MicrostockGroup

Agency Based Discussion => Shutterstock.com => Topic started by: fritz on November 05, 2013, 08:30

Title: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: fritz on November 05, 2013, 08:30
Well this is the first time I get this rejection reason for all 10 pictures in batch. Previous 10 all accepted!

"Text would be too difficult for a customer to remove, please correct and resubmit."

I don't understand what to correct translation needed.
Any idea?

(http://st.depositphotos.com/1010555/3462/i/450/dep_34627929-Vegetable-sandwich.jpg)
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: Ron on November 05, 2013, 08:32
Resumbit with a note explaining the text is part of the composition and not to be removed. And you could submit a second image without the text :)
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: fritz on November 05, 2013, 08:38
There is another image already approved on SS without magnifying glass. Now what?
Thanks,
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: Ron on November 05, 2013, 08:39
As I a said.
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: fritz on November 05, 2013, 08:40
Thanks Ron
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: Beppe Grillo on November 05, 2013, 11:18
I have the impression that the Shutterstock inspectors have someproblem to understand what is a "concept"
Is it only my impression?
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: KB on November 05, 2013, 11:29
I have the impression that the Shutterstock inspectors have someproblem to understand what is a "concept"
I don't quite get the concept, either. What does it mean to show a nutrition facts label with 4g of fat (including 1g sat fat) with veggies & fruits? It seems contradictory to me (is that the concept?).
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: Beppe Grillo on November 05, 2013, 12:11
I have the impression that the Shutterstock inspectors have someproblem to understand what is a "concept"
I don't quite get the concept, either. What does it mean to show a nutrition facts label with 4g of fat (including 1g sat fat) with veggies & fruits? It seems contradictory to me (is that the concept?).

 :o Are you a Shutterstock inspector?
(Just kidding you)
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: KB on November 05, 2013, 14:00
Ha!  ;D

My comment may have seemed flippant or harsh, but I was being serious. I really don't understand the concept.
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: JPSDK on November 06, 2013, 17:25
it is a fine concept. as a whole maybe a little underexposed.

if they dont understand it, sell it somewhere else. It is good.
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: fritz on November 06, 2013, 20:15
Thanks
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: ruxpriencdiam on November 07, 2013, 12:32
it is a fine concept. as a whole maybe a little underexposed.

if they dont understand it, sell it somewhere else. It is good.
+1 easily understandable as well.
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: KB on November 07, 2013, 17:07
it is a fine concept. as a whole maybe a little underexposed.

if they dont understand it, sell it somewhere else. It is good.
+1 easily understandable as well.
Well, come on then, please share! I've asked a couple of times for someone to explain it to a simpleton like me, but no one has yet done so. Really, I won't be hurt by someone explaining the obvious, because I am a dolt sometimes.

Now, if the label had read '0g' fat, then sure, I'd completely get it. But as is, the concept escapes me.

Could it be that the SS reviewer also thought that, and that was the reason for the rejection?
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: Ron on November 07, 2013, 17:33
it is a fine concept. as a whole maybe a little underexposed.

if they dont understand it, sell it somewhere else. It is good.
+1 easily understandable as well.

Well, come on then, please share! I've asked a couple of times for someone to explain it to a simpleton like me, but no one has yet done so. Really, I won't be hurt by someone explaining the obvious, because I am a dolt sometimes.

Now, if the label had read '0g' fat, then sure, I'd completely get it. But as is, the concept escapes me.

Could it be that the SS reviewer also thought that, and that was the reason for the rejection?


Quote
Fat Content
Most fruits and vegetables contain low levels of fats. Because these foods tend to contain high amounts of water, they fill you up without increasing fat levels dramatically. The U.S. Department of Agriculture provides an online nutrient calculator that calculates nutritional content of many fruits and vegetables. Apples, oranges, melon, leafy greens, carrots, potatoes and celery contain low levels of fat.

Certain fruits and vegetables contain relatively high levels of fat. Avocados, olives, seeds, coconut and soybean products such as tofu have high fat content. The majority of the fat found in these foods is monounsaturated or polyunsaturated fat, which are healthy forms.


http://www.livestrong.com/article/280078-fats-in-fruits-vegetables/ (http://www.livestrong.com/article/280078-fats-in-fruits-vegetables/)
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: fritz on November 07, 2013, 17:49
Ha!  ;D

My comment may have seemed flippant or harsh, but I was being serious. I really don't understand the concept.

 
Look, I'm simple man doing simple concept for simple buyers.
Ok, is it more understandable now???

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/p480x480/1380230_10200165292293427_1399803526_n.jpg)
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: luissantos84 on November 07, 2013, 17:55
is that tuna? ;D
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: fritz on November 07, 2013, 18:02
Bingo!
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: luissantos84 on November 07, 2013, 19:50
Bingo!

now I am desperate for sushi :D
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: fritz on November 07, 2013, 20:00
Enjoy!
(http://i.istockimg.com/file_thumbview_approve/19192451/2/stock-photo-19192451-roll-of-thin-cheese-piece.jpg)
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: luissantos84 on November 07, 2013, 20:08
now I am sick! ;D (due to iStock!)
Title: Re: SS strange rejection reason!
Post by: ruxpriencdiam on November 07, 2013, 22:55
The other part is that on the so called nutritional labels in the us you need a dam magnifying glass to read the chit!

Just saw an add similar to this using a magnifying glass for toe fungus.