the problem at SS sometimes is that one day they (reviewers) wake up and want a blue sky with plenty copy-space (too bad that day you decided to have your subject on all frame), on the other day they want the object on the full frame (the day you decided to give them a picture with copy-space) 

That is Murphy's law for you 

Just a suggestion microstockphoto.co.uk with people in front of a building (especially taking wide angel), take a few pictures every time after the people have moved. You can always layer the images afterwards and paint the people out from the image areas where they moved away on the subsequent pictures (that is to say if you obviously do not know it already and just do not feel like the effort).

Oh I guess it all depends at what stage you are currently with the micro stock pendulum, are you chasing quantity currently or are you focusing on quality to get your approval rates up 

I think it would be really interested to see a name attached with a review on Shutterstock.  To get to see who the reviewer was.  The only site that does this (that I know of) is photodune.  kudos to them.

+1  Great Idea.

Quote from: leaf on November 19, 2012, 17:38

I think it would be really interested to see a name attached with a review on Shutterstock.  To get to see who the reviewer was.  The only site that does this (that I know of) is photodune.  kudos to them.

DT does something similar too, when you contact them regarding a rejection, kind of an account manager that contacts the reviewer and then he/she let us know why it was reviewed that way, that said I have given up on that because they are always right

Interesting...  I have never even had a response to a rejection query on DT...

the 'poor framing', lack of composition , etc, rejections are just another auto-reject-reason many reviewers use when their LCV key wears out

exactly, my opinion too

Today, one of my images (black silhouetted object placed in the middle of a white background) was rejected because of:
Composition--Poor framing, cropping, and/or overall image composition
Yes, a highly coveted isolated object just waiting to be cut out and placed on another canvass.
 
Before I resubmit it, will it be enough to move it horizontally to the left or right third, or should I offset it also vertically?

BTW, I noticed that today the SS shares dropped about a dollar. Could be, that was the real rejection reason.

Today, one of my images (black silhouetted object placed in the middle of a white background) was rejected because of:
Composition--Poor framing, cropping, and/or overall image composition
Yes, a highly coveted isolated object just waiting to be cut out and placed on another canvass.
 
Before I resubmit it, will it be enough to move it horizontally to the left or right third, or should I offset it also vertically?

BTW, I noticed that today the SS shares dropped about a dollar. Could be, that was the real rejection reason.

Les, just make sure the object is not too small in comparison to the white area. Not from this site, but I had a rejection because the size of the object fell below the size of the acceptable image size. Can be due to lack of such a description it might have been rejected with this note. Not saying it is, but just check 

I had 4 isolation images (of 4 different animals) all rejected for composition last week.  I think its just a reviewers "i dont like that" personal preference and a random reason from there.

How many people really know the difference between "Isolated" and "On white"?

I bet less than 50%.

Why because look at all the images listed as isolated that are on white.

There is a big difference and most people dont have any idea!

Quote from: gnirtS on December 17, 2012, 19:08

I had 4 isolation images (of 4 different animals) all rejected for composition last week.  I think its just a reviewers "i dont like that" personal preference and a random reason from there.

Now why do they not just put a %&^%$#@#$ review note on their list which states "Rejected: Personally I just think your picture sucks. If you want, submit again, but if you get the same response again, your picture sucks." 

That would be a lot easier to work out what they do and don't want at times rather than misleading focus etc (which stand a much higher chance of being re-uploaded once "fixed"!)

Ive not seen them use the LCV reason for ages now.

Quote from: Les on December 17, 2012, 16:21

Today, one of my images (black silhouetted object placed in the middle of a white background) was rejected because of:
Composition--Poor framing, cropping, and/or overall image composition
Yes, a highly coveted isolated object just waiting to be cut out and placed on another canvass.
 
Before I resubmit it, will it be enough to move it horizontally to the left or right third, or should I offset it also vertically?

BTW, I noticed that today the SS shares dropped about a dollar. Could be, that was the real rejection reason.

Les, just make sure the object is not too small in comparison to the white area. Not from this site, but I had a rejection because the size of the object fell below the size of the acceptable image size. Can be due to lack of such a description it might have been rejected with this note. Not saying it is, but just check 

Thank you for all the comments.
In this case, the reviewer was just sloppy, incompetent, depressed, or mad at the whole world because of the recent drop of his Apple stock portfolio.
 
1. The object was actually quite large
2. The background was pure white - no off-white, light gray. I filled every available pixel with 0,0,0 white.
3. In the previous batch, there was a similar isolated object processed in identical way and that one was accepted.

It will be resubmitted as many times before, and most likely accepted second time around. Regrettably, rejections like this are a double waste of time - for the contributor and the reviewer as well.
Or if the reviewer is paid by piece (same payment for acceptance or rejection), he just generated for himself another unit of work for his next batch. That could be a good reason after all.