Author Topic: Weird rejection reason (Read 5083 times)

dragonblade · « **on:** December 12, 2018, 00:53 »

VB has rejected a video of mine for 'poor post production.' The comments (presumably left by the reviewer) says that the footage is too short. What does post production quality have anything to do with the length of a video?? And I don't see any issues with the quality of the post production - the same clip was accepted by all the other stock sites that I submitted it to.

And I'm puzzled as to why it's considered too short. It's 10 seconds in length which is the same duration as some other clips that were previously accepted by VB. I can't see any minimum duration mentioned on the site's requirements for footage (only the maximum which is 3 minutes.)

Weird. I'll submit the video again and hope for the best.

Ronib · « **Reply #1 on:** December 12, 2018, 01:00 »

Quote from: dragonblade on December 12, 2018, 00:53

VB has rejected a video of mine for 'poor post production.' The comments (presumably left by the reviewer) says that the footage is too short. What does post production quality have anything to do with the length of a video?? And I don't see any issues with the quality of the post production - the same clip was accepted by all the other stock sites that I submitted it to.

And I'm puzzled as to why it's considered too short. It's 10 seconds in length which is the same duration as some other clips that were previously accepted by VB. I can't see any minimum duration mentioned on the site's requirements for footage (only the maximum which is 3 minutes.)

Weird. I'll submit the video again and hope for the best.

Can you show us link to see it?

mindstorm · « **Reply #2 on:** December 12, 2018, 01:58 »

Quote from: dragonblade on December 12, 2018, 00:53

the same clip was accepted by all the other stock sites that I submitted it to.

Not the slightest bit relevant. Each agency has their own standards and what they are looking for. In fact, they would LOVE to have different media than their competitors. If they are identical media, then all they can compete on is price -- which is to your detriment...

Quote from: dragonblade on December 12, 2018, 00:53

Weird. I'll submit the video again and hope for the best.

Just move on to other media. Stop worrying about one agency not accepting one piece of media. It happens every day to those of us that submit regularly. It is simply not worth your time to flog a dead horse, and does not really help you in the long run.

FWIW, I have lots of media that was accepted by x by not by y. When I see it sold on x, I used to smirk and say "I told you so." However, when I tracked those media that got accepted after first being rejected, I have had ZERO sales on them. ZERO. NOT ONE. Yes, they sold at the agencies that accepted them up front, but not at those that rejected it the first time.

What does that tell me? They have different clients looking for different media. They aren't as stupid as people here seem to assume. They are looking for media that fits THEIR clients, not a lowest-common denominator of clients.

dragonblade · « **Reply #3 on:** December 12, 2018, 03:03 »

Quote from: mindstorm on December 12, 2018, 01:58

they would LOVE to have different media than their competitors.

Indeed they would.

Quote from: mindstorm on December 12, 2018, 01:58

FWIW, I have lots of media that was accepted by x by not by y. When I see it sold on x, I used to smirk and say "I told you so." However, when I tracked those media that got accepted after first being rejected, I have had ZERO sales on them. ZERO. NOT ONE. Yes, they sold at the agencies that accepted them up front, but not at those that rejected it the first time.

I guess different contributors have different experiences. Some time back, I had a particular photo rejected by SS. Later on I resubmitted it and this time around, SS accepted it. And since then, it has sold ten times on SS. That's certainly not the case with other previously rejected photos of mine but sometimes you can get lucky. Actually, I also had a video that was rejected by SS, then later accepted and eventually sold on SS.

dragonblade · « **Reply #4 on:** December 12, 2018, 03:09 »

Quote from: Ronib on December 12, 2018, 01:00

Can you show us link to see it?

I'd like to but there are a few copycats around.

Alex M · « **Reply #5 on:** December 12, 2018, 03:48 »

Could be just a mistake. Once I found out that a bunch of my commercial videos were marked as editorial at pond5 without no reason. I emailed them and they changed them back to commercial. Curators are still people

davidbautista · « **Reply #6 on:** December 12, 2018, 08:39 »

Shutterstock rejected half o batch for shutter speed or some bs like that and the other half were accepted. They were videos recorded very similar, the same day. They do some stupid stuff sometimes and now I have to resubmit the rejected ones.

Enviado desde mi ALP-L29 mediante Tapatalk