pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Rejected at SS  (Read 11298 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: April 22, 2014, 13:02 »
+2
SS often uses bulk reject reasons for 'lighting' - even if it's dramatic or atmospheric

don't spend time worrying about why -- as others have suggested, some small changes to lighten the image will often get it accepted (and it's likely just a different reviewer is all that's needed)


Goofy

« Reply #26 on: April 22, 2014, 13:35 »
0
ok, I am going to toss this out (might be way off) for thought. I've noticed a much higher rejection rate from the weekend (Sat/Sun) reviewers than the Weekday (Mon- Fri) reviewers. Might just be me but food for thought  ???



Ron

« Reply #27 on: April 22, 2014, 13:37 »
0
ok, I am going to toss this out (might be way off) for thought. I've noticed a much higher rejection rate from the weekend (Sat/Sun) reviewers than the Weekday (Mon- Fri) reviewers. Might just be me but food for thought  ???
Same here and many others on SS as well, its on the SS forum. I am only submitting on weekdays since I found out, and I see a 98% approval rate now.

Goofy

« Reply #28 on: April 22, 2014, 13:59 »
0
ok, I am going to toss this out (might be way off) for thought. I've noticed a much higher rejection rate from the weekend (Sat/Sun) reviewers than the Weekday (Mon- Fri) reviewers. Might just be me but food for thought  ???
Same here and many others on SS as well, its on the SS forum. I am only submitting on weekdays since I found out, and I see a 98% approval rate now.

so either they have junior reviewers or software doing the reviewing on weekends?

Ron

« Reply #29 on: April 22, 2014, 14:10 »
-1
ok, I am going to toss this out (might be way off) for thought. I've noticed a much higher rejection rate from the weekend (Sat/Sun) reviewers than the Weekday (Mon- Fri) reviewers. Might just be me but food for thought  ???
Same here and many others on SS as well, its on the SS forum. I am only submitting on weekdays since I found out, and I see a 98% approval rate now.

so either they have junior reviewers or software doing the reviewing on weekends?
I dont think SS uses technology to fully replace humans

« Reply #30 on: April 23, 2014, 13:23 »
0
It is rejected due to: Poor Lighting--Image has exposure issues and/or incorrect white balance.
What am i not seeing? Help appreciated! ....


 Hi
 What i think that you do not see (because it is not written), is not actually about exposure/wb issues, it is about commercial usability of your photo. I guess their real rejection reason would be "not commercial" - but in my experience, and discussion with reviewer from one of ss competitor agencies is that they actually avoid to put this reason - because it's opening a lot of debate - because ANY image -accepted or rejected - have some similars both - in accepted or rejected images. -and with this rejection reason - it is possible to start (useless) arguing "why this one mine is not commercial and this one.... is and is online..".
 My 2c.
 cheers

« Reply #31 on: April 23, 2014, 15:58 »
0
thats right.

« Reply #32 on: April 24, 2014, 00:03 »
0
Hey ho i just wanted some input on the actual rejection so i can use it to enhance the image and re submit. But great to know that the photo is crap as well!  :D

BaldricksTrousers: the people in the background are blurred. I don't have the hang of this how to work editorial. Doesn't the photo need to be news worthy to be editorial? Is there a big difference in exposure/sales between RF and editorial?



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
15 Replies
5213 Views
Last post June 03, 2016, 04:48
by HappyBunny
86 Replies
21117 Views
Last post August 22, 2017, 08:14
by Chichikov
13 Replies
4629 Views
Last post October 07, 2016, 07:08
by ShadySue
16 Replies
5101 Views
Last post October 25, 2017, 03:31
by BaldricksTrousers
7 Replies
3974 Views
Last post November 08, 2017, 10:59
by rinderart

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors