Quote from: luissantos84 on December 28, 2011, 20:23

Quote from: kultablasi on December 28, 2011, 19:55
This site is horrible by all means, and they ask for money in application?

I wouldn´t say that but we all have different experiences on agencies, they are my 6th/7th best agency

I didn't even send them, their site is simply ugly. I'm surprised how they make sales!  6th best agency? But can you make money? Really?

Yep, the photo / composition needs more space. This one looks a small part of a big stall, and cut sharp! They rejected one of my hair curling machine photo because of cutting the cable. Some reviewers are strongly against cutting objects in any way! They don't care your opinion or preferences, they just need suitable photos for designers. 

Some photos lost their charm when they are shot at a long distance to keep every part of it in frame! I'm not sure about thisone, because I don't kow the rest of stall.

This site is horrible by all means, and they ask for money in application?

Thank you folk, all of you. Really. You made it clear for me. Also, about epilator you're * right!! It needed a little brightness. When I appy brightness with dodge tool, in the white areas, the result was surprisingly good.

LOL RacePhoto.  I could easily get rid of flag, and pigeons but I don't know, I didn't. Well, statue is bigger than seen on photo actually. So we would have to throw rocks, but that wouldn't make sense, I suppose.  And the flag was too small to be noticed in the screen, while shooting.

Next round, I will knock down Istock! Here, I will represent my new nominees. By the way, you're great!

Quote from: RacePhoto on December 28, 2011, 05:08

Quote from: Sammy on December 27, 2011, 19:42
LOL the first post is from 2006!

If the person posting the delayed reply had only waited until January it would have been a full five year old "back from the dead topic".

It does point out how some things just don't change much?

Yep, I was going to mention that. Nothing has changed, apparently. 

Thanks people, when I search in the site and view the images at %100 size, I can see they are not that perfect! I suppose they act more restricted when it comes to the application? Am I right?

I want to have photos with people in but as I said before, I can't manage right now.   Thanks for suggestions people, I will edit photos, but of course, I won't send same photos to Istock again. : ) The overexposed area, yep. Actually that was my main concern about that photo.

About the colors, they don't seem to like colorful photos than desaturated ones?

BTW, I want to ask something else. To be honest Istock isn't my primary goal! I would love to get in Shutterstock. (Not tried yet, since they ask a passport and I don't have one. I want to get one just for SS, but not sure worth it or not.) Would you please tell me, which site is easier to get in(in this case for me)?

P.s: And the statue. Actually it was a monument more than a statue. And it's a real person monument, the one on the horse. He is Ataturk, founder of Turkey. Significant historical figure, actually. 

Especially these days, rejections are not stable. Even when they don't find a ''reasonable reason'' they say

''We are looking for images that exceed the technical quality and creativity of the images already online. Lighting and composition are very important in creating a good quality stock image that will have good chances to sell. This is a very well covered subject in our data base and the image does not exceed in quality, composition and technique images that we already have online.''

Even if you have texture photo. Come on, how come someone exceed the limits of a texture photo? Maybe, not taking texture photo.  Or a crap texture?

Strange, someone may accept almost all of your photos, other one rejects all of them. It ain't a trustworthy attitude. Because you are either good or just suck! If you suck at photography, next time all of your photos can't be accepted. It shouldn't.

Actually I'm more happy with product and still life photos. But unluckily they need variety.  Thanks for advice, I will stay away statues. But, For Pete's Sake, they also don't like outdoor photos. They don't find a texture photo good enough. What else can I shoot? Bugs, birds, flowers? They hate them, as well. (To be honest, I hate those, too. )

They consider isolated product and food photos as different types?

Thanks sjlocke, actually took my time to take of that statue photo. The third one is isolated with pen tool, when I say ''make selection'' what number should I type? It might be because of that? So, technically  (noise, focus, expose etc.) nothing's wrong, but a strong composition needed? Also, I wanted to send three different types (I can't shoot people, so far), so for a texture photo, how much can I be creative, extraordinary?

BaldricksTrousers, thank you. The Statue is actually accepted by Fotolia and Dreamstime so I thought it would be ok. And you know what, the one thing I liked in that photo is the angle. Some of my friends told me to remove buildings, but I thought they saved the photo being another dull statue photo. Also, ı got rid of all the crowd and ugly parts of the city that way.

Yes, actually I only wanted to submit photos which don't have vital problems and didn't care about the creativity. I thought they only looked for photographs having potential. I didn't expect them to be ''great''. So, I was wrong. But do you think If I send photos technically equal to these, and yet creative / well composed, I can make it? Am I likely to break through? : )

Lol, just give them a month.  They are the fastest agency! : )

I can't see the photo but why do you keep ISO so high? I never shoot a photo over 100 (Mostly 80), you could set your ISO to 100 and choose slower shutter speed. 1/500 is not necessary if you don't shoot something moving, or your hands aren't shaking...

Sometimes it's better not to resubmit it. Instead of resubmitting with old ID, submit it as if it's a new file. Because, I think resubmissions are being inspected by the same reviewer. And when the problem is focus, lighting or something else like that they usually reject it again. If the problem is noise (not much of course), or logo issue, then you could fix that easily. Though, Dreamstime rejections are mostly reasonable and clear.

Sorry, I've fixed the problem. 

Hello people, I'm sure you had enough of this. But I couldn't find a way to post Istock so I preferred to post here. (I've always been just a reader here.)

So, let me get to the point. My first 3 photos are rejected. The reason was actually confusing, I couldn't get exactly what was wrong. I want to understand what's wrong and next time solve it. But all the thing they said was something like that:

''Admin Note:
At this time we regret to inform you that we did not feel the overall composition of your photography or subject matter is at the minimum level of standard for iStockphoto. Please take some time to review training materials, resources and articles provided through iStockphoto. The photographs provided in your application should be diverse in subject matter, technical ability and should be your best work. Think conceptual, creative and most important think Stock photography. Try to avoid the average eye level push the button perspective of a common subject. Try and impress us, we want to see how you stand out from the crowd.

We welcome you to return after the number of days specified and upload 3 fresh samples of your work and we will re-process your application. Please note that you will not be able to upload new samples until this waiting period has passed.''


Would you please take time and look my rejected photos? And critique them? Thanks in advance. The problem is technical or they just didn't find those attractive?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/54718845/P1090733_1copyistock.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/54718845/P1090929copyistock.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/54718845/P1100322copyistock.jpg

123rf is sooo unstable. If my files inspected in 9 days, I would be bloody happy.