Hmm...  My editorial images seem to be selling well on ShutterStock.  That kind of surprises me, I didn't expect such popularity.  Still not selling better than my illustrations, but darned close.  All my editorial stuff is "news" type images (train wreck, police stand-off, troops coming home, etc..).  I see a lot of buildings, general shots with logos, etc.. submitted as editorial but I haven't tried any of that.  Just news type stuff I catch while out and about.

Anyone else doing well with editorial?  I'm going to start submitting some sports stuff (college and pro sports) and see what happens.

Sports are selling well.  I think all my editorial is sports?

i have some celebrity and sailboat racing shots. they do quite well with many od's and one el. however, i'm sure they'd do much better at the macro agencies but they're on a 2 year contract with ss.

Quote from: ap on July 23, 2010, 23:42
i have some celebrity and sailboat racing shots. they do quite well with many od's and one el. however, i'm sure they'd do much better at the macro agencies but they're on a 2 year contract with ss.

Hmm... I didn't think about Macro with editorial...  I need to check that out.  Thanks!

Quote from: WarrenPrice on July 23, 2010, 23:41
Sports are selling well.  I think all my editorial is sports?

Have you try some of editorials (sport) on Alamy?
If yes, how does it compare with SS.

Quote from: Kone on July 24, 2010, 04:23

Quote from: WarrenPrice on July 23, 2010, 23:41
Sports are selling well.  I think all my editorial is sports?

Have you try some of editorials (sport) on Alamy?
If yes, how does it compare with SS.

I have not, Kone.  I was surprised by seeing them sell at SS and just have not taken time to size them for Alamy.  Plus, this is not hard news (current). 

How do you send editorial to SS? I haven't seen any option for that. Could you help please??

Thanks

Upload the way you always do. Then change the release section in Editorial (at the right) when submitting your images. Also no special editorial categories like BigStock has.
Warning: on the forum you can find the info about how to write the description. This is very important. Your images will be rejected when doing this wrong!
See: http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/abt40005.html

Quote from: Colette on July 24, 2010, 15:34
Upload the way you always do. Then change the release section in Editorial (at the right) when submitting your images. Also no special editorial categories like BigStock has.
Warning: on the forum you can find the info about how to write the description. This is very important. Your images will be rejected when doing this wrong!
See: http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/abt40005.html

Absolutely ... I had several rejected because I ended with the location before the date.  The caption has to be EXACTLY right. 

I think there are three choices:  1) No Release Needed; 2)  Attach Release; 3) Editorial Use Only

Quote from: WarrenPrice on July 24, 2010, 14:53

Quote from: Kone on July 24, 2010, 04:23

Have you try some of editorials (sport) on Alamy?
If yes, how does it compare with SS.

I have not, Kone.  I was surprised by seeing them sell at SS and just have not taken time to size them for Alamy.  Plus, this is not hard news (current). 

it's a good thing you didn't for editorial (as everything else) sells royalty free on ss, but anything with people are royalty managed on alamy. so, once it's been sold as rf can no longer qualify for rm (except zoonar).

I have submitted several pics to SS as editorial(for example minor-league baseball players), and they have gotten rejected for "not newsworthy" or something to that effect. I thought editorial images could be pics of people you didnt have releases for, buildings with logos etc. Do they not accept editorial pics unless  they are "current" news-worthy stuff?

I found this, just looking around as I always do, its Angelina Jolie in Moscow, by a Shutterstock contributor (not me, I wish)!

http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/celebrity_photos/celebrity_photos_july_7zeGTc67gKlGdQPxqHUjDP

Great shot, congrats to the photographer!

Quote from: WarrenPrice on July 24, 2010, 16:23
Absolutely ... I had several rejected because I ended with the location before the date.  The caption has to be EXACTLY right. 

Here comes my free editorial caption tool....
http://www.microstockphoto.co.uk/editorialcaption.html
sorry for pimping

To the original question... I've noticed as well that some editorial pictures sell well on SS; they are probably being so strict in requiring editorial even when it's not necessary*, that some buyers know they can use those pictures in a more liberal way

*such as stamps from many countries, or buildings in Germany which -afaik- can be photographed from a public point of view

Quote from: microstockphoto.co.uk on July 27, 2010, 17:56

Quote from: WarrenPrice on July 24, 2010, 16:23
Absolutely ... I had several rejected because I ended with the location before the date.  The caption has to be EXACTLY right. 

Here comes my free editorial caption tool....
http://www.microstockphoto.co.uk/editorialcaption.html
sorry for pimping

Aren't we all, just by the nature of the business, Pimping?  I don't understand some of our attitudes.  We sell/Pimp pictures. Does it really matter that we do it here?
By the way, thanks for taking the time to develop the captioning tool.  It should be very useful.

Quote from: zimmytws on July 25, 2010, 21:19
I have submitted several pics to SS as editorial(for example minor-league baseball players), and they have gotten rejected for "not newsworthy" or something to that effect. I thought editorial images could be pics of people you didnt have releases for, buildings with logos etc. Do they not accept editorial pics unless  they are "current" news-worthy stuff?

you're correct - newsworthy is one of a number of possible editorial definitions, not the ONLY one - but some reviewers can't seem to grasp that concept --resubmit them and they may be accepted  by another reviewer

s

I'll try resubmitting some, thanks Cascoly!

Quote from: cascoly on July 27, 2010, 18:45

Quote from: zimmytws on July 25, 2010, 21:19
I have submitted several pics to SS as editorial(for example minor-league baseball players), and they have gotten rejected for "not newsworthy" or something to that effect. I thought editorial images could be pics of people you didnt have releases for, buildings with logos etc. Do they not accept editorial pics unless  they are "current" news-worthy stuff?

you're correct - newsworthy is one of a number of possible editorial definitions, not the ONLY one - but some reviewers can't seem to grasp that concept --resubmit them and they may be accepted  by another reviewer

s

Quoteyou're correct - newsworthy is one of a number of possible editorial definitions, not the ONLY one - but some reviewers can't seem to grasp that concept --resubmit them and they may be accepted  by another reviewer

I had a series of the same subject split up in two batches. First batch were all accepted, second batch all rejected for "not newsworthy enough". 
So perhaps you are right! Seem to me that the second batch had another reviewer!

when this first happened, i emailed the manager, and he said to resubmit with attn to contact him; since then i've just re submitted and the good shots usually make it on pass 2

s

QuoteI had a series of the same subject split up in two batches. First batch were all accepted, second batch all rejected for "not newsworthy enough".  Huh
So perhaps you are right! Seem to me that the second batch had another reviewer!

Sorry, mistake. To be correct, I should have said too that this was about a submission to another agency, not to SS. (or is it: "should have must said"? owowooww! Bad English!) 

Quote from: ap on July 23, 2010, 23:42
i have some celebrity and sailboat racing shots. they do quite well with many od's and one el. however, i'm sure they'd do much better at the macro agencies but they're on a 2 year contract with ss.

Were these via the Red Carpet program?

Motocross images selling well today.  Must have to do with the start of X-Games 16.   

My pics of local news events have been selling well, I'm a little surprised.  But most of the shots are somewhat generic (could be anywhere).  I got a shot of a boy hugging his dad (a soldier who just came home from overseas deployment) and it's sold on SS a few dozen times.

I did get a rejection of a coal power plant as "not newsworthy".  I'll resubmit and see what happens.

Okay, so it's somewhat of a well known secret that constantly submitting new materials to ShutterStock is what gets you steady sales... Start slacking off on submissions and you'll see your sales drop.

By submitting editorial images that previously I would not have, I have managed to continue submitting weekly images to SS and the result for me has been a DRAMATIC increase in sales on ShutterStock.  Even if some of the editorial images don't ever sell, they still keep my account active and buyers find my other images.

After several months of inactivity on my part (and next to no sales during that time period), I have been submitting new files at least once a week on SS for the past 6 weeks and the result was a new BME for me in July.  I would not have been able to do it if it weren't for editorial shots.

Quote from: dnavarrojr on July 30, 2010, 07:02

I did get a rejection of a coal power plant as "not newsworthy".  I'll resubmit and see what happens.

Shows all they know. I'm running the website for a campaign against a proposed local coal power station and there are many similar campaigns in the UK at present. (http://www.conchcampaign.org/links.html) The iStock images at the time were far too 'pretty' (taken at sunset), but I found a superbly suitable photo on Flickr to use.
I'd have 'no confidence' in anyone that said that one of the biggest current environmental issues 'isn't newsworthy'.

Is there any way of limiting a particular image on Shutterstock to Enhanced License?  I have a newsworthy image that might prove to be in demand as the anniversary of the event approaches.  It sort of rankles to see the license royalties at $.25 for this particular image.