Author Topic: Shutterstock Rejections (Read 14204 times)

beisea · « **on:** July 12, 2006, 16:19 »

Hi, I am a newbie, I uploaded some pictures 6 month ago to Imagevortex (17), and never got a single sales( about 2-300 views for all images ), last week, I signed up with Fotolia, Shutterstock, Istock, bigstock, I submitted 13 pic to fotolia and get 12 approved, but the 10 I submitted to shutterstock got all rejected:
( I am still waiting to hear from Istock and Bigstock )

5 with reasons " noise at full size "
5 rejection with no reasons

My questions to you is:
1. does that mean I have 5 acceptable ones, or 10 are not acceptable?
2. Is Fotolia has far lower standard than Shtterstock?
3. If noise is a concern, ( very mini noise ) can I use noise ninju to clean it up and resubmit THREE MONTHS later?
4. Now the images have been dele from SS, how do I know which is good and which one is not acceptable?

thanks for your help.
( i started to wonder already " is $4 average per photo per year worth the trouble?"

Striker77s · « **Reply #1 on:** July 12, 2006, 17:48 »

Many of us here have had issues with getting accepted to shutterstock. Inlcuding myself. Shutterstock is extremely picky about noise so running them through noise nija should be done for all images except for the cleanest of images. Avoid flowers and to many landscapes, they have lots of those and they want to see more variety of work. I don't know how you can tell which ones were rejected if it has been a long time and they have deleted the images. If it is some what recent you can find out on their website.

As far as Fotolia goes I wouldn't say they have lower standards, just different standards. Most microstock sites aren't as picky with noise as SS. But Fotolia will still reject bad composition and other images the same as shutterstock.

If $4 is worth it to you or not, only you can decide. Obviously everyone here has decided it is. If you have a 1000 images that equates to $4,000 a year, and the money will keep coming in even if you stop shooting. Also the average $/pic/year will vary from $1 to $15 depending upon your skill and subject matter. $4/pic/year is just a ballpark figure.

Good luck,
Mark

beisea · « **Reply #2 on:** July 12, 2006, 18:00 »

Thanks for the reponse.

I just got rejected today by SS, then I went to the website, I could not find any of my initial uploads, so I don't know which of the 5 is good, so that next time I add five more.

I guess most of my images are fine noise wise, it's all taken during daylight, maybe some I have turned up the shadow details causing some noise visible at 100% crop.

Now I guess I just keep my finger crossed for Istock ( could be a tough one if they also have noise free mentality ).

1000 images are a big number, the amount of time it took to upload and key in key words to different sites like a full time job, I don't know how much time u guys spend each week in doing stock photo? ( for people who have 1000 images or more )

Anyway this is all new to me, I have to wait and see what happens, certainly the 17 images at Image Vortex for 6 months really defeat everything:(

Striker77s · « **Reply #3 on:** July 12, 2006, 18:25 »

I'm not sure what camera you are using. But they will reject a DSLR image at 200 ISO if you aren't careful. I've even had a few at 100 ISO be rejected. So if you are using a point n shoot there is a good chance even in good light they will reject it for noise. Like you said you need to use noise ninja.

A 1000 images sound like a lot but if you shoot 20 images a week, it will take less than a year to get there. Even at 20 images a month it is worth my time. I don't know how you are doing keywording but you need to use the IPTC within the jpg image. That way once you keyword your image you can submit it to any website and your images are ready to go. There is still some work involved but it is minimal for most sites.

ImageVortex is a very low seller. So with 17 images it doesn't surprise me you haven't sold anything. The tops sites are

Shutterstock
IstockPhoto

after that
Fotolio
Dreamstime
Bigstock
StockXpert
Featurepics (maybe)

The rest are very low sellers and hardly worth your time.

Mark

beisea · « **Reply #4 on:** July 12, 2006, 18:54 »

Thanks again.

I do use Nikon D100 at ISO200 most of the time possible. ( I can not go lower than that, maybe I need a D200)

I just figured out the ones they rejected, it all has the same rejection reasons, " Noise, artifacts or hazing at full size" and another 5 just rejection with no reasons, does that mean all rejected or just the 5 with reasons since I did not pass the 7 out 10, so the whole batch was rejected?

So I guess noise is a big deal with SS.

I like your idea of ITPC, I will download this and try it on all my images before submitting.

Greg Boiarsky · « **Reply #5 on:** July 12, 2006, 19:32 »

The reason they don't have comments on all 10 images is that they already declined 5 photos. It's pretty typical for them not to review all the photos--once you have four rejects, they decline your application for three months.

IRCrockett · « **Reply #6 on:** July 12, 2006, 19:35 »

You're probably already using Photoshop and bridge. The ability to add IPTC data is built in to both so you just edit the file info once and you're good to go for all the sites. If you're not a perfect speller then you'll probably want to create your info in a program with a spell check then copy it over.

beisea · « **Reply #7 on:** July 13, 2006, 15:42 »

Thanks for all your help, I did add the IPTC information on my pictures, but still they did not show up on Dreamstime, but at least they have the last 5 saved, so it helps a little, maybe they are not supporting IPTC?

Anyway I got reply back from SS that the 5 rejected actually were acceptable, of course the funny thing is that one acceptable one is very identical to one declined, ( taken at the same time, same lighting and different people )

One question for you though, I do have lots of parade pictures with no model releases, are they any good, or shall I only submit those as occasional, but not a big batch?

Since I got 5 approved by SS, shall I add more diversity to my photos when I submit next time, or stick with the ones get approved?

beisea · « **Reply #8 on:** September 07, 2006, 01:16 »

Since I got admitted by SS 20 days ago, I have sucessfully uploaded 329 out of 340, and finished the month with a payout:)
but today I got my big blow, I have 50 photos ( all parade pictures ) rejected 49 out 50 due to wrong keyword/catergory, funny thing is that among the approved ones I have 150 of them approved with identical keywords, and idential scene, so my question to you is that:
if you have a series of photo shot at the same time, for the same subject, do you still have to have individualized keyword for each individual one, can you use keywords apply to all of them?

leaf · « **Reply #9 on:** September 07, 2006, 02:46 »

yes, you can use identical keywords for mutiple images.

I am guessing you either got two different reviewers with different opinions, or else the catagoy error slipped past the first reviewer.

madelaide · « **Reply #10 on:** September 07, 2006, 17:41 »

Beisea,

You can use the same keywords, but remove those that don't apply to a specific one. I have already reported bad keywords in IS and DT and in many cases seeing the other images from the same photographer made it clear that he had just copied the keywords. For example, in one beach series, some had "tree" in the images, but "tree" was in the keywords of even those who hadn't.

Regards,
Adelaide

beisea · « **Reply #11 on:** September 07, 2006, 21:44 »

thanks for all the feedback, i will resubmit with more acurate key wording but grouping similar shots together in order to avoid future problem or possible warning from SS, after all it's my biggest money maker now, DT is slightly below them though.

Boylet · « **Reply #12 on:** September 08, 2006, 04:58 »

I'm not sure if this has been answered already, but does anybody know if it's ok (or even worth it) to resubmit as part of the 1st 10 the previous photos that have been rejected but have no rejection reasons except "7 of 10 must be approved" ?

beisea · « **Reply #13 on:** September 08, 2006, 17:48 »

if you were rejected first time due to not having 7 out of 10, then the rejection with no reasons are the approved ones, you can resubmit those, I just did that, the 5 resubmission got back in 4 out of 5.

Boylet · « **Reply #14 on:** September 09, 2006, 05:09 »

Quote from: beisea on September 08, 2006, 17:48

if you were rejected first time due to not having 7 out of 10, then the rejection with no reasons are the approved ones, you can resubmit those, I just did that, the 5 resubmission got back in 4 out of 5.

Thanks for the reply ..

Greg Boiarsky · « **Reply #15 on:** September 09, 2006, 09:59 »

I just saw a thread on SS about this issue. The concensus was that you should submit an entirely new batch--don't take chances. Take a look at the batch you submitted and then try to shoot something new, something better.

Quote from: Boylet on September 08, 2006, 04:58

I'm not sure if this has been answered already, but does anybody know if it's ok (or even worth it) to resubmit as part of the 1st 10 the previous photos that have been rejected but have no rejection reasons except "7 of 10 must be approved" ?

Boylet · « **Reply #16 on:** September 10, 2006, 02:16 »

Quote from: Professorgb on September 09, 2006, 09:59

I just saw a thread on SS about this issue. The concensus was that you should submit an entirely new batch--don't take chances. Take a look at the batch you submitted and then try to shoot something new, something better.

Quote from: Boylet on September 08, 2006, 04:58
I'm not sure if this has been answered already, but does anybody know if it's ok (or even worth it) to resubmit as part of the 1st 10 the previous photos that have been rejected but have no rejection reasons except "7 of 10 must be approved" ?

Thanks.. Maybe I'll review my "uncommented" rejections again. The more I read the posts and others' galleries, the more I see there's still some improvements I could make in my photos. Maybe if I do resubmit some, it would be the ones which I really can't find any defects.

Greg Boiarsky · « **Reply #17 on:** September 10, 2006, 09:15 »

One more thing. Be sure that your monitor is profiled and calibrated. If you can't see noise/artifacts in your images, you'll never know why they're being rejected. SS is notorious in its intolerance for noise. Even though designers don't typically worry about noise, SS seems to make it their highest priority in assessing file quality.

Quote from: Boylet on September 10, 2006, 02:16

Quote from: Professorgb on September 09, 2006, 09:59
I just saw a thread on SS about this issue. The concensus was that you should submit an entirely new batch--don't take chances. Take a look at the batch you submitted and then try to shoot something new, something better.

Quote from: Boylet on September 08, 2006, 04:58
I'm not sure if this has been answered already, but does anybody know if it's ok (or even worth it) to resubmit as part of the 1st 10 the previous photos that have been rejected but have no rejection reasons except "7 of 10 must be approved" ?

Thanks.. Maybe I'll review my "uncommented" rejections again. The more I read the posts and others' galleries, the more I see there's still some improvements I could make in my photos. Maybe if I do resubmit some, it would be the ones which I really can't find any defects.

Boylet · « **Reply #18 on:** September 11, 2006, 22:11 »

Quote from: Professorgb on September 10, 2006, 09:15

One more thing. Be sure that your monitor is profiled and calibrated. If you can't see noise/artifacts in your images, you'll never know why they're being rejected. SS is notorious in its intolerance for noise. Even though designers don't typically worry about noise, SS seems to make it their highest priority in assessing file quality.

Many thanks. I'm currently using my Toshiba laptop to view/edit my photos. I read that LCDs like the one on my laptop tends to render the image differently than the actual. I guess that's why some of my images get rejected due to poor lighting. They tend to be very bright (even washedout sometimes) in my monitor but when viewed on a CRT, the photos seems to be ok. I read on one of the threads here about a certain Spyder calibration gadget but unfortunately, I'm not sure of its availability where I reside. I might have to import it from the US.

Noise ... yeah, I had my share of that. One of the images (I think one is good) got rejected due to noise. I shot it on ISO400 (forgot to go manual). The funny thing is that ALL other sites accepted it EXCEPT for SS.

beisea · « **Reply #19 on:** September 15, 2006, 16:55 »

Just got strange rejections from SS, saying " cannot read model release's name" as a reason.
so the whole batch of 20 got rejected . I told them I was the witness, and then they said you can't be the photographer and witness, have someone else sign it and print their name and resubmit the whole thing.

So basically I have to submit the whole thing, and reenter all the key words and everything else for a model release issue, very unfriendly way of handing my work.

berryspun · « **Reply #20 on:** September 15, 2006, 17:09 »

Quote from: beisea on September 15, 2006, 16:55

Just got strange rejections from SS, saying " cannot read model release's name" as a reason.
so the whole batch of 20 got rejected . I told them I was the witness, and then they said you can't be the photographer and witness, have someone else sign it and print their name and resubmit the whole thing.

So basically I have to submit the whole thing, and reenter all the key words and everything else for a model release issue, very unfriendly way of handing my work.

Beisea, sorry to hear that. Are you using Photoshop ? If yes, there is an easy way to have all the keyvords enbedded with the picture, and they are automatically entered afterwards on all the main stock sites. Let me know if you can use this info, it will save you lots of time.

beisea · « **Reply #21 on:** September 15, 2006, 17:13 »

Yes, I should have used IPTC to enter all the key words rather than individually, but I guess lessons learned. thanks.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Shutterstock Rejections (Read 14204 times)

beisea

Striker77s

beisea

Striker77s

beisea

Greg Boiarsky

IRCrockett

beisea

beisea

leaf

madelaide

beisea

Boylet

beisea

Boylet

Greg Boiarsky

Boylet

Greg Boiarsky

Boylet

beisea

berryspun

beisea

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors