Author Topic: New istock rejection (Read 5485 times)

dbvirago · « **on:** January 25, 2007, 10:46 »

An image of a lighthouse was rejected for the following.

The keywords used for this file do not appear to be fully relevant to the subject. E.g. we see no coastline or shipping.

Under the new controlled vocabulary system that we now use, images need fewer keywords to do well in searches. The site handles translations and synonyms, so you do not have to.

I guess it could have been one of the many lighthouses found in rural Kansas that's not used for shipping navigation.

GeoPappas · « **Reply #1 on:** January 25, 2007, 13:34 »

Quote from: dbvirago on January 25, 2007, 10:46

I guess it could have been one of the many lighthouses found in rural Kansas that's not used for shipping navigation.

Thanks for the good laugh...

epixx · « **Reply #2 on:** January 26, 2007, 02:31 »

Congratulations! It only means that your keywording makes sense. The system at iS most certainly doesn't

leaf · « **Reply #3 on:** January 26, 2007, 08:18 »

yep, got one of those keyword rejections today. grrrr.

I guess i was a little liberal with my keywords.. but... still frustrating.

madelaide · « **Reply #4 on:** January 26, 2007, 15:06 »

Many valid keywords are not in IS database yet, or have meanings that don't match ours. We can email them at [email protected] with suggestions. I haven't returned to see if all photos I had problems (I took note of their IDs) can now be corrected.

Regards,
Adelaide

Tim Markley · « **Reply #5 on:** January 28, 2007, 10:06 »

I got one of those rejections and the result is that I end up using fewer keywords. I wonder if this is a common problem?

madelaide · « **Reply #6 on:** January 28, 2007, 11:38 »

I haven't had one of these rejections yet (knock on wood).

I had however three images rejected for "artifacting" while I could see no such problem (unless they see satin and leaves own texture as "artifacts". When a 4th one was approved (and sold almost immediately), I sent one of those Scout messages and after a while it was approved. I'll do the same with the others. So maybe that's the way to go to have your keywords, if justifiable, accepted. Also the person behind [email protected] once emailed me to and she agreed with my arguments about a keyword that was considered out-of-the-controlled-vocalbulary was indeed a valid keyword (carmine, which is a red and is used in many animal names, such as the carmine bee-eater).

Regards,
Adelaide

dbvirago · « **Reply #7 on:** January 28, 2007, 15:14 »

RE the keyword database, the response indicates this was a human response - not automated. The reviewer stated that they couldn't see a coastline, so the fact that my back was getting wet shooting the image didn't count.

As for using fewer keywords, that is what I am afraid of. We can do it one way for everybody else, but a different way if you want to submit to Istock.

humannet · « **Reply #8 on:** October 25, 2012, 19:10 »

Quote from: dbvirago on January 25, 2007, 10:46

An image of a lighthouse was rejected for the following.

The keywords used for this file do not appear to be fully relevant to the subject. E.g. we see no coastline or shipping.

Under the new controlled vocabulary system that we now use, images need fewer keywords to do well in searches. The site handles translations and synonyms, so you do not have to.

I guess it could have been one of the many lighthouses found in rural Kansas that's not used for shipping navigation.

I also have something similar like yours in my is rejection.

gostwyck · « **Reply #9 on:** October 25, 2012, 19:31 »

Quote from: humannet on October 25, 2012, 19:10

Quote from: dbvirago on January 25, 2007, 10:46
An image of a lighthouse was rejected for the following.

The keywords used for this file do not appear to be fully relevant to the subject. E.g. we see no coastline or shipping.

Under the new controlled vocabulary system that we now use, images need fewer keywords to do well in searches. The site handles translations and synonyms, so you do not have to.

I guess it could have been one of the many lighthouses found in rural Kansas that's not used for shipping navigation.

I also have something similar like yours in my is rejection.

Ancient thread alert!

Suljo · « **Reply #10 on:** October 25, 2012, 20:27 »

just imagine what wikipedia will look like if smacks from IS and Gredy if is guided with this smacks... and with they vocabulary wannabe lets say system.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: New istock rejection (Read 5485 times)

dbvirago

GeoPappas

epixx

leaf

madelaide

Tim Markley

madelaide

dbvirago

humannet

gostwyck

Suljo

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors