Author Topic: Crestock Rejections (Read 4908 times)

stokfoto · « **on:** May 08, 2007, 11:38 »

Ok I am not the first one who gets surprised by the rejection rate of Crestock.it is not that I am complaining besides I was expecting something like that could happen as I'd read some others having similar experiences,like their best seller photos being rejected there ,which happened to me too:)

now I am just curious while they are really concerned about building up a very high quality stock photo library how they will keep the photographers encouraged to upload, it appears that current rejection rates rather puts people of from uploading at the same time,as far as I know, they have very slow sales.

I don't mean to argue their policy,which I fully respect but it seems to me what they are doing is very risky,I hope a bright feature is awaiting the site but I must admit I have worries about it.

madelaide · « **Reply #1 on:** May 08, 2007, 16:32 »

Sales are amazing at CS! This month I sold one image already and I got amazing $1 for it!

Regards,
Adelaide

Eco · « **Reply #2 on:** May 08, 2007, 16:44 »

I think Crestock is firmly on the road to self destruction. As is probably the case with most microstock sites 80% of the sales comes from 20% of the photographers. If these top photographers stop uploading they are in serious trouble. In fact some of the most respected and successful photographers openly call them "a joke".

What they try to do is to select only the best of the best, yet their subscription sales at 25c a download is among the lowest in the industry. I am afraid this is not a sustainable business model. In my opinion they have two options if they want to keep their photographers and stay in business: lower their standards for acceptances or increase the payment per download.

I hardly upload there anymore. At an acceptance rate of about 80% I probably cannot complain, yet their generic and irrational reasons for rejections really irritate me. If you have 5 rejections out of a batch with all of them rejected for "composition" I doubt if they themselves know what they are looking for.

stokfoto · « **Reply #3 on:** May 08, 2007, 17:52 »

Quote from: Eco on May 08, 2007, 16:44

What they try to do is to select only the best of the best, yet their subscription sales at 25c a download is among the lowest in the industry. I am afraid this is not a sustainable business model. In my opinion they have two options if they want to keep their photographers and stay in business: lower their standards for acceptances or increase the payment per download.

I agree with that,may be they should go like macro and sell for more thus pay photographers more,which I think, could work out.

and they are even taking further steps by removing earlier accepted photos lower then 4mp res,and the ones that don't fit their current quality standards.

let's see how they will deal with it.

epixx · « **Reply #4 on:** May 08, 2007, 18:24 »

They could try a new slogan:
"You don't like money? Try Crestock. Low on sales, high on rejects."

Sounds like a success, doesn't it?

ManicBlu · « **Reply #5 on:** May 09, 2007, 04:05 »

Well, as much as I like the site and have been one to give them a chance I've stopped uploading as well until they get realistic. You cannot on the one hand expect the best of the best..different from all the rest for .25.

hospitalera · « **Reply #6 on:** May 09, 2007, 16:26 »

Uploaded 450 images in one go, 45 approved, rest rejected, perhaps they have a 10% law

SY

Aquilegia · « **Reply #7 on:** May 10, 2007, 00:41 »

They just rejected one of my illustrations as out of focus. How am I supposed to focus an illustration?
They rejected an image that sold 25 times on its first day of upload on another site, and has sold consitently since. They recon it is not stock. I recon they don't know stock if it bites their bum!
The mantra 'We only accept the very best' is becoming a little stale, and seem like a cover-all excuse for amateur reviewing.
I am not uploading any more to that site.

madelaide · « **Reply #8 on:** May 10, 2007, 17:48 »

Not only they reject images, now they're cleaning up the portfolio.

It's not a new message there, but only now I noticed it:
https://www.crestock.com/news/cleanup-time-165.aspx

Regards,
Adelaide

stokfoto · « **Reply #9 on:** May 11, 2007, 06:35 »

Quote from: madelaide on May 10, 2007, 17:48

Not only they reject images, now they're cleaning up the portfolio.

could they be low on free disc space

?

madelaide · « **Reply #10 on:** May 11, 2007, 17:59 »

Quote from: stokfoto on May 11, 2007, 06:35

could they be low on free disc space ?

I probaly have more disc space in my PC that they need to store approved images.

Regards,
Adelaide

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Crestock Rejections (Read 4908 times)

stokfoto

madelaide

Eco

stokfoto

epixx

ManicBlu

hospitalera

Aquilegia

madelaide

stokfoto

madelaide

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors