pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Ridiculous rejections  (Read 55553 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #100 on: February 04, 2011, 15:20 »
0
Excuse me, you studied photograhy 4 years and you don't know how to downsize an image?

I know it's ridiculous isn't it. I mean, fancy not teaching us that in the late 80's even though we only used film.  ::) Don't worry, I am sure I will work it out on my own. It's not rocket science. Thanks for your help  ::) It's obvious here that there are some who just don't want new members joining SS.

I dont know how to do it in GIMP but with Photoshop you simple go to "Image/Size" and resize down.  I'm sure there's something similar in GIMP.


« Reply #101 on: February 04, 2011, 17:41 »
0
It's obvious here that there are some who just don't want new members joining SS.

No, if you ask in the right way you'll get plenty of help here. However starting a thread with the title 'Ridiculous Rejections' suggests that you've already decided that you know more than any 'stupid reviewer' does __ and probably anyone else here too. But quite clearly you don't.

« Reply #102 on: February 04, 2011, 17:53 »
0
It's obvious here that there are some who just don't want new members joining SS.

No, if you ask in the right way you'll get plenty of help here. However starting a thread with the title 'Ridiculous Rejections' suggests that you've already decided that you know more than any 'stupid reviewer' does __ and probably anyone else here too. But quite clearly you don't.

my days wouldnt be the same without reading your comments (not vice versa I know :P)

Phadrea

    This user is banned.
« Reply #103 on: February 04, 2011, 19:31 »
0
It's obvious here that there are some who just don't want new members joining SS.

No, if you ask in the right way you'll get plenty of help here. However starting a thread with the title 'Ridiculous Rejections' suggests that you've already decided that you know more than any 'stupid reviewer' does __ and probably anyone else here too. But quite clearly you don't.

Don't flatter yourself Joe. I don't need your help . I have plenty of Photographic experience.

« Reply #104 on: February 04, 2011, 19:55 »
0
Most people are friendly and helpful. So why not be a little more patient?

These days you can find nearly everything you want to know on the internet.
For example:
Typing in Google: "resizing images in photoshop"
answer:
about 3.000.000 results(0,19 seconds)

-Ad useful pages to a map in your Favorites.
-Copy and paste what you find useful and save it in Word, pdf (or whatever you want) for later use and in no time you build up a workflow.
-the "old fashioned way" is buying a book. I have a lot myself. Is useful too.
-you can find also a lot of info on stocksites, forums and in blogs.

No one can guarantee you that you will be accepted the next time.
You are unlucky if the reviewer has a headache or a 'bad-hairday' or something.
You can't take a rejection serious when it is accepted at 12 sites and the got a rejection at the 13th for 'your image is not in focus', for example...
But you have to live with that and try again...no other way...
Every agency has its own rules and people try to help you the best they can with this particular agency.
You have the best chance with: no artistic look, colorful and bright, sharp, no noise and dustspots and a collection of different subjects that has not be cropped to much.
Your super artistic images where you are (rightly) proud of, are propably not the bestsellers at stocksites!
On the SS forum you can find indeed good help. They are experienced with the site.

And by the way: when you are accepted as a contributor, you can try to submit what you want and find out by yourself what will be accepted or not and what sells or not.
But for now you must have 7 of the 10 accepted. And so for now you have to be better safe than sorry. That is why people write what you obvious don't like to read! ;D
 

« Reply #105 on: February 24, 2011, 17:42 »
0
If I might ask, why would Shutterstock think this has "little" commercial value?



It has sold on Dreamstime and other sites.  So I'm not sure why they would think that.

RT


« Reply #106 on: February 24, 2011, 19:57 »
0
Just my opinion but I'd say it's probably because the sky is too dark considering the shadows you've applied and the grass rim doesn't look realistic.

« Reply #107 on: February 24, 2011, 20:03 »
0
Just my opinion but I'd say it's probably because the sky is too dark considering the shadows you've applied and the grass rim doesn't look realistic.

That's the DT preview causing lighting issues...  I'm wondering why people keep buying it on DT, CanStock, Deposit Photos and other sites if it's that bad...

sc

« Reply #108 on: February 24, 2011, 20:47 »
0
If I might ask, why would Shutterstock think this has "little" commercial value?



It has sold on Dreamstime and other sites.  So I'm not sure why they would think that.


Lighten it a little and resubmit.

« Reply #109 on: February 25, 2011, 01:24 »
0
Lighten it a little and resubmit.

As I said, it looks dark because of the DT process of creating preview images.  The actual image is not anywhere near that dark.

That said, if it were a lighting issue... Wouldn't ShutterStock say "too dark" or something.  Typically my rejections are for reasons like noise, or the reviewer doesn't actually like the way I lit a scene and says so.  Why the "No commercial value" rejection?  That's the part I don't understand.

RacePhoto

« Reply #110 on: February 25, 2011, 05:31 »
0
If I might ask, why would Shutterstock think this has "little" commercial value?

It has sold on Dreamstime and other sites.  So I'm not sure why they would think that.

Seriously, I can't see why they would reject it and the people who do, are getting the same tight ass, absurd attitudes that the reviewers have on some sites. Come on it's a good concept and good execution and it would sell!

Now for my usual humorous view. It's a Wilson golf ball and the truncated dimples are protected!  :o

« Reply #111 on: February 25, 2011, 06:17 »
+1
We keep telling you guys to post your stuff in the critique section at Shutterstock..Before you submit. Some of us were reviewers for years and most of us are working Pros. We can and do help you. Remember guys Getting accepted  is the easy Part, having Images that sell is very difficult. Give us a try. We won't tell you what you wanna hear but, What you need to hear. And, it's usually just one simple adjustment your missing.

Could you post a link to your professional portfolio, we would love to see your professional work outside of microstock?
« Last Edit: February 25, 2011, 06:37 by gbalex »

lagereek

« Reply #112 on: February 25, 2011, 06:50 »
0
I think its because it looks like a Tennis ball falling down a drainage hole on a tennis court.

sc

« Reply #113 on: February 25, 2011, 09:13 »
0
Lighten it a little and resubmit.

As I said, it looks dark because of the Dreamstime process of creating preview images.  The actual image is not anywhere near that dark.

That said, if it were a lighting issue... Wouldn't ShutterStock say "too dark" or something.  Typically my rejections are for reasons like noise, or the reviewer doesn't actually like the way I lit a scene and says so.  Why the "No commercial value" rejection?  That's the part I don't understand.

Nobody can ever know exactly what the reviewer was thinking - maybe they checked the wrong box.

I only say lighten it so you have made a slight change to justify the resubmission - and then resubmit. I've found that LCV rejections usually pass  review the 2nd time around.

« Reply #114 on: February 25, 2011, 13:01 »
0
I just posted a new blog entry on reviewers and rejections.... http://blog.elenaphoto.com/?p=100

rinderart

« Reply #115 on: February 25, 2011, 15:36 »
0
OK Guys, let me straiten a few things out. First off, what sells on one site and not on another means nothing and what gets accepted on one and not the other also means nothing. I have had a camera in My Hand for 50+ years, That means nothing when It comes to stock, I've co-authored 3 Photo Books,Done workshops around the world,and lectures on commercial Photography, Shot for major National Clients. All of this means nothing about understanding stock. Stock photography is not art But, It is an art unto itself when done correctly. It's about helping a buyer/designer sell a concept,idea or service by using the whole image or elements of an Image. Thats it, Nothing More, It's not about pretty pictures, That went away in the late 80's. To sell......And to get accepted you MUST be unique period. I have nearly 27,000 posts on SS alone and 24,500 just in the critique section alone, I reviewed for 3+ years until I couldn't stand it anymore.

I have heard every excuse,every whine,every complaint,every ego and every lame comment as to why Your Fantastic Images were refused. This business isin't flicker guys, It's commercial stock photography and believe it or not, not for everyone just because they own a camera. if you knew how many times I've heard "I just bought a 5DMK2 and L Glass" and still get rejected it would shock you. That also means nothing. There are folks with 500 Images that makes them enough to live on and, there are some with 15,000 that just squeak by, Quality High commercial value images and Quanity is the ticket. Always has been. The pics posted here by our friend suffer from the anyone can take those syndrome and exposure, maybe 5 years ago they would fly But not Now. They are just simply Not Unique enough and owning a $45,000 80MP hasselblad will not help. After looking at a gazillion Images and the reasons they were rejected I must say without a doubt that the reviewers were 99.9% correct. The biggest issue is focus, Most folks have no clue as to the sharpness needed in stock, 90% haven't done any work whatsoever understanding the principles of DOF,Composition,Exposure and WB as it relates to "Stock" Photography. Most just Buy a camera,a cheap kit lens,put it on auto and blast away. Thats not going to cut it friends. You MUST be a photographer first then a stock photographer, You must do the work and learn your craft or you will always be very disappointed in your performance in this business. Thats the truth.

The biggest Players here get rejections Guys, Probably Not many because they figured it out and most have a standard formula. Like said what I see mostly is LCV, Focus,composition in stock terms,overprocessing by people that don't have the tech skills to do it,noise reduction which is 90% caused By exposure. And on and on to infinity.

I invite you to Please come into the critique forum for an Honest evaluation of your work, but, Remember, were not going to hold your hand,Tell you what you want to hear as your friends do, it's gonna be straight talk, Do not take anything personal and if Ya listen....Really Listen and leave the ego at the door with a good attitude we will help you if you really want this and I/we will know if you do. I have helped hundreds if not thousands get approved and go on to sell But Ya gotta do the work.


A quick tip..How do you be unique instead of shooting stuff thats been done to death many years ago? You search your soul and you shoot what turns YOU On, Not what you think someone else would do or what you've seen on a site. then...if you have what it takes tech wise and can think commercially also the buyers will find you, They really will and they will bookmark you, thats called style. I can search and see images and just know who took them because they are unique. No artist is pleased, The true way is keeping the channel open and making it yours in any art form ever conceived from Dance,music,drama and Image making in all it's forms. Also, If your not ready to upload 10/20 good Images every week 52 weeks a year, Don't bother and take up golf. theres way to many now that just want a place to park there pictures killing sales for the rest of us. And before you submit think of 5 things your image could be used for and keyword it properly. keywords are one of the most Important things you can do. many fail badly at this.

Good Luck and If ya want help we are there for you.If ya don't, keep flopping around sites like this bitching and moaning. If there was one topic in all forum posts done more it would be this and #2 Sales. Both could be fixed by you.

RT


« Reply #116 on: February 25, 2011, 16:23 »
0
Good Luck and If ya want help we are there for you.If ya don't, keep flopping around sites like this bitching and moaning.

Anybody would get a better evaluation of their work here than they would on Shutterstock any day of the week because some of the biggest names in microstock come here, the biggest problem with the Shutterstock forum is that there's no way to establish whether the person who's giving critique knows what they're talking about or just trying to bump up their own ego.


« Reply #117 on: February 25, 2011, 17:14 »
0
I have a feeling that if you took your best seller and posted it in the critique forums saying it just got rejected and how could they do that etc. etc. at least some of the people would defend the reviewers and point out all the problems with your best seller image. They might even be right, for the most part the technical requirements are not as critical as the others as far as getting sales. That doesn't mean that the technical requirements don't matter, but especially for small size images and web use it is not as critical as the microstocks would make you think.

Getting rejections is part of this business. Sometimes they are right, sometimes they aren't. Sometimes it happens with an image you have high hopes for. Tweak it and resubmit it or don't bother. It can be frustrating and demotivating, but if you can't handle that occasionally happening this isn't the business for you.


One of the best things about being at a number of sites is usually by the time the image gets rejected it has already been accepted elsewhere and perhaps even had sales.

« Reply #118 on: February 25, 2011, 18:19 »
0
I have no problem with rejections and I understand it's part of the process.  I get them for various correctable issues occasionally, and I correct the issues and resubmit, typically with success.

The head-scratcher is the "we don't think it will sell" rejection.  Especially on something that's a proven seller elsewhere.  I already plan to re-submit, but I was more curious as to why that would get that kid of rejection.

And I've read the reviews in the ShutterStock Critique forum and the overwhelming majority of them are crap from people who believe there job is to discourage everyone else from uploading anything that might compete with them.  It's mostly self-serving BS, not actual useful information.  I agree that I'd get much more realistic and useful critiques here.

fritz

  • I love Tom and Jerry music

« Reply #119 on: February 25, 2011, 21:15 »
0
 shutterstock Not Approved:
Composition--Limited commercial value


Approved:


comment is not necessary

RacePhoto

« Reply #120 on: February 25, 2011, 23:56 »
0
"theres way to many now that just want a place to park there pictures killing sales for the rest of us."

Can you expand on this? Did I read it right?

Please go away and leave the work for the professionals. You're not welcome here?


Or am I misunderstanding? Has micro become a private club, members only for the insider artists?

+ on the rest of it.

« Reply #121 on: March 02, 2011, 05:31 »
0
SS driving me crazy lately...  :-[ :-[ :-[
SS rejected all my photos what are approved on IS,FT and other picky sites... They approved rejected photo on another sites...
Quite opposite!

« Reply #122 on: March 02, 2011, 13:38 »
0
i've had same results recently withSS -  rejections of entire batches all with same reasons - "not newsworthy", or "it wont sell", etc   where usually they would accept similar.  the editorials are the worst - resubmitting gets many of them accepted, but it's a waste of everryone's time having to play this 'guess who's reviewing' game

graficallyminded

« Reply #123 on: March 02, 2011, 21:29 »
0
Shutterstock is the best selling agency for many of us, unfortunately at the same time, it is the most inconsistent with reviewing standards.  It's like a catch 22.  The last few batches, I reported to support - I never do that.  It's getting really bad over there, and we all need to start letting them know we're noticing the change, or nothing is ever going to be consistent.  Maybe there's a new Atilla the reviewer or someone new that isn't fully trained? Who knows.

I still say those of us with a certain level of all time earnings should be able to get automatic approvals, or something of that nature.  Sort of like a rewards program.  I'd take that over another raise, just for the peace of mind.  I've got a batch of 57 images in the cue right now, and I'm seriously nervous about the outcome. 

tab62

« Reply #124 on: March 03, 2011, 14:03 »
0
I was told if it states - "7 out of 10 must be approved" that that photo was accepted. This information came right from SS itself when I asked the question. I had submitted 10 photos that were approved by fotolia, dreamstime, big stock but were rejected by SS. Now you want to see or experience high requirements- put in your photos with CRE and see how well you fare. They are very strict on their photo selections...


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
12 Replies
4718 Views
Last post October 18, 2007, 19:01
by hatman12
22 Replies
7206 Views
Last post April 06, 2008, 10:55
by Peter
12 Replies
5510 Views
Last post July 17, 2009, 18:48
by Brian O'Shea
28 Replies
13715 Views
Last post March 27, 2011, 08:07
by digitalexpressionimages
19 Replies
3602 Views
Last post July 15, 2022, 13:51
by Uncle Pete

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors