Author Topic: 2 weird rejections of the 1st 10 (Read 6217 times)

thaimacky · « **on:** July 06, 2010, 03:09 »

i am uploading on SS, IS, DT, FT, 123, BigStock, CanStockPhoto, DP and SSP so far and i got approx. 800 pics in my port. so, finally tried to start on veer, too and got the 2 pics below rejected.

as most among us i don't like rejections, especially (1 .) if they come from a low earner, (2.) if the pictures got accepted by ALL the other agencies and (3.) if the rejection reasons should make me laugh if it wasn't that sad :'(

rejection reason of this one: "We feel the model's expression is too forced - we are looking for more natural expressions."

and this one: "We feel the image lacks strong composition."

the 2nd one might be because the picture is framed too tight. but whatever: i can't accept the first one at all. i decided to dump veer. i also immediately stopped with crestock 1 year ago after crazy rejections. guess that veer would be a waste of time anyway. but then at least they shouldn't get on ones nerves then $:-\$

cathyslife · « **Reply #1 on:** July 06, 2010, 05:56 »

I'm surprised about the rejections for those this time around. Seems like they have been more lax compared to the first time the opened the Marketplace.

Do you have those images on all the other sites you listed and are they selling well? If so, you can read between the lines of the rejection reason...what they really meant to say was they were looking for fresh, new images and your best sellers will all be rejected. That follows what happened to me the first time around. I uploaded ALL of my best sellers first and they ALL got rejected.

And not that my opinion matters, but I think your images look good. Tight crop on the second, yes, but still very useable.

thaimacky · « **Reply #2 on:** July 06, 2010, 06:20 »

Quote from: cclapper on July 06, 2010, 05:56

Do you have those images on all the other sites you listed and are they selling well?

these two pictures are from some of my latest photo shoots. they just got accepted. the "non natural expression" is online for approx. 2 weeks and did sell quite well especially on SS. the "bad composition" just got accepted on about 6 of the the sites in the last one or two days (the others still pending)... hmmm...

i believe it's not right to call my model's expression unnatural. what if this is just the way she looks like when she smiles?? would they say "we don't like the smile of your model"? and what if designers are looking for an unnatural, forced expression (if it really looks forced)? or do they also not accept people with fancy hair colors coz it's not natural? and so on.....

anyway, i thought the upload procedure on veer was quite easy. that's why i gave it a try. but now i think it's not worth it. i don't need the 5-10 bucks a month if i get wild rejections...

Microbius · « **Reply #3 on:** July 06, 2010, 09:05 »

'fraid I agree with both those rejections, the expression on the first one looks forced, not like a genuine smile. The second is cropped too tight, usable but not as usable as it would be with a wider crop. Reviewers can afford to be picky with the sheer volume of stuff out there now, there are plenty of very similar photos without these problems.

cathyslife · « **Reply #4 on:** July 06, 2010, 09:41 »

Quote from: Microbius on July 06, 2010, 09:05

'fraid I agree with both those rejections, the expression on the first one looks forced, not like a genuine smile. The second is cropped too tight, usable but not as usable as it would be with a wider crop. Reviewers can afford to be picky with the sheer volume of stuff out there now, there are plenty of very similar photos without these problems.

Of course reviewers can afford to be picky. Millions of images from hundreds of thousands of contributors. They are picky as though they are a macro agency and the contributor is going to get hundreds of dollars for every download.

I agree with you, thaimacky, I think it is a waste of time. I myself have stopped uploading (again) to Veer. Not because I have had any weird, macro-style rejections like yours above, but because it has been weeks since any of my images have been reviewed. Like another thread regarding Veer says, Dash for What?

ajbird · « **Reply #5 on:** July 06, 2010, 09:59 »

lol

I am just starting out and already have given up trying to understand the differences between the different sites.. Veer was the only agency where all my attempts to get on were dismissed.. no great loss to them but if I ever get to the point where my images are worth anything I promise to hold a grudge

.... that will teach a lesson!

thaimacky · « **Reply #6 on:** July 06, 2010, 10:01 »

Quote from: cclapper on July 06, 2010, 09:41

I agree with you, thaimacky, I think it is a waste of time. I myself have stopped uploading (again) to Veer. Not because I have had any weird, macro-style rejections like yours above, but because it has been weeks since any of my images have been reviewed. Like another thread regarding Veer says, Dash for What?

cheers for that

thaimacky · « **Reply #7 on:** July 06, 2010, 10:02 »

Quote from: Microbius on July 06, 2010, 09:05

'fraid I agree with both those rejections, the expression on the first one looks forced, not like a genuine smile. The second is cropped too tight, usable but not as usable as it would be with a wider crop. Reviewers can afford to be picky with the sheer volume of stuff out there now, there are plenty of very similar photos without these problems.

where does a genuine smile start and where does it end? at least there seemed to be a few designers who downloaded this picture in the past 2 weeks. and talking about the tight crop: some of the most popular stock pics are cropped even tighter.

i believe the reviewers should more take care about sharpness, right focus, noise, wb, isolation, etc in this case and let the designers decide which pictures they like for their work.

thaimacky · « **Reply #8 on:** July 06, 2010, 10:14 »

Quote from: ajbird on July 06, 2010, 09:59

lol

I am just starting out and already have given up trying to understand the differences between the different sites.. Veer was the only agency where all my attempts to get on were dismissed.. no great loss to them but if I ever get to the point where my images are worth anything I promise to hold a grudge .... that will teach a lesson!

hehe - indeed, with 5-25 pics in your port it's no great loss yet

cathyslife · « **Reply #9 on:** July 06, 2010, 11:29 »

Quote from: thaimacky on July 06, 2010, 10:02

Quote from: Microbius on July 06, 2010, 09:05
'fraid I agree with both those rejections, the expression on the first one looks forced, not like a genuine smile. The second is cropped too tight, usable but not as usable as it would be with a wider crop. Reviewers can afford to be picky with the sheer volume of stuff out there now, there are plenty of very similar photos without these problems.

where does a genuine smile start and where does it end? at least there seemed to be a few designers who downloaded this picture in the past 2 weeks. and talking about the tight crop: some of the most popular stock pics are cropped even tighter.

i believe the reviewers should more take care about sharpness, right focus, noise, wb, isolation, etc in this case and let the designers decide which pictures they like for their work.

Everyone will have their own opinion as to whether your images are good or bad. You have to take it as constructive criticism and move on.

But I do agree with you on your point. The reviewers job should be to make sure the file is technically correct, has the correct keywords to fit the image and they of course should weed out obvious "snapshots". The rest will be determined by downloads. If an image never gets any, that means it sucks. If somebody buys it, then it has commercial value. That one reviewers opinion is just that...his opinion. Reviewers make pennies to review an image and often times seem as though they aren't even photographers, let alone designers.

thaimacky · « **Reply #10 on:** July 06, 2010, 13:49 »

Quote from: cclapper on July 06, 2010, 11:29

Everyone will have their own opinion as to whether your images are good or bad. You have to take it as constructive criticism and move on.

i don't mind getting rejections here and then. guess all of us have them, sometimes with good, sometimes with strange reasons. i usually got no problem with that.

what i don't understand here in this case though is that veer is rejecting 2 technical absolutely correct pictures (because they don't match the reviewer's personal taste) out of the first 10 and asking for 10 more pics to get me approved. rejecting the 2 and accepting the application - this would have been the right way i guess.

but anyway, it saves me a lot of time - i hesitated for about 6 month to start with veer because uploading to the other low earners is already time consuming enough without getting much back. as i already mentioned: if i compare the earnings ratings here on microstockgroup i could expect approximately usd 5-10 per month...

to be honest: i sometimes don't understand myself why i don't just stick with the big 4. they usually pay me more than 95% of the stock income... $:-\$

FD · « **Reply #11 on:** July 06, 2010, 18:25 »

Quote from: thaimacky on July 06, 2010, 13:49

what i don't understand here in this case though is that veer is rejecting 2 technical absolutely correct pictures (because they don't match the reviewer's personal taste)

I have quite some rejections that state that the image is technically perfectly OK, but that it doesn't suit the taste of Veer customers.

How can their customers develop a different taste when they never can see a different image? It doesn't matter that much for their low sales, but for me it matters a lot since the 400 is in reach.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #12 on:** July 06, 2010, 21:53 »

nices photos! veer sometimes is sleeping I guess

donding · « **Reply #13 on:** July 07, 2010, 08:41 »

I just had some more of my stock pile reviewed....50 approved...50 rejected. On every one of the 50 rejected photos it said exactly the same thing:

"Other concerns. Composition, styling, and/or lighting do not quite reflect the aesthetic that appeals to Veer customers."

The previous rejects from the last batch explained why they were rejected. Many of these are on all the other sites and are good sellers. What was strange was several of the accepted one's I figured wouldn't make it because they were taken in the evening and I really thought they would get rejected because of noise. Many of the rejects are isolated images.

thaimacky · « **Reply #14 on:** July 08, 2010, 04:54 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on July 06, 2010, 21:53

nices photos! veer sometimes is sleeping I guess

thks

by the way: just had a download of the first one on 123rf yesterday

(+ some on ss as already mentioned)

thaimacky · « **Reply #15 on:** July 08, 2010, 05:00 »

Quote from: donding on July 07, 2010, 08:41

I just had some more of my stock pile reviewed....50 approved...50 rejected. On every one of the 50 rejected photos it said exactly the same thing:

"Other concerns. Composition, styling, and/or lighting do not quite reflect the aesthetic that appeals to Veer customers."

The previous rejects from the last batch explained why they were rejected. Many of these are on all the other sites and are good sellers. What was strange was several of the accepted one's I figured wouldn't make it because they were taken in the evening and I really thought they would get rejected because of noise. Many of the rejects are isolated images.

they are veered, aren't they

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: 2 weird rejections of the 1st 10 (Read 6217 times)

thaimacky

cathyslife

thaimacky

Microbius

cathyslife

ajbird

thaimacky

thaimacky

thaimacky

cathyslife

thaimacky

FD

luissantos84

donding

thaimacky

thaimacky

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors