Author Topic: Did editorial caption requirements change recently? (Read 6748 times)

offisapup · « **Reply #25 on:** June 10, 2023, 01:02 »

I also had an entire batch rejected two times for "Editorial Caption" because I only entered Month and Year (like I always have). Resubmitted with the Day and they all went through.

dakk · « **Reply #26 on:** June 10, 2023, 03:33 »

Had the same issue and had to re-submit with Month Day Year. They probably implemented some AI crap to auto-reject everything that doesn't follow the Month Day Year format?

All they've done for the past few years is to make everything more and more insufferable for contributors. This month's looking to be the worst in years for me with nothing but 10c downloads.

Honestly, if Adobe introduced an exclusive scheme, I'd go all in without hesitation at this point.

odesigns · « **Reply #27 on:** June 14, 2023, 08:49 »

As of 6/1/2023, there was a change made to the editorial caption requirements. To summarize, they now require a full date to be included for editorial submissions. Circa is no longer acceptable for an editorial submission except for content that was captured before the year 2000. A full list of requirements can be found in this updated post.

https://support.submit.shutterstock.com/s/article/Content-Publishing-Standards-Contextual-Metadata?language=en_US

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #28 on:** June 14, 2023, 11:48 »

Quote from: J_Stock on June 14, 2023, 08:49

As of 6/1/2023, there was a change made to the editorial caption requirements. To summarize, they now require a full date to be included for editorial submissions. Circa is no longer acceptable for an editorial submission except for content that was captured before the year 2000. A full list of requirements can be found in this updated post.

https://support.submit.shutterstock.com/s/article/Content-Publishing-Standards-Contextual-Metadata?language=en_US

Well thank you! Too bad SS doesn't send us notices of changes?

The day, month, and year the content was taken. For content shot before the year 2000, only the year is required.

The geographical location where the image was taken

Descriptions/titles must be relevant and applicable to the content you are submitting.

I just added the other part, geographical location just in case. I love the part about being relevant.

Although there seem to be some that are false or vague, incorrect locations, already in the collection.

Desintegrator · « **Reply #29 on:** June 14, 2023, 13:29 »

It seems chaotic.

"Circa year" was accepted for many years when the shot is not about some specific event.
And if was according to the original editorial guidelines, i've learnt it from that.

Few day ago i've found some possibly current guidelines on the website. Now it said that if photos are not vintage, at least month and year has to be written even for "circa" descriptions.
I've resubmitted my files corrected to this format. Some got accepted but the majority didn't

Oh, and the editorial guidelines i've seen few days ago on the contributor website seem to be gone by now...

In the meanwhile I still see some recently accepted editorial files with just "circa 2023" as date
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/berlin-germany-circa-2023-mechanic-works-2303025929

Unamas · « **Reply #30 on:** June 14, 2023, 13:37 »

Thank you for sharing, but I'm still not getting how the exact date helps with this description

Editorial Caption: London, UK, England - APRIL 27, 2019: Traditional fish & chips van at Southbank.

April makes sense, but exact date?

Desintegrator · « **Reply #31 on:** June 14, 2023, 14:02 »

Quote from: J_Stock on June 14, 2023, 08:49

As of 6/1/2023, there was a change made to the editorial caption requirements. To summarize, they now require a full date to be included for editorial submissions. Circa is no longer acceptable for an editorial submission except for content that was captured before the year 2000. A full list of requirements can be found in this updated post.

https://support.submit.shutterstock.com/s/article/Content-Publishing-Standards-Contextual-Metadata?language=en_US

oh, i was looking at that page a few day ago and it was different. Thanks.

Shuttershock · « **Reply #32 on:** June 15, 2023, 06:52 »

I have had a few rejection as the title had not (well to them anyway) described the photo well enough.
Do find the model release rejections worse, i get rejections if the models hair style is different in the release to the submitted photo!

gnirtS · « **Reply #33 on:** June 15, 2023, 07:16 »

Ive completely given up on released content now.

All my long-term, genuine releases now get rejected and for the money it brings in, im not going to get each person to sign a new one every single day.

Her Ugliness · « **Reply #34 on:** June 15, 2023, 09:51 »

Quote from: gnirtS on June 15, 2023, 07:16

Ive completely given up on released content now.

All my long-term, genuine releases now get rejected and for the money it brings in, im not going to get each person to sign a new one every single day.

You do not need releases for editorial content.

gnirtS · « **Reply #35 on:** June 15, 2023, 10:03 »

Quote from: Her Ugliness on June 15, 2023, 09:51

Quote from: gnirtS on June 15, 2023, 07:16
Ive completely given up on released content now.

All my long-term, genuine releases now get rejected and for the money it brings in, im not going to get each person to sign a new one every single day.

You do not need releases for editorial content.

Im fully aware of that. It was a reply to the post above about releases getting rejected.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Did editorial caption requirements change recently? (Read 6748 times)

offisapup

dakk

odesigns

Uncle Pete

Desintegrator

Unamas

Desintegrator

Shuttershock

gnirtS

Her Ugliness

gnirtS

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors