reviewer too - one of the main reasons is rejecting of keyword-spamming images.
*if this is some object, heartial-shaped, and in red color = keyword "love" has nothing to do with this. this is "object" "single object" "heartial shape" etc... = what is not-is not love ("human feeling"). - so reviewer was right.

** i met one reviewer from istock personally -and believe me -that person is really excellent - photographer -and photo shop operator.

Microbius · « **Reply #56 on:** May 14, 2010, 08:49 »

Quote from: Dr Bouz on May 14, 2010, 06:54

Quote from: Perry on May 04, 2010, 09:01
They just rejected some images of a red heat-shaped thing because I had includeded word 'Love' in the keywords. Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh!

yes, i would love to be the reviewer too - one of the main reasons is rejecting of keyword-spamming images.
*if this is some object, heartial-shaped, and in red color = keyword "love" has nothing to do with this. this is "object" "single object" "heartial shape" etc... = what is not-is not love ("human feeling"). - so reviewer was right.

** i met one reviewer from istock personally -and believe me -that person is really excellent - photographer -and photo shop operator.

Why would IStock include conceptual keywords in the system if they are not be used in this sort of instance? Clearly you cannot photograph "love", as you point out it isn't an object, so when would it be appropriate to add it as a keyword?
Following your reasoning it would be equally inapplicable to a photo of two young people starring longingly into each other's eyes "love has nothing to do with this. This is "people""couple""two"etc."

Dr Bouz · « **Reply #57 on:** May 14, 2010, 10:09 »

if love is "human feeling" - this has nothing to do with ONLY objects. objects are dead things. with no heard and hot blood inside.
-so your parallel is not good. -image of two people from the other hand can produce differ feelings. love is one of these feelings.
if you have image with people for example are giving a present each to other - this heartial object for instance - then "love" is o.k. keyword.

or try to think "from the end" - if you are buyer, and you need a little red glass heart image for your design, for i don't know.. st.valentine's day... - you are going to try search with : red, glass, single object, heart shape, ...... i am pretty sure that you are not going to type word "love" for this. -you guess -you need image of object.
another buyer who needs "human feeling ->love" is going to have a bunch of images which does not have anything to do directly with the term "love"
reviewers few times deleted some right kwds from my files - and i complained to support, and kwds. were back.
but in this specific case - i have to say that i agree with reviewer.
*why is istock most sucessful agency in a business? fiwe years ago - all the agencies had pretty similar number of pretty the same images - but istock rised up from the crowd? even if the prices on is. are actually the biggest in a business? i am sure that a number of new buyers turned on istock also because search/keyword policy

Microbius · « **Reply #58 on:** May 14, 2010, 10:19 »

In that case could I ask why it was appropriate for you to have the keyword "love" on this image:

or this one:

!!!

Dr Bouz · « **Reply #59 on:** May 14, 2010, 10:35 »

because these images were sent BEFORE istock anounced it's plan to avoid keyword spamming with both non-relevant, and half relevant kewords. AFTER this site mail - which every single one member received - i think that i had two (2) images rejected with keywords reason.
2.nd is back from 2006. -this is a 2010. now

anyhow, thanks for pointing on these images. -please check these images in a few hours or tomorrow, and tell us here what happened. (i do not know how quick is update of editing images ).

*can we see please problematic image from the start of thread, and date of uploading please? thanks.

but the main fact that you are missing here is :

these two (mine) images that are accepted (under the rules in the time these were sent to microstock sites) -would not, and should not be accepted today - because there are new rules about keywording. -but these images with no matter which are images's keywords, or whatever with this images - does not make any change to the image we are talking here.

this is what my mailbox says:

iStockphoto Tip of the Week - 10.14.2008 - Keyword Crackdown ......

so... cool down, and play by the rules, or don't play

Microbius · « **Reply #60 on:** May 14, 2010, 10:44 »

Thanks for answering the question; many would have been too embarassed to. I'll leave it at that, people can reread the thread including what you had said to Perry and make up their own minds.

madelaide · « **Reply #61 on:** May 14, 2010, 18:08 »

I had sales at DT where the search term was love, and they were illustrations of hearts and stuff like that. I suppose the buyer liked that I had this "inappropriate" keyword.

Dr Bouz · « **Reply #62 on:** May 14, 2010, 18:12 »

yes. i agree - on dt. i had also.. let's say maybe 5% of images bought with less relevant kwds, but, this is on d.t. dt is not is, and is is not dt. these are two different companies, with different policies, and different customer

ap · « **Reply #63 on:** June 22, 2010, 00:51 »

ok, now i've seen everything.

this is the latest rejection reason at is:

"Please provide a focused description for this file. The description should include how the file was created, its subject, location and any valuable technical information regarding the file that may be helpful to the client who may be interested in purchasing your image. Thank you."

it's like they want to limit our keywords but be as verbose as possible in the descriptions. what the?...

ShadySue · « **Reply #64 on:** June 22, 2010, 01:59 »

Quote from: ap on June 22, 2010, 00:51

ok, now i've seen everything.

this is the latest rejection reason at is:

"Please provide a focused description for this file. The description should include how the file was created, its subject, location and any valuable technical information regarding the file that may be helpful to the client who may be interested in purchasing your image. Thank you."

it's like they want to limit our keywords but be as verbose as possible in the descriptions. what the?...

That's usually (always?) used if there's something in the image which might be subject to copyright, e.g. a statue, carving, fancy detail on a building, etc. The bit you quoted isn't the 'rejection reason' - that will be given in your rejection email; it's advice on how to resubmit, should you choose. Not knowing what the image is I can't be specific, but for example it could be proving that the contentious item is out of copyright.

ap · « **Reply #65 on:** June 22, 2010, 02:09 »

i appreciate your trying to help but there were no other rejection reasons other than for keywording. it's a photo of a movie marquee with the headliner, 'love, love, love' and they rejected these following keywords:

{[ Film Industry, Movie (Entertainment Event), Movie Theater (Entertainment Building), Movie (Entertainment Event), show, Romance]}

if this is the case, then they've really gone too far. why should i explain everything in the description when they won't allow it in keywords?

it's double arrrrrgh!

Dr Bouz · « **Reply #66 on:** June 22, 2010, 02:38 »

with no intention to offend you, i think that i would reject these kwds too.
can you put here a thumbnail? -> go to rejected image, and right-click on it , and "copy image lotcation" - and paste it here. i'll give my best honestly - because i know how this is frustrating, and can be frustrating - just to save you nerves and time. - i had let's say some... 5 rejections regarding keywords , and 3x they were right once half-right, and once this was not acceptable, so i made a complaint to scout, and kwds were back.

ap · « **Reply #67 on:** June 22, 2010, 05:30 »

to be really honest, i'm not sure it's in our best interest to reject keywords by association. those keywords are definitely associated with the image without being literally it.

for example, i just had a sale on dreamstime where the buyer searched for "santa barbara". guess what? it's an image of a pair of very tall palm trees i took in santa barbara. obviously palm trees can be representative of santa barbara, just as beach is to hawaii.

so, anything to do with the movie industry can be associated with a cinema marquee. i just feel it's so limiting the way it currently is and the buyer obviously agrees.

other agencies encourage a goodly # of keywording. ie, you can't upload without at least 10 keywords at dt. veer offers even more keyword ideas for the ones you already have. i think it's really common sense vs. spamming and we both know which one it is.

Dr Bouz · « **Reply #68 on:** June 22, 2010, 07:45 »

i really hate when i have not to take side to my colegue - contributor in this case.
try to look things from the angle of buyer. o.k. this your buyer did type "santa barbara" in search, and he liked image, so -he bought one.
but to be honest - imagine on example that you need your previous image:

it's a photo of a movie marquee with the headliner, 'love, love, love' and they rejected these following keywords:

{[ Film Industry, Movie (Entertainment Event), Movie Theater (Entertainment Building), Movie (Entertainment Event), show, Romance]}

and he needs it. what for sure, regarding the fact these terms are connected with image - terms that will never be used for reaching your image is: romance (it's not romance(human relationship) - it's an object right?), nor film industry (again - it's an object), neither movie teather (it's not entertainment buildint, right?it's an object), nor movie (it's not a movie right?).
what buyer is going to type is: "love" (single word), electronic display (or bilboard). the end.
*please, take this my post with reserve, i'm not 100%sure that i understand correctly from the description fi this is on your photo? -this would be much easier with image to look on.

thing that i am trying to say is that istock really have best search machine in a business. -one of the reasons that i quit other sites - i was really bored when i try to find some of my images and have a tons of spamming images before mine.

*article on istock about keywordint (on the rejection mail/message, there is a link on kwds. article) -is really really useful. i read it twice or even three times, i can't remember any more - but as i said - after a site mail (every contributor got one) with "please take one more look on your keywords" i had maybe three images rejected with keyword reason.

lagereek · « **Reply #69 on:** June 22, 2010, 09:03 »

Im sure they have some summer-reviewers or trainees. My latest experience with an oil-industrial shot, well?? blimey, even the knowledge of English was questionable. Im waiting for autumn to upload any special photography, dont want to go through all that again.

Dr Bouz · « **Reply #70 on:** June 22, 2010, 09:32 »

^ but have in mind that images on hard drive earns nothing, and costs - at least that part of memory space on hard drive. from the other side - images that are online are fighting in between others to earn you some money

.
what i am tryin' to say is - this is not smart deceision. o.k. i can agree with reviewers being wrong. but, i can't agree that reviewers are too often wrnog. but, let's say that i agree - o.k. - it's a human person. even a high professionals in any business makes a mistakes. Senna died in F1 car, regarding the fact he was the best driver in the world...
-so o.k. -you have a scout to complain - why don't you complain? after all one image here or there does not make any big difference, right? (wow, ... i'm writing like i am a is p.r. stuff, i'll link 'em this topic, and ask for +2% royalities to be razed to me lol).
no honestly -reviewer who made a mistake can not be a reason for anyone to give up. if we give up every time we have a problem, and not trying to resolve the problem - we would be still in baby bed with pampers in between our legs

lisafx · « **Reply #71 on:** June 22, 2010, 10:50 »

Quote from: Dr Bouz on June 22, 2010, 09:32

^ but have in mind that images on hard drive earns nothing, and costs - at least that part of memory space on hard drive. from the other side - images that are online are fighting in between others to earn you some money .

I have to agree with Christian. Timing of when you upload can be an important factor in the success of an image. If you upload an image during a particularly slow time (or a seasonal one when demand is lowest for that subject) you run the risk of it sinking into the oblivion of the search engine. Initial sales and interest in a file when you first upload can cause it to have a much longer and more productive life.

Of course I am not suggesting game the system (wouldn't even know how to do that) but timing your uploads to give the best chance to an image may seriously affect its long-term success.

Dr Bouz · « **Reply #72 on:** June 22, 2010, 10:55 »

yes, i agree also with this. but i might mistakenly concluded that kristian did not want to re-upload/or upload images because he think that "real" inspectors are on let's say vacation, and that "reviewer students" are doing job currently. (which i disagree 100%)

ShadySue · « **Reply #73 on:** June 22, 2010, 10:56 »

Quote from: ap on June 22, 2010, 02:09

i appreciate your trying to help but there were no other rejection reasons other than for keywording. it's a photo of a movie marquee with the headliner, 'love, love, love' and they rejected these following keywords:

{[ Film Industry, Movie (Entertainment Event), Movie Theater (Entertainment Building), Movie (Entertainment Event), show, Romance]}

if this is the case, then they've really gone too far. why should i explain everything in the description when they won't allow it in keywords?

it's double arrrrrgh!

Again, this would be much easier if we could see the actual image, but it looks like they would need to know that you had just put in the words 'Love, Love, Love' youself, and that it isn't the name of an actual movie. Also, I think that your keywords are too loose for iStock. Depending on the actual image, 'movie theatre/cinema' might be OK, but not the others.
What works on Dreamstime is irrelevant to what will be accepted at iStock, and probably vice versa.

lagereek · « **Reply #74 on:** June 22, 2010, 12:09 »

I know reviewing is a human process and sure! anybody can make mistakes, quite acceptable but in this particular case it was a bit too much, it was like being told to remove spaghetti from a plate of spaghetti and after all any reject no matter how wonky, it shows up on your acceptance percentage and if the shot in question demands extensive PP, model-release, etc, well then it aint fun.
Reviewers must learn to look further then noise and keywords, thats just the very basics of being a professional picture-editor or Art-buyer.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: istock...arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrggh!!! (Read 29835 times)

stockastic

michealo

ap

RacePhoto

donding

Dr Bouz

Microbius

Dr Bouz

Microbius

Dr Bouz

Microbius

madelaide

Dr Bouz

ap

ShadySue

ap

Dr Bouz

ap

Dr Bouz

lagereek

Dr Bouz

lisafx

Dr Bouz

ShadySue

lagereek

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors