MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Shutterstock.com => Topic started by: labsas on August 18, 2014, 05:25
-
I recently dropped my Crown with iStock and now i want to try my luck with ShutterStock and others. I uploaded 10 images that all sold well at iStock but unfortunately 4 of them were not accepted by ShutterStock.
Finally i can apply Again and my question is now:
Can i re-upload the 6 images that were "approved" at my first application. The comment from SS was: Images that could have been approved if your submission was accepted. Or do i have to upload 10 new images.
Thanks in advance
-
I did when I was accepted on second attempt to SS. Just make sure that you choose your top ten pics that are technically flawless... Ie. zero noise, super sharp focus, good lighting, no color aberration, no artefacts, no cropping ... And also demonstrate commercial appeal.
Good luck
-
You can but there is no guarantee that they'll be accepted the second time.
-
Thanks a lot Guys. I hope to be more successfull 2nd time.
-
Personally, I submitted 10 different images in my second attempt. All 10 were approved.
After that I resubmitted the images of my 1st attempt that would have been approved with an appropriate note to the reviewer.
-
As Nikovsk said, they may not be accepted. That exact same thing happened to me. I submitted 10 images and six passed and 4 rejected. I used those same six and then added 4 others but guess what, not all of those six passed the second time. I guess it just depends on who reviews them.
-
Thanks. I uploaded 10 new ones. I have around 2200 from my iStock portfolio anyway.
-
i got in on first attempt. but i had 3 years of "training" in ms with the top 8 sites at that time (with IS favourably highly esteemed with their exclusive contributors, as u know i m sure yourself).
at that time, i also noticed from msg long-standers that what ss rejected - is approved - and vice versa.
i also made sure not to submit all of the same category, instead covered the whole range:
industrial, lifestyle, isolated person, isolated object, isolated food, environmental, design, texture. as to the stuff i can produce well...
as several of the long-timers who advised me said to do that.
but really, times changed , and frankly, if u were doing well at is, i would not bother with ss and just go for stocksy, etc..
hope this helps.
-
I feel tempted to give up ShutterStock. Just got 5 of the new ones rejected. So far 10 out of 20 of my best selling iStock images were rejected by SS. the last 5 for out-of-focus / blurry images. Since i bought my Canon 5D MK2 in 2009 in had NO images rejected by iStock for those reasons. Are they joking or what ?
-
I feel tempted to give up ShutterStock. Just got 5 of the new ones rejected. So far 10 out of 20 of my best selling iStock images were rejected by SS. the last 5 for out-of-focus / blurry images. Since i bought my Canon 5D MK2 in 2009 in had NO images rejected by iStock for those reasons. Are they joking or what ?
That is the individual impact of the "glass house effect". Meaning that inside the istock glasshouse the competition is less among photographers, so they do not develop as much as independents are forced to.
Which deteriorates istock images from the inside so that contrary to the belief, images on istock are often NOT as good as those on other places.
Which again is why istoch in their desperation, opened the floodgates for new images, and thereby made many years of (outdated) curation worthless.
-
I feel tempted to give up ShutterStock. Just got 5 of the new ones rejected. So far 10 out of 20 of my best selling iStock images were rejected by SS. the last 5 for out-of-focus / blurry images. Since i bought my Canon 5D MK2 in 2009 in had NO images rejected by iStock for those reasons. Are they joking or what ?
That is the individual impact of the "glass house effect". Meaning that inside the istock glasshouse the competition is less among photographers, so they do not develop as much as independents are forced to.
Which deteriorates istock images from the inside so that contrary to the belief, images on istock are often NOT as good as those on other places.
Which again is why istoch in their desperation, opened the floodgates for new images, and thereby made many years of (outdated) curation worthless.
I donīt think it has to do with it, as his 10-top pictures hardly loaded up the last year considering how sales are with new images on iStock now.
Something however, Shutterstock is sensitive to, as I often get rejections for, is short depth of field. Donīt look at images that sell wll at iStock, but select images that are perfect exposure and long depth of field. Gladly studio pictures, if you have these.
(Sry for my crappy english)
-
Thanks guys.
You are right Gunnar. Most of my best selling images from iStock are from 2008, 09 and 10.
JPSDK you are absolutely right about the "flood-gates". My acceptance rate for the last 4 months went through the roof - 350 uploads and 8 rejections. Quality images are being pushed back in the best match-search, drowning in snapshots.
-
I think that most of the images accepted by Shutterstock in 2008 would not get accepted today.
Actually I know some of my images accepted LAST YEAR would not get accepted today !
The bars have been lifted during 2014.
Also, Shutterstock is very technical, while IS looks more after content and legal stuff.