pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: SS not allowing any more icon sets or abstract business backgrounds?  (Read 5558 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Microbius

« on: January 12, 2011, 03:58 »
0
I've noticed more rejections of these recently; "too many on the site"
Anyone else noticing a similar trend?


« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2011, 11:45 »
0
Yep.  Abstract anything unless it's totally spectacular and different from everyone else's is going to get rejected for too many on site.  I get that a lot and I don't do a lot of abstracts.  Some of people who submit there that basically all they do are abstracts are having a helluva hard time getting any of them accepted.  Which I don't understand actually since most of the top 50 are abstracts and abstracts sell.

Something's gotta give or change but I doubt that'll happen anytime soon.  I'm even having a hard time getting some of my stuff accepted and I get the too many on site rejections eventhough when I search on the site there's maybe 3 - 10 pages not hundreds.

Microbius

« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2011, 11:52 »
0
I've actually had a very near 100% acceptance record till the last week or two when these rejections have started to crop up.
It's not really worth putting the work into these files if SS isn't going to take them, as that's the main place they make money.
It would be interesting to hear from people who stuff files, maybe SS only want those sorts now as it means more money for them and less for the contributor.

« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2011, 12:31 »
0
Seems like every 6 months SS goes on a rejection binge, which sends their forums into a frenzy.  Then a few weeks pass and everything returns to normal.

It may be different this time if they are actually proclaiming "too many on site" as the reason for rejection.  Which of course makes absolutely no sense to me.  The logical thing to do would be to purge the old non-performers from the database, not reject fresh material.  But what do we know?   :D

« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2011, 14:15 »
0
For years I have had close to 100% acceptance on SS. That changed about 3 months ago and I am getting images rejected mainly for focus issues.  Other submitters are reporting this as well along with increases in rejections for lighting issues, abstracts and too many on site when they have never gotten them in the past.  My acceptance rate is down to 78% and based on the measures I take to make sure I only submit images which will have no problem passing I find this number troubling.

Something has changed and you would think that after several months new reviewers would have the experience necessary to make good decisions.

I also wonder if reviewers are assigned regions, because not every one is experiencing these rejections at SS.

Microbius

« Reply #5 on: January 12, 2011, 14:38 »
0
I hadn't had them till relatively recently, others were complaining well before I got hit, so you might be right.

« Reply #6 on: January 12, 2011, 15:40 »
0
I went from near 100% acceptance to much more rejections a few months ago.  Such a shame as SS was about the only site keeping me motivated to produce new images.  Looks like my earnings will take a hit but surely they will lose more than me?  I just can't understand why they don't delete old images that haven't sold and give more new images a chance.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2011, 16:24 by sharpshot »

« Reply #7 on: January 12, 2011, 16:23 »
0
I'd like to see them clean house too with images that haven't sold in 3 or more years that should take a chunk out.  I'd also like to see them prune the message board but that's a whole other thing unto itself.  Course none of this will probably happen unless a lot of us inquire about it but then that's not even going to guarantee that they'll listen either.

« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2011, 21:26 »
0
I've actually had a very near 100% acceptance record till the last week or two when these rejections have started to crop up.
It's not really worth putting the work into these files if SS isn't going to take them, as that's the main place they make money.
It would be interesting to hear from people who stuff files, maybe SS only want those sorts now as it means more money for them and less for the contributor.

The thing about SS is that recently they seem to accept and reject widely different files from individual submitters.  One day you see isolated files featured in their front page light box's with blown highlights, harsh shadows and dirty backgrounds and the next you see very well know photographers with pristine files complaining about lighting rejections on studio shots or illustrators complaining about rejections reserved for photographic files.

It is the inconsistency that is troubling and if the trend continues to deteriorate, I can not see wasting the time to upload many images to SS. Maybe they really do want millions of poodles stained pink with nasty wrinkled backgrounds in lew of traditional stock shots.  If so I will not waste much of my time or resources on SS!
« Last Edit: January 12, 2011, 21:41 by gbalex »

« Reply #9 on: March 14, 2011, 08:16 »
0
yup I'm getting lots of "we don't need this image at this time, too many on site"
mainly for icons set, and the funny thing is that the same images are accepted at IStock,

the question is:
20 files have been made, 18 were accepted at IST but only 5 on SS! how long it takes before that account dies and the illustrator behind it give up on SS ?

thought for food!

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #10 on: March 14, 2011, 12:16 »
0
My ratio over there is 100% lately: either 100% accepted or 100% rejected.

There have been similars issues in the past and the situation always reverted to normal after a few weeks, so now I'm very uncertain whether it's best to keep on uploading or taking a short pause.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2011, 12:21 by microstockphoto.co.uk »

« Reply #11 on: March 14, 2011, 13:34 »
0
I've actually been running at 100% acceptance for some time.  Only a few rejections a year.

I think that if Shutterstock tells you it has too many of the type of image you're submitting, they are doing you a big favor.  It's a big wake-up call that you need to stop providing more of the same-old oversaturated subjects.  Take this opportunity to branch out, and you'll be far better off.

Otherwise, even if they did accept those images, they wouldn't sell... you'd be happy for the moment that they took your latest batch... but worse off in the long run because they're just buried in the bunch of thousands more just like them, and you'll make no money from them.

In other words, don't be offended by it, be empowered.

« Reply #12 on: March 14, 2011, 13:41 »
0
The main difference i noticed for my uploads is it became impossible to get images with selective focus through; and anything not razorsharp either (much, much stricter than before).

« Reply #13 on: March 14, 2011, 17:12 »
0
Seems like every 6 months Shutterstock goes on a rejection binge, which sends their forums into a frenzy.  Then a few weeks pass and everything returns to normal.
We can only hope. But one good thing about SS to remember is that you can wait until this phase passes, and then resubmit your images later.

« Reply #14 on: March 14, 2011, 18:09 »
0
I've actually been running at 100% acceptance for some time.  Only a few rejections a year.

I think that if Shutterstock tells you it has too many of the type of image you're submitting, they are doing you a big favor.  It's a big wake-up call that you need to stop providing more of the same-old oversaturated subjects.  Take this opportunity to branch out, and you'll be far better off.

Otherwise, even if they did accept those images, they wouldn't sell... you'd be happy for the moment that they took your latest batch... but worse off in the long run because they're just buried in the bunch of thousands more just like them, and you'll make no money from them.

In other words, don't be offended by it, be empowered.

Problem is they seem to reject stuff if it fits into a certain category regardless of the quality of the work. I don't know about photos, but this has certainly been the case for illustrators since the site was flooded with colorful EPS10 backgrounds. I had an icon set rejected in November, and shortly after I reuploaded it with a note to the reviewer. It was accepted and has sold more than 550 times in the four months it's been so far, which I would say is good for an image that was initially rejected.
If I go ahead and draw objects, animals, food illustrations or cartoon characters I know they're going to accept those no matter how awful they are. But they don't sell nearly as good as backgrounds, stickers, labels, icons and buttons, plain and simple -because everyone needs images like these, only a few need images of a donkey or a screwdriver. Why not let us continue creating what buyers need the most.

They would be way better off deleting images with less than 10 sales in a year or so, clean up the database and keep everyone happy.
I'm certainly not changing my subjects just because SS doesn't want this and that at this point of time. That would mean more for the other agencies untill SS went back to normal.

« Reply #15 on: March 14, 2011, 18:47 »
0
...only a few need images of a donkey or a screwdriver. Why not let us continue creating what buyers need the most.

They would be way better off deleting images with less than 10 sales in a year or so, clean up the database and keep everyone happy.
I'm certainly not changing my subjects just because Shutterstock doesn't want this and that at this point of time. That would mean more for the other agencies untill Shutterstock went back to normal.

*, I just finished my series of donkeys with screwdrivers. I think SS's problem is that they don't actually want to take the time to differentiate what should be let in and what shouldn't, so you get these weird rules as temporary fixes. I think it's part of the growing pains of all these agencies. They need to figure out better ways to approve, manage/organize and remove content.

lagereek

« Reply #16 on: March 15, 2011, 10:13 »
0
GOOD!! there is plenty enough of these clogging up already. I have always had around 90% acceptance rate at SS but sometimes I worry about the reviewers ability to read or see the conceptual value in images?  this skill is normally only associated with a higher level of editor, such as an art-buyer or AD, within the agency world but still, the biggest asset when reviewing pics is to be able to read between the lines.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
Icon sets

Started by CofkoCof Shutterstock.com

4 Replies
3890 Views
Last post April 05, 2008, 19:48
by ironarrow
19 Replies
4965 Views
Last post February 10, 2010, 12:12
by gbalex
0 Replies
1036 Views
Last post April 16, 2013, 20:29
by aly
5 Replies
1331 Views
Last post August 15, 2014, 14:29
by Sean Locke Photography
1 Replies
1242 Views
Last post December 18, 2016, 05:14
by Microstock Posts

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle