My goal is the same as it was on day one, about 18 months ago-take the best possible images.  I need money but that is not the primary goal of my photography.

Got it, have received a few LCV rejects, always just ignored that rejection as many times, it is a difference of opinion.  I agree, the marketplace is a better determination of value but then again, getting buried under 15 million other images and 30 pages of Vettas makes it kinda hard to get  your stuff seen by buyers.

I fail to completely understand why the sites do not purge themselves of the older junk (junk being the operative word); they could keep the 15 million images status by the current new stuff replacing the older junk.

Quote from: visceralimage on April 24, 2011, 19:38

Well, add me to the "pissed off camp"; just had a round of rejections at Shutterstock, on the weekend no less.  Is there no recourse for rejections on Shutterstock; for all the images, reviewer did not like the focus, all were wildlife at approx. 40 Fotolia with 600mm lens at f11 or so; so there was ample focus for the subject (small to med. birds), three they accepted, 9 they rejected, focus same on all.

I was wondering what "40 Fotolia" was - then I realized the letters f t must get changed to Fotolia.

It is frustrating getting this kind of rejection. Shutterstock does like all of the subject to be in focus - maybe a point and shoot with a tiny sensor would solve this problem for you. HA

Actually, I really enjoyed the photo shoot; the birds in Florida are in breeding plumage, the laughing gulls are mating at this time.  I felt like a director of a porn flick with all the gulls having sex around me; there were times I wanted to hide my eyes.  The male gulls are like 16 year boys; they yell and scream while doing the deed so that the whole community sees them "on top"; it is a real gas.  So when I get pissed, I try to remember how much fun it was taking the images.

What is LCV?

Thanks for comments.  I have resubmitted in the past using the required resubmission process with 100% success; just looking to see if there was a way to notify management that there is a reviewer or two that has less than a clue about wildlife images (early and late light and focus).  With a 600mm lens and a large mammal (relatively close), the entire mammal will never be totally in focus unless it is located on the moon.

At SS, is there a procedure for a second review of images; images the submitter feels should not have been rejected.  If so, please provide method to contact the second review.

As the new guy on the block, buyers bailing from IS kinda pisses me off but also makes me happy.  It pisses me off because "percentage wise, IS is one of my best sites"; I have a bit over 100 images that have been uploaded since Feb 2011 with 23 sales-it pisses me off because IS is screwing the clients that are purchasing our images.  I have my images at 20+ other sites so I am happy that, hopefully, these will get the new clients as they drift there-those that do drift to SS purchase my same images at much reduced prices-that kinda hurts also.

I wish IS would get their collective act together; for the benefit of clients, producers and employees.

Yeah well bugger off the pair of you, we dont need anymore here in our cosy little club.  Oh! and welcome! 

Lagecreek, anyone tell you you're an "ash", oops, did I spell that wrong   (just kidding, really, you're only a tailend)

I hope you change your position as I enjoy your input.

Quote from: madelaide on April 23, 2011, 11:13

I prefer to ignore manually, it feels much better!

I hate that, especially when my wife does it.   

I had one of those (wife, that is); she told me her "needs were not being met", I told her to drop some of her needs.

I guess I was one of the needs that got dropped.

Bob;

There seems to be one or two inspectors at SS that does not understand nature/wildlife.  I have same problem, especially if my images come to review at mid-week.  My acceptance rate runs at 70% but at times, this one inspector rejects everything; never for spots or anything-usually because he wants more saturation, crisper lighting, etc.  He just does not seem to understand we do not use studio lighting when photographing Siberian Tigers in the Primorski region of Russia.  He also does not have a firm grasp of white balance for early morning or late afternoon, rejecting things because images have a yellow or similar tint of early or late light.  Part of one rejection said to white balance the bird (laughing gull with pure white belly in very early morning light) but that would have killed the sunrise colors and made the image a dull shot.  Same image was accepted by 19 other sites.

Sometimes, you just need to move on and forget it.  I used to get really bothered by rejections, now I just do my work and submit.  With over 20 sites carrying my images, they will be available somewhere.

Elena;

I agree with the others, great site but I would change "we" to "I"; you may indeed have staff than helps  you with day to day operations but you are the guts of the operation and I feel you need to be the highlight.

It is easy to give up hope; maybe sales are poor compared to the old days, I don't know-was not here in the old days.

I have been on IS now for two months, now have 90 images online and 19 sales.  Honestly, for the number of images online, it is selling better than the others.  I will keep uploading my allotted 18 images/week; someday, maybe it (IS) will be sold and times will get better.  Then again, maybe I will step in front of a bus and it will not matter.