That's interesting - my tiny IS port doesn't generate enough volumes to have much of a picture.  So..  seems like there is a like for like in terms of types of sales with SS, DLs per image are similar and the return per download is a little higher in the PP.  What I'm having a problem understanding is how come the PP is considered so crap and SS is considered so great?

I think anything they reject is rejected for "technical reasons"

Got some good advice here and now use infranview for keywording (latest version is great as it handles title, description & keywords which are handled correctly on all sites).  However, if i edit something after keywording, the data is lost.  Any way of preventing this (I use paintshop pro)?

I have never seen a description box, only title and keywords.

Patrick.

Nor me - seems to collect the same data but changed some of the labels

lol, its true there is no accounting for some people's artistic taste and after all, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. But look at the facts, SS use to accept just about anything, right! Now they have 15million images they can afford to be choosy and that makes sense. So tacky is out. Understand it and adapt ........or die

Hmmmm....  If I�m being honest I really don�t like stock photography � it may be technically very good but as boring as elevator music � I find this stuff interesting and imaginative.  As for acceptance, I suspect this batch was outside the norm, I don�t think tacky is out, I think same old same old is out (except for IS) and that�s where adaption is needed (for acceptance if not for sales).   Fortunately for me I don�t need to adapt unless I want to get stuff on IS but then it would be like work and that really would need income like work and......

Several of you are relatively new to stock and to photography yet you are reporting that you have very high acceptance rates consistently.  I am certain that you would not discount their efforts, professional feedback or merit by suggesting based on your own limited experience that your work deserves to be accepted while someone who has put in the work long term and has proven that they produce work that is far above the norm both in content and technical merit does not deserve to be accepted.

Here is the essential error in the argument.  Deserves has absolutely nothing to do with anything.  This is cold hard commerce; the vendor stocks his shelves with whatever he wants rightly or wrongly.  I have a lot of sympathy for folks whose income is being eroded by this but my sympathy won�t pay anyone�s mortgage.  BTW have been doing photography since the early 80s � don�t submit photos as neither the film scans nor what I can do with available digital kit is up to par.

Oh it's not just tacky, it's really tacky and now SS are tightening up, 100% rejection speaks for itself. Hopefully he will get it and adapt and produce better work.

Maybe I just like tacky 

The "stop uploading new images" drive seems like a great way to suffocate a greedy website slowly but surely. Their customers will pick the lack of new content up and move to other sites. BUT, how many contributors are represented on this website who will actively participate in such a drive, compare to the total number of contributors. If the drive is only from us here, it might not even dent their new uploads that much. How to get a large proportion of their contributors to participate, I think, is the challenge......

You're not wrong!  They seem to have almost as many images as SS, possibly a similar number of contributors numbering 100s of thousands.  Using the DT rank here as a guide to possible number of independents on this site we're talking in the region of 600.  Of those only 40 have 10,000+ (lifetime) sales and 200+ have no sales.  All of the top 40 "going on strike" may have a minor impact, as for the rest of us, they wouldn't even notice...

Although I have the most activity and sales on SS, one does have to wonder what those inspectors are smokin'.  Here's a screen shot of a couple of my most recent rejections, because I don't think you'd believe me otherwise...



I guess I'll be more attentive about getting property releases for these architectural photos!   

Gonna take a complete punt here - could they possibly have been talking about a property release for the tatoos & hit the wrong button?

Cutting commissions

Well, in this case I am going to do the opposite of being accused of pointing out a substandard portfolio and point out a superior portfolio, the artist of whom had a 100 percent rejection rate from a recent submission.  Now, these rejections are not available for us to see, but from his/her port I'd venture to say that we can infer that the submissions were of similar quality and composition.  The reason I am making this post is that there has been a lot of, "well your port must suck then" comments over several threads. 

Here's the guy's port at Shutterstock: http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-urolffimages.html

Here is the thread about his 100 percent rejection submission. http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=110311

I have a very hard time believing that someone of this stature, quality and creativity would have 100 percent of his images rejected.

My conclusion is simply that there is no rhyme or reason behind the LCV rejections.  I just had 40 accepted (100 percent) while this guy had zero accepted with a lot more graphic talent.

Can�t argue with you on this!!  Technically excellent, ultra creative, different and sells really well (judging by performance where numbers of dls are available).  BTW, never said your stuff sucks � I can�t see it so don�t know but probably much better than what I produce.
@eggshell � tacky?  This is stock we�re talking about (ubiquitous sterile cheesy grins, stick figures, plates of salad etc).  It�s technically good and sells very well so very fit for purpose.   As a bonus, it�s complex and interesting to look at � on that basis, I�m all for tacky

- 1.
I like Shank. I have always liked him. And I don't want him banned.

And I love the way he likes to stir things up And the furious replies he never fails to get. Hahaha! I bet he's having a lot of fun
A while ago someone here called him the absolute Mr. Baiter.
I agree
He does that to perfection.

Don't go anywhere Shank, life is a lot more boring without you

PS On Topic
Unless Rebbeca decides to give back independent artists the 20% commission I signed for, there is no future for me at IStock.
Unfortunately.

Yeah too many people with rods up their asses - I have no problem with someone attempting to liven things up by talking shite.  Then again, I don't mind Lobo either 

I still can't get the greater part of my last series online at SS (while it's been excepted everywhere else, 21/21 everywhere, just IS rejected one). I think they'll drive a few ppl into IS exclusivity (since IS still is the 2nd best earner for most, way ahead of the rest and earnings of those who get most good content rejected at SS will sooner or later dry up). A lot more ppl will just stop uploading there. I'll give them another shot with a new series I hope to shoot soon (actually I hope to shoot at least 4 by the end of August) and if they'll just reject the whole series, I'll take a break over there. And than see what happens in the next month or 2. I'll sure carefully read these threads.

This is the risk they run.  I don't know if folks with good earning ports on SS will give it all up and go exclusive on IS BUT there is a high chance that some better contributors will stop uploading.  Obviously they won't care that they won't be offered stuff they don't want but they may care about not being offered stuff they do want 

Quote from: heywoody on June 11, 2011, 14:24

Quote from: Mantis on June 10, 2011, 20:40

There is one guy on Shutterstock who claims to be the king of stock and he is the worst photographer in general I can think of, yet Shutterstock continues to reject good images and accept his junk.  There is, in my opinion, a double standard over there. Not a variance in inspectors for him, but favoritism for him.  When I look at the crap he gets accepted and the excellent images that get rejected I can only conclude that there is a different set of rules for some photographers.  This isn't just one or two images I disagree with.  It's been that way for years, that's why he has 10,000 images on line THERE.  He can't get accepted anywhere else.  If I have 10,000 GOOD images I would certainly take the time to upload on all sites I could.  He doesn't.  

I don't personally know the guy nor do I blame him.  I blame Shutterstock for creating that unfair rift and showing clear favoritism.  

Is it acceptable to pick on an identifiable individual (hell, even I know who you're talking about) like this using a cloak of anomynity?

Get over it.  I never mentioned anyone's name.  Just because you think you know who he/she is doesn't mean my comment was finger pointing. And this thread is about SS rejections and it is an appropriate observation relevant to this conversation. 

I know EXACTLY who you were talking about and, if I do, ANYONE with an account at SS will too.  How is this NOT finger pointing?  I simply happen to think that criticising an identifiable individual in a public forum, who is not a participant and whose work in not particularly relevant to the conversation, is unacceptable.   To do so from within a cloak of anonymity is just plain cowardly.
Similarly, your opinions about your �excellent images� vs someone else�s �crap� and a sub sale at SS will earn me $0.25.
The idea that acceptance / rejection depends on who you are rather than what you submit is just silly.  More likely you are either submitting technically good stuff but not what they feel they need at the moment (IS is a good home for these) or the images are just not as excellent as you think they are.  In any case, I�m not the one who needs to �get over it�.