Author Topic: SS rejections explosion!!! (Read 35941 times)

epixx · « **Reply #75 on:** January 04, 2009, 09:16 »

Quote from: Peter on January 04, 2009, 03:51

Doesnt agencies on holidays have less job? why would they need extra reviewers? people upload less on holidays, not more!

I upload more. At the moment, I have more images waiting than ever before.

RolMat · « **Reply #76 on:** January 05, 2009, 01:11 »

Yes, I did notice a some more rejections than usual. But to be honest, I was lazy with my submissions, and actually I got some nice justifications on them, such as a new one: "please correct skin tone"... ;-)

As for uploading, I also upload more. Some don't and opt to stockpile. Well, I don't. I strongly believe that the result will be somehow the same: As soon those who are stockpiling get their images online, the lifespan for new images will be shorter than ever for everyone. At least, I'm keeping my upload pace (10 more after each aprooval) and the chances for more exposure are surely higher if I wouldn't.

That's my take on that ;-)
But good luck to everyone!
Regards.

eppic · « **Reply #77 on:** January 06, 2009, 01:15 »

I normally enjoy about an 80% acceptance rate at SS, but my last batch was an 80% rejection, so yeah maybe some reviewers did get coal in their stockings.

null · « **Reply #78 on:** January 06, 2009, 01:22 »

Quote from: rmat on January 05, 2009, 01:11

Yes, I did notice a some more rejections than usual. But to be honest, I was lazy with my submissions, and actually I got some nice justifications on them, such as a new one: "please correct skin tone"... ;-)

I went down from 100% acceptance to 70%. The only note I got was from a reviewer telling me I should make my descriptions shorter. Well what the heck, they allow 200 characters and if they don't like long descriptions, they should take the title, like all other agencies.

The worst is that this reviewer changed a series of my descriptions very quickly to rubbish, not even looking at the title. For instance he changed the title of a portrait of a "Muslim girl with headscarf in typical bangsomoro outfit" to "Asian teenager".

ndrpggr · « **Reply #79 on:** January 06, 2009, 16:00 »

I've tried my first attempt at SS just after Christmas and all my images were refused (5 without any reason given, is that normal btw?). Should I just believe that it was the infamous bad reviewer and try happily in 1 month?
Happy new year to everybody

lisafx · « **Reply #80 on:** January 06, 2009, 18:39 »

I just uploaded a batch after taking a couple of weeks off. Now I am not too hopeful about the results.

Very disappointing to hear that the rejection problem is still rampant there.

dbvirago · « **Reply #81 on:** January 06, 2009, 18:46 »

Yeah, I just had 14 of 15 rejected. The last few weeks have been horrible.

Tuilay · « **Reply #82 on:** January 06, 2009, 18:52 »

Quote from: FlemishDreams on January 06, 2009, 01:22

.......(partial)
The worst is that this reviewer changed a series of my descriptions very quickly to rubbish, not even looking at the title. For instance he changed the title of a portrait of a "Muslim girl with headscarf in typical bangsomoro outfit" to "Asian teenager".

FD,i can see why you're anal about the change.
talk about idiotic reviewers. i guess this one thinks all asian teens look muslim?
what is this world coming to !

Whiz · « **Reply #83 on:** January 06, 2009, 22:49 »

Yeah, my latest batch was just rejected. I only submitted three, but I was being cautious. Plus, they were all nature images. I had one of two whitetail deer fighting, and I thought it was really good. The expression on one of the deer was perfect. The rejection reason was this:

Lighting Problems--Purple fringe, blown highlights or lenses flare.
Composition--Limited commercial value due to framing, cropping, and/or composition.

I don't think there was any lighting problems; it was a foggy day though, so maybe the lighting was too bizarre.

Maybe I should just submit it as RM to Alamy?

thaimacky · « **Reply #84 on:** January 07, 2009, 01:22 »

i just started to upload on ss at the end of nov 08. on my first 100 shots (80% studio shots of people on white) i got an acceptance rate of over 90%. the rejected pics were all outdoor shots, mostly w/b issues...

fotografer · « **Reply #85 on:** January 07, 2009, 02:33 »

I rarely get refusals at SS as I am very selective about what I upload but my last batch had 20% refused. 2 were for focus when I know that the focus is perfect. I'm waiting to see if IS accept them and if they do then I will put the back up to SS.

Jack Schiffer · « **Reply #86 on:** January 07, 2009, 06:12 »

SS refused 16
Dreamstime approved- 17 same of the same photos

CCK · « **Reply #87 on:** January 07, 2009, 07:02 »

I uploaded a batch on Sunday, reviewed on Monday with 80 accepted. Normal for me.

ichiro17 · « **Reply #88 on:** January 07, 2009, 10:43 »

Nothing has changed. Still getting rejections.

I will be cutting every one of my photos from 21 MP to 4 MP. I dont' care if its an extra step, but SS doesn't deserve my 21 MP files for the amount of hassle and little pay they give me for them.

PenelopeB · « **Reply #89 on:** January 07, 2009, 11:24 »

Good Idea!

6 out of 7 rejected - one for putting it into the wrong category???

another for out of focus (it was something shot in the fog - doh, what was your first clue?)

They are just not worth it any more.

yuliang11 · « **Reply #90 on:** January 07, 2009, 11:42 »

i got 99% rejections. i think SS is dying

Jack Schiffer · « **Reply #91 on:** January 07, 2009, 17:57 »

Dreamstime will be at the top soon

Tuilay · « **Reply #92 on:** January 07, 2009, 19:44 »

Quote from: Jack Schiffer on January 07, 2009, 17:57

Dreamstime will be at the top soon

i doubt that. there's only so little of you (the ones with rejections), and a lot more of them.
moreover, i keep watching the polls and DST is in stupor with 6, and SS keeps getting 7.
SS is not IS, there are more "happy campers" with SS. their #1 is not just written in stone,
it's carved like Moses' 10C tablets. SS is godly.

rod · « **Reply #93 on:** January 07, 2009, 20:03 »

It seem some types of images rejected more than other in the few days.

disorderly · « **Reply #94 on:** January 07, 2009, 20:37 »

I dunno. I had a lot of rejections recently, but in going over the images I can (usually) see their point. I'd gotten a bit careless, I guess. Anyway, my last two batches of 60 images had 45 and 56 accepted. Not bad at all.

Carla · « **Reply #95 on:** January 08, 2009, 03:11 »

Must definitely be the photo- reviewers.
Photos still have more rejections than accept, vectors and other illustrations are accepted at a normal rate.
Two days ago I tried submitting some very mediocre fractals (testing just for fun), they were accepted (I would have be inclined to reject some of these, had I been a reviewer).

Peter · « **Reply #96 on:** January 08, 2009, 03:12 »

I am geting a lot of rejections lately on SS. But thats OK.

Jack Schiffer · « **Reply #97 on:** January 08, 2009, 06:15 »

All I can do is present my work if they don't like it it's their loss no big deal.
My return is much larger then .25cents at other stock sites

Dreamframer · « **Reply #98 on:** January 08, 2009, 06:50 »

Well, few days ago I had rejection at SS like this:
Noise--Noise, film grain, over-sharpening, or artifacts at full size.
Effects--We do not allow autotracing, simple filters or artifical framing.

I am sure there is no noise, because I already know how to take care about noise at SS, over-sharpening and artifacts..at 100 ISO, good focus and almost no processing are almost impossible. But OK, maybe reviewer found it somewhere. But, autotracing, simple filters and artificial framing

has nothing to do with my image

There is a boy who sleeps on the bed in my image. I used 2 reflectors 500W each and SB800 speedlight with diffuser

. So, I didn't need and didn't want to apply any filter. Of course I never use artificial frames or autotracing.
But... reviewers are human beings. They make mistakes. Maybe reviewer just push the wrong button. So, I submitted the image again with a note to reviewer. I suggest you always write a note to reviewer to explain what you did, or what you have corrected in your image.
Honestly, I never had such nonsense rejections before. So, I guess it's just a mistake.

After resubmision, the image was rejected due to overuse of noise reduction software

I have to correct it again

But I didn't have some wierd rejections like this one before. And I didn't notice any increasment in rejections at SS

Fran · « **Reply #99 on:** January 08, 2009, 06:53 »

My last batch was 11 out 16 accepted, the rejections were absolutely reasonable. This submission was better than my normal standard, but I'm also starting to upload people shots in controlled light, which I think are easier to get accepted (I have 100% on those so far).

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: SS rejections explosion!!! (Read 35941 times)

epixx

RolMat

eppic

null

ndrpggr

lisafx

dbvirago

Tuilay

Whiz

thaimacky

fotografer

Jack Schiffer

CCK

ichiro17

PenelopeB

yuliang11

Jack Schiffer

Tuilay

rod

disorderly

Carla

Peter

Jack Schiffer

Dreamframer

Fran

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors