pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Frustrating rejections again at Shutterstock  (Read 21106 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: March 26, 2008, 11:19 »
0
Thanks for that explanation!


« Reply #26 on: March 26, 2008, 12:28 »
0
I don't tolerate any reviewers rejections.....I find out who they are and threaten their lives.
I tell them I just got out of prison on parole, and say "Don't make me have another body"

God * reviewers. making bubble gum wages.

« Reply #27 on: March 26, 2008, 12:31 »
0
Sweet concept of teenage/ young people in love, simply gorgeous! SY
To be honest, this and all other shots of the series were all accepted by SS 5 days later after a resubmit (with a note to the reviewer). To please them, I made a tighter crop on this one (only cutting the gray slack) and more pop-up and less red in the other ones.

« Reply #28 on: March 26, 2008, 13:38 »
0
So after resubmitting i got 10/11 accepted, yesterday result was 0/11.  So i guess some reviewers just don't care about their job.

« Reply #29 on: March 26, 2008, 13:51 »
0
So after resubmitting i got 10/11 accepted, yesterday result was 0/11.  So i guess some reviewers just don't care about their job.
A great target for a Tomahawk cruise missile  ;-)

lisafx

« Reply #30 on: March 26, 2008, 17:39 »
0
Glad I read this thread.  Thought it was just me.  Just resubmitted the 13 of a batch of 18 that were rejected. 

It still amazes me that some new or premenstrual reviewer can run amok for days on a site rejecting hundreds or thousand of acceptable images, with no oversight until contributors start a forum thread.

Glad Jon has stepped in and sorted this out...

« Reply #31 on: March 26, 2008, 18:26 »
0
last two batches results: 30 of 32 admitted, 10 out of 11 admitted. I do not know if is due to the complaint I sent to them about 7 out 8 images rejected. No response from support. Glad to be lucky 2 times out of 3 then.


« Reply #32 on: March 26, 2008, 18:35 »
0
We work hard - we are at their peril!
We cant win em all - we wish we could but believe we should!!

« Reply #33 on: March 27, 2008, 08:40 »
0
NOthing has changed.  Woke up this morning to find 28 out of 30 rejected for "Composition" and "Poor lighting" meanwhile I have other photos with similar "composition" that are getting downloads daily and I have photos of a goalie playing hockey in which I can't control the lighting and the lighting is perfectly fine.  Here is an example at DT:

http://www.dreamstime.com/hockey-goaltender-image4079577

EDIT:

Its stupid crap like this that makes me want to go exclusive at IS.  In the end I hope that these companies get what they deserve for hiring idiots or trying to save money by using machines.  That said, I know that SS has been good in the past so I hope they return to that level - but given the recent events, it just seems to get worse.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2008, 08:47 by ichiro17 »

« Reply #34 on: March 27, 2008, 11:08 »
0
I had a couple rejected for composition a few weeks ago that are selling fine everywhere else. One is on the front page rotation at bigstock :) I thought that was kind of funny.

« Reply #35 on: March 27, 2008, 11:30 »
0
last two batches results: 30 of 32 admitted, 10 out of 11 admitted. I do not know if is due to the complaint I sent to them about 7 out 8 images rejected. No response from support. Glad to be lucky 2 times out of 3 then.



Curious.

Let me tell you a short history:

I sent my first 10 images batch. Rejected.

Next month I took the approved images, re-sended them with a new ones. They approved the news ones and rejected the others (approved in the first batch)

Next month I took the last batch approved images and re-sended with a new ones. New images approved, old images (approved in the past) rejected.

It was enough for me. This people are making fun of me, this is the last time I submit to SS. And so I wrote in the "note for reviewers" square.
I took 10 images that had been approved at least 1 time in the past and submited them...

Approved...

That is the way they test us...





RacePhoto

« Reply #36 on: March 28, 2008, 01:53 »
0
Trebuchet, I'm not making fun of your English, but the message makes little sense to me.

You say you had ten rejected from the first batch of ten and the next batch you included the accepted? Which were then accepted? If they were rejected how could there be anything accepted?

Maybe it's me and it's late at night.  ;D

Did you submit the same images three times? Once accepted, then second time rejected, and then with the note, they were accepted? So isn't your portfolio filling with duplicates?

Doesn't SS get kind of angry that you are consuming their time, running tests and resubmitting accepted and rejected images, multiple times? I'd worry about being banned from the site.

I forgot about this thread and submitted a new batch tonight. I was going to wait until the all clear had sounded. Oh well, I'm getting ready for rejection.

« Reply #37 on: March 28, 2008, 03:27 »
0
I think I understand Trebuchet. He was not accepted at SS and on his retries was resending to them images approved on failed attempts to be admitted. And again they rejected  some of the previously approved images. But the will power  was strong and he got in ...  :)

« Reply #38 on: March 29, 2008, 15:05 »
0
:o I hope you are kidding

I have heard that you are not alone, others employ your methods.  They have ways of routing out cloaked reviewer identities. 

::) Inside stool pigeons etc. Then they make life hell for the hapless reviewers. This cuts way down on rejections ;)

I don't tolerate any reviewers rejections.....I find out who they are and threaten their lives.
I tell them I just got out of prison on parole, and say "Don't make me have another body"

God  reviewers. making bubble gum wages.
« Last Edit: March 29, 2008, 15:07 by gbalex »

« Reply #39 on: March 29, 2008, 22:03 »
0
These stories sound just...well, kind of unreal. Shutterstock on the whole appears to have pretty consistent review process, some of the rejections are (or used to be) a bit unjustified - but that was mostly due to sometimes a bit cryptic reason for rejection. But for the most part - the rejection is described well enough to have a second look at the picture - and to start wondering how I could have ovelooked this before ?  Most of the rejected images I was able to fix and resubmit - and they were accepted. I also learned to pay attention to things which the reviewer may be looking at, and to fix them before submission. Works for me.

« Reply #40 on: March 29, 2008, 22:14 »
0
These stories sound just...well, kind of unreal. Shutterstock on the whole appears to have pretty consistent review process, some of the rejections are (or used to be) a bit unjustified - but that was mostly due to sometimes a bit cryptic reason for rejection. But for the most part - the rejection is described well enough to have a second look at the picture - and to start wondering how I could have ovelooked this before ?  Most of the rejected images I was able to fix and resubmit - and they were accepted. I also learned to pay attention to things which the reviewer may be looking at, and to fix them before submission. Works for me.


This one was rejected for composition

Please tell me how to fix it  :)

« Reply #41 on: March 29, 2008, 22:59 »
0
make the sea deeper, the clouds and mountains higher, and most importantly bring the female with the umbrella to the closer scrutiny by  male reviewers.



« Reply #42 on: March 29, 2008, 23:34 »
0
Thanks, I'll remember that for next time  ;)

« Reply #43 on: March 30, 2008, 03:14 »
0

This one was rejected for composition

Please tell me how to fix it  :)


My eyes are drawn to the driftwood instead of the women.  I think if you clone it out you'll have a good seller.

« Reply #44 on: March 30, 2008, 04:01 »
0
Yes, I agree with that fotografer - the driftwood is a distraction.

DanP68

« Reply #45 on: March 30, 2008, 07:21 »
0

This one was rejected for composition

Please tell me how to fix it  :)


My eyes are drawn to the driftwood instead of the women.  I think if you clone it out you'll have a good seller.


I agree.  I don't think it is quite true that the image lacks composition, but the drift wood is distracting.  Plus, it is very harsh looking, which takes away from the idyllic nature of the image.  A little cloning, and you will be fine.  You might consider cropping a little closer too, at the same time removing some drift wood.

« Reply #46 on: March 30, 2008, 10:56 »
0
I like the driftwood its a little different! I guess its just a matter of personal taste. I have a similar shot without driftwood already in my port. Also have a tighter crop. I think it will sell ok over time. I actually prefer this shot from a lower angle.  I was kind of surprised when Bigstock put it in the front page rotation. Thanks for your comments.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2008, 11:10 by cdwheatley »

« Reply #47 on: March 30, 2008, 14:35 »
0
I'm curious about this discussion.  I understand people may think they image could be better, but is it reasonable to have it rejected?  Colors are beautiful, exposure seems perfect, assuming that focus and noise are good, why reject it?

Regards,
Adelaide

« Reply #48 on: March 30, 2008, 14:59 »
0
I'm curious about this discussion.  I understand people may think they image could be better, but is it reasonable to have it rejected?  Colors are beautiful, exposure seems perfect, assuming that focus and noise are good, why reject it?

Regards,
Adelaide

Right! and thank you! I think every picture in my portfolio could be improved in some way as I am my worst critic. This particular rejection made me kind of throw my arms up the air and say what! Normally I agree with reviewers as I feel they are more than fair with me. Hit me with noise, focus, artifacts, exposure issues, filtering, fringing, but composition? If it was cropped to tight I would understand that. I know there were a bunch of people that had similar problems a couple weeks ago, I just thought this was a good example of a bad review.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2008, 15:12 by cdwheatley »

« Reply #49 on: March 31, 2008, 01:40 »
0
I agree completly that this should never have been refused but the question was 'please tell me how to fix it'.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
21 Replies
12817 Views
Last post September 15, 2006, 17:13
by beisea
0 Replies
3834 Views
Last post November 26, 2008, 12:15
by sharpshot
0 Replies
4383 Views
Last post January 21, 2009, 09:32
by sharpshot
22 Replies
10094 Views
Last post May 02, 2011, 13:54
by Morphart
18 Replies
10944 Views
Last post July 17, 2012, 08:11
by MarkRyanDesigns

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors