Author Topic: Shutterstock Footage Rejections (Read 6837 times)

Erin Cadigan · « **on:** January 10, 2020, 08:17 »

So I've been submitting stock for almost 13 years, but just (really just) decided to start attempting to do some footage. I've recorded some super boring clips on my new iPhone 11 pro max, just to see if they meet the technical requirements. My first two clips were accepted to Adobe, but apparently they are missing some of the tech requirements for SS, and not simply because they're boring cooking footage! I initially received a rejection for it "resolution/aspect ratio." I went back into the editor and adjusted it to a 16:9 format. The same one was rejected again for that reason after changing it. I also had rejections for noise/artifacts, etc. I can easily see these errors in my photos, but I'm missing it in the videos. Does anyone here use an iPhone for shooting footage and what settings to you use to insure suitable quality. I really want to capture some more footage but not until I stop with the rejections. What am I missing?

increasingdifficulty · « **Reply #1 on:** January 10, 2020, 08:40 »

Quote from: Erin Cadigan on January 10, 2020, 08:17

What am I missing?

Well, I think the obvious thing is that you're not using a real camera to film with...

But if you must use your phone, find an app (like Filmic Pro) that lets you change the bitrate first of all. The standard bitrates are set to conserve space for personal videos, not for professional quality.

And due to the tiny sensor, noise will be an issue in anything but perfect conditions. You might also get rejections for the "strobe" effect, which will occur in bright conditions with lots of movement due to the fast shutter speed (that should ideally always be 1/48-1/60 unless you're doing slow motion). Since you can't change the aperture, this will be a problem.

Erin Cadigan · « **Reply #2 on:** January 10, 2020, 09:08 »

Thank you! Yeah, I know...it's just easy compared to shooting with my old 5D Mark II, which I had not desire to use for video! I've been switching to 4K when recording, hoping for great quality, but they were taken inside, so it definitely could be lighting. I'll have to shoot something outside and see if I don't still get the same rejection. Thank you for the app recommendation. I really know nothing about shooting footage or editing it right now. Need to learn!!!

mino216 · « **Reply #3 on:** January 10, 2020, 17:12 »

Footage rejections at Shutterstock are totally random, at least it seems it is like that. I have some iPhone footage accepted (even if it is not totally noiseless) and lot of videos from great full frame camera rejected for noise (and there is really no noise). Basically, I would recommend to shoot at 4K with iPhone and submit that as Full HD.

Ukko · « **Reply #4 on:** January 10, 2020, 18:46 »

Before you make any big moves with your equipment, workflow or anything, try to resubmit those same footages again a couple of days later. No need to edit or change anything. Shutterstock reviewing process is so random these days, the AI can be incredibly good and incredibly stupid at the same time, so it's impossible to predict the outcome. That's why I always wait a day or two, maybe submit a new batch, before I give it a new shot for those rejected footages or photos. Most of the times they are all approved faster than I can say "Microstock - not worth it"!

Erin Cadigan · « **Reply #5 on:** January 11, 2020, 10:29 »

Quote from: mino216 on January 10, 2020, 17:12

Footage rejections at Shutterstock are totally random, at least it seems it is like that. I have some iPhone footage accepted (even if it is not totally noiseless) and lot of videos from great full frame camera rejected for noise (and there is really no noise). Basically, I would recommend to shoot at 4K with iPhone and submit that as Full HD.

Quote from: Ukko on January 10, 2020, 18:46

Before you make any big moves with your equipment, workflow or anything, try to resubmit those same footages again a couple of days later. No need to edit or change anything. Shutterstock reviewing process is so random these days, the AI can be incredibly good and incredibly stupid at the same time, so it's impossible to predict the outcome. That's why I always wait a day or two, maybe submit a new batch, before I give it a new shot for those rejected footages or photos. Most of the times they are all approved faster than I can say "Microstock - not worth it"!

Thank you for your information! I was wondering about random rejections and trying to resubmit. Since I'm new to the footage game, I've actually decided to apply to Pond5 for exclusive video status. They've accepted the few I have right away and I'll see how I fare there before trying to go crazy submitting elsewhere.

Rasika · « **Reply #6 on:** January 16, 2020, 12:49 »

Everything I upload and is getting rejected, eventually gets approved from second or third time.
All you need is patience. It seems that the reviewers just trying to earn their bread. Actually SS mention it in the FAQ now - if you aren't agreeing with a rejected content do not complain over it. Just resubmit. And eventually it will be approved. Its f&%d up but that's how the system works

lostintimeline · « **Reply #7 on:** January 16, 2020, 19:03 »

i ve heard in the past that people who resubmited their content for second and third time got warnings from ss for ban.isnt that risky??? i agree maybe some cases the reviewers are right cause in the end of the day the photographers make mistakes too as much as experienced they are,but in most of the cases the rejections have nothing to do with technical problems Just an AI doesnt know what its accepting or rejecting or reviewers who like to reject just to earn more money

odesigns · « **Reply #8 on:** January 21, 2020, 14:30 »

They're really getting picky lately. Guess that's a good thing?

I've been getting (along with more $1.50 sales lately), many "Noise / Artifacts / Pixelation / Posterization" rejections. And these are clips shot on my GH5 that are barely affected and adequately lit.

They're basically straight from the camera.

Not sure if this camera is no longer acceptable for SS reviewers of if there are one or two overly strict reviewers out there.

jamesbenet · « **Reply #9 on:** February 07, 2020, 03:47 »

No, the rejections are ridiculous lately. I have worked on TV and Film projects for nearly 20 years and my footage had a 99.7% acceptance rate as I denoise, shoot at 10bit and always stabilize if needed when not on a tripod or dolly. Lately SS has been rejecting 70% of all submissions. It is their loss at the end of the day as AS and P5 have continued to have my footage at 100% approval. My guess is that the rejections are random or made by evolving deep learning AI.

Asthebelltolls · « **Reply #10 on:** February 07, 2020, 09:07 »

Quote from: jamesbenet on February 07, 2020, 03:47

My guess is that the rejections are random or made by evolving deep learning AI.

....and I'm assuming your submissions are 4K?
The Microstock Poll Results are shocking and its directly attributed to changing SS behavior that began about a year ago. Someone said,"We're getting way too many submissions!" And everyone listened to the one who responded, "Why don't we start rejecting more?"

skysense · « **Reply #11 on:** February 07, 2020, 13:48 »

I do believe that the algorithm is learning how to review our footage.

A lot of Noise / Artifacts / Pixelation / Posterization rejections last few weeks. But when i re-upload, and re-submit same footage, it gets accepted with no problem...

P5 on the other hand eats everything, same as Adobe.

Visualab · « **Reply #12 on:** February 07, 2020, 14:23 »

Yes...ai is learning pretty fast...a landscape rejected for missing artwork property release...
No sense at all...

marthamarks · « **Reply #13 on:** February 07, 2020, 15:20 »

Quote from: skysense on February 07, 2020, 13:48

P5 on the other hand eats everything, same as Adobe.

Not sure I understand what you mean by that. Care to clarify?

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #14 on:** February 07, 2020, 15:53 »

I got some nonsense rejection about my motion graphics clips being "pillarboxed", whatever that is. Well, let's try again....

marthamarks · « **Reply #15 on:** February 07, 2020, 16:02 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on February 07, 2020, 15:53

I got some nonsense rejection about my motion graphics clips being "pillarboxed", whatever that is. Well, let's try again....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillarbox

Zero Talent · « **Reply #16 on:** February 07, 2020, 16:09 »

One plausible theory is that some reviewers might have less powerful PCs or video cards unable to fluently render 4K.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #17 on:** February 07, 2020, 16:22 »

Quote from: marthamarks on February 07, 2020, 16:02

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on February 07, 2020, 15:53
I got some nonsense rejection about my motion graphics clips being "pillarboxed", whatever that is. Well, let's try again....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillarbox

I figured that's what it meant, but anyone with eyeballs can see that's not the case.

m · « **Reply #18 on:** February 08, 2020, 14:18 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on February 07, 2020, 16:22

Quote from: marthamarks on February 07, 2020, 16:02
Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on February 07, 2020, 15:53
I got some nonsense rejection about my motion graphics clips being "pillarboxed", whatever that is. Well, let's try again....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillarbox

I figured that's what it meant, but anyone with eyeballs can see that's not the case.

Check the resolution and aspect ratio to see if it matches their acceptable resolutions and ratios. That rejection has 3 possible issues with the video.

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #19 on:** February 08, 2020, 23:11 »

As many people have said before (and I agree from personal experience) - it seems shutterstock, no matter how perfect your video is - will at a bare minimum, *always* reject at least 30% of the footage, if not more.

And if you happen to get one batch they love (say 50 videos of footage) - and got a 100% approval rating, then to "balance" the minium 30% rejection ratio, the next 50 clips would have at least 30 of those rejected.

You could have the most exclusive clips in the world (say of the last 20 presidents over the last 100 years in the usa doing private interviews), perfectly keyworded, perfect denoising/etc - and you'll get comments like "clip too similar to last clip submitted, rejected", or "Noise / Artifacts / Pixelation / Posterization: Clip contains noise, compression artifacts, pixelation and/or posterization that is prominent and/or affects the main subject/focus of the clip.", or "Keywords: Keywords are either not relevant to the clip, not in English, or trademarked. Keywords must be specific and must directly relate to the clip.".

I wouldn't worry about it.

BTW - which other agencies do you submit to?

marthamarks · « **Reply #20 on:** February 09, 2020, 00:11 »

Quote from: SuperPhoto on February 08, 2020, 23:11

it seems shutterstock, no matter how perfect your video is - will at a bare minimum, *always* reject at least 30% of the footage, if not more.

I'm actually not having that experience. Not sure why not, but it's a fact.

catman · « **Reply #21 on:** February 27, 2020, 05:07 »

Its really frustrating now. They rejecting videos shot with ISO100 with studio lighting for noise/pixelation reason constantly.

I kinda feel if you submitting batch of lets say 10-20 videos, and there is couple weaker videos, they most likely will just reject all videos in that batch.

gnirtS · « **Reply #22 on:** February 27, 2020, 23:10 »

For me at least currently it seems to be if you submit a few videos, they'll all get accepted.
If you submit a larger number at once, most will get rejected,usually with noise/artefacts regardless of subject,camera type, settings or anything at all. Its like a catch-all reject for submitting too many clips at once.

If you resubmit the same clips later, they invariably all get accepted.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Shutterstock Footage Rejections (Read 6837 times)

Erin Cadigan

increasingdifficulty

Erin Cadigan

mino216

Ukko

Erin Cadigan

Rasika

lostintimeline

odesigns

jamesbenet

Asthebelltolls

skysense

Visualab

marthamarks

Sean Locke Photography

marthamarks

Zero Talent

Sean Locke Photography

m

SuperPhoto

marthamarks

catman

gnirtS

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors