MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Sites that no longer exist => Zymmetrical.com => Topic started by: madelaide on March 12, 2008, 18:54
-
I've recently had many submissions reviewed, emptying my queue. I was surprised however with the large amount of rejections. I haven't checked everything yet (I should download the excel file, it's much easier than looking online), but it seems the main problem were "similars".
I can accept that in some cases, but when one image is horizontal and the other is vertical, I believe they should be acceptable variations. Also a series that has the same composition but different currencies in each image. Anyone having these problems?
I don't normally have more than 4 images in a series, varying angle of view and rotation. Is that too much?
It's really a pity, as sales in Zymm give us a good return.
Regards,
Adelaide
-
Keith, it would be interesting to hear your opinion on this.
I can totally understand an agency's reasons for rejecting too many of the same, but designers value having at least 1 vertical and a horizontal option of each shot. Especially for magazine layouts, photo editors very quickly fill their holes, and if the perfect vertical photo that they have found does not perfectly fit the horizontal hole in their layout, you have lost a sale. It is also very hard for many to visualize a horizontal photo on a vertical magazine cover, or a tall product.
I blogged about it here (http://microstockjunction.com/2007/09/15/shooting-both-ways.aspx) One designer did reply: (in part) I've seen so many gorgeous images on stock sites I just can't use, either because the shot axis is wrong or the cropping makes me insane.
And, I also encourage you to read this photo editor blog (http://aphotoeditor.com/2008/02/29/fill-in-the-blank-stock/) called "Fill In The Blank Stock". (You must read this entry!)
-
(in part) I've seen so many gorgeous images on stock sites I just can't use, either because the shot axis is wrong or the cropping makes me insane.
Off-topic. Didn't realize the MS Junction was yours. Added it here (http://flemishdreams.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=72&Itemid=76) anyways ;-) - you need a feed button for RSS. The first thing in the morning is to hover over all my feed buttons in Firefox.
-
We recently added the Editors names with the button to PM them directly with any concerns or inquiries about rejections/approvals, this would be the best method to ask about specific submissions. Be sure to include the Submission ID #'s to make things easier for the Editor to look it up.
I personally am not doing so many reviews these days as we have brought on more pros to handle this, and I am falling back into my proper role as CEO/systems engineer. Dealing directly with Editors is the quickest and most accurate way to get editorial-type questions resolved.
thanks
-
And how long does it usually take you to review the pictures? About two weeks? More? Less? I have a few waiting there for rather a long time...
-
We recently added the Editors names with the button to PM them directly with any concerns or inquiries about rejections/approvals, this would be the best method to ask about specific submissions.
I did that and the inspector replied me saying she has fowarded my inquiry to the admin... what is ok to me. Of course in some cases the inspector can decide (technical aspects, mainly), but when it comes to site policies (like the vertical vs horizontal, number of similar images and acceptable variations, subject), I do believe that the site admin should give the orientation. It can not be a decision solely left to the inspector's opinion.
Regards,
Adelaide
-
Dear madelaide,
thank you for your inquiry. As you well know, editing is not a science and we appreciate any feedback you might have. As Chief Editor of Zymmetrical, I have instructed editors to be vigilant for too many repetitive images in order to avoid image buyers having to go thought too numerous similar images. We offer them a service, which is to display the best images, not all of them.We value quality over quantity.
There is no policy regarding verticals or horizontals. Actually, verticals are most welcome as it is the most used orientation on the web but also on print. So, if we had to choose between two images, the vertical would have the priority.
Editing members submission is a fine balance between quality, composition, subject and other technical parameters. However, we have to be respectful of buyers time by not flooding them with too much choice. It doesn't help anyone.
Finally, as a midstock agency where our prices a higher than microstock, we need to stay aware that we are being highly judge on quality and relevancy of content. For that we use our past experience in image sales ( I have personally have done it for more than 17 years) but also more technological information from our site and its traffic.
I would hate to instruct our editors to follow very tight standards as I do not believe that I have the perfect eye. No one does. It is always open to controversy, it will always be since you are dealing with taste and opinions and one could go on and on how this image is better than the other one.
We have to agree to disagree. Hopefully not too often.
Best
Paul M
-
171 approved, 11 rejected but I think some of those were when I had problems with the FTP and the files didn't upload properly. That seems fine to me.
My only problem with them so far is my earnings stuck on $0.00. I hope that changes soon :)
-
(...) As Chief Editor of Zymmetrical, I have instructed editors to be vigilant for too many repetitive images in order to avoid image buyers having to go thought too numerous similar images. (...) There is no policy regarding verticals or horizontals. (...)
Paul,
I am ok with the similar images rejection when they are indeed similar (some of mine were, same setup shot from different angles), I only did not understand why a horizontal was accepted and a vertical wasn't (or vice-versa) for similarity. If the rejected one has a technical issue, it's another thing and not "too many similars".
The situation I have contacted the inspector however (my only contact so far) was indeed another issue: three vertical images, similar in composition, but showing different currencies (USD, EUR and BR). Therefore I did not understand (and in this case indeed I disagree) with the "too many similars", because someone who is looking for a financial images with euros will not (generally) want one with dollars instead. Apparently the inspector was not sure she should revert the rejection, therefore she sent my msg to the admins (you or someone else, I don't know).
Thanks for your reply.
Regards,
Adelaide
-
Well, I guess, Zymmetrical inspectors decided just reject images without any explanations. It may be fine to thin out a pending queue, but it's completely disrespectful to contributors >:(
-
nata_rass,
Not sure what you are referring too. We have an absolute strict policy never, ever to reject ANY image without a detail explanation. If you have had any of your images treated that way, let me know and I will get the responsible editor out of our team. I and everyone at Zymmetrical agree. It is disrespectful and impolite and should never happen.
Please email me at pmelcher(@)zymmetrical.com with more details and information so I can solve this issue promptly.
best
Paul M
-
I have investigated further and determined that due to a slightly ambiguous element of our Editor admin page layout, one our new Editors was indeed entering comments but they were not being recorded. We will ensure that this batch that is missing comments is re-reviewed.
Our policy is as Paul states, every reject gets an explanation, it's only fair.
-
I also had a lot of rejections with my first batch. So I asked them now to close my account. I think it's better for me to concentrate on the big six, who have accepted a lot of the rejected photos by zymmetrical. It felt like a waste of my time, specially for a site still with the low earners
-
Our policy is as Paul states, every reject gets an explanation, it's only fair.
It's also very useful for people like me who are just starting up. Thanks.
-
Hi Claudia,
May I ask, do you feel those rejections were unfounded? As in, the exact reasons stated by the Reviewer are not accurate, or are you just going by that another agency accepted them?
"This photo was accepted/sells on some other business on the internet" - we get this a lot, however you should realize that we are not clearing out photos on subscriptions/$1/<insert weekly marketing scheme here>, where buyers aren't going to have a stroke if the photos have minor technical flaws, lighting is not perfect etc.
We sell from $3 - $100, with the average price of photos at this moment being $23. We owe it to our customers to have higher editorial standards, I hope you can appreciate that. ;D
I also had a lot of rejections with my first batch. So I asked them now to close my account. I think it's better for me to concentrate on the big six, who have accepted a lot of the rejected photos by zymmetrical. It felt like a waste of my time, specially for a site still with the low earners
-
Hi Keith
I uploaded a batch of a few hundred, and they were all rejected for " The composition and lighting of this image limit its stock value." or similar.
Now, these are not the best of my work (I was planning on uploading chronologically to get my whole port up in an organized manner), however these are photos that have been accepted and are selling moderately well on other stock sites.
This is in no way a rant. You can set any quality standard you wish, and a photo selling on another stock site doesn't mean anything.
I just wanted to check if I just encountered an overenthusiastic reviewer, of if your standards are really that high, in which case there's no need to waste time uploading further.
My account on zymettrical is kgtoh.
Thanks.
Edit: Just read the part about "We sell from $3 - $100, so higher standards". Some of these photos are on the Macros, which sell considerably higher than $3 - $100.
-
Kgtoh,
Well, does the composition and lighting of the images limit their stock value? :)
Rather than try and continue pleading for understanding of our market position, or just saying our Reviewers are not off their rockers, I would love to see some discussion of specific examples here. We are here to make a go of this, not reject photos that could earn us both some money.
Can you link up some thumbs of ones you feel are perhaps not right in their reject reason? I don't want to take up your time if you don't want to explore this further, but just remember we pay for each of those rejects in money, and even more money if they are actually potentially sellable by us, so this issue is extremely important to me and I will discuss it until people are satisfied.
**Got your edit. Sure that's a good point about the macros, however as a parallel, I have seen a photo, from a Getty/Corbis top-level guy, that has been downloaded on a certain ISite, 697 times. We rejected it - the dust spots on it were atrocious. So.. just going by who else sells, no chance. Every photo gets looked at, and a fair shake, is our idea. Not implying that those ones you have on the macros have such an obvious flaw.. but the point is we are our own agency and of course we have a different direction of content acquisition than others. It would be a pretty dull experience if our inventory matches someone elses, IMO.
-
Keith
I was looking through my rejections, and most were actually for
"This is a nice image, but because there are typically so many images in this category, each one must be exemplary to be marketable as midstock."
My mistake
(although I did get a bunch of lighting/compositions one)
Here's a rejection:
http://www.dreamstime.com/airport-lounge-image3260281 (http://www.dreamstime.com/airport-lounge-image3260281)
rejected for
"The lighting of this image limits its stock value"
This shot was taken at night, using available artificial lighting for a more realistic feel. Sold a bunch of times at various micros, once on Alamy, so I certainly feel it's commercially viable.
I really don't have the time or the inclination to try to justify individual photos.
I am not questioning your marketing position, just whether it's worth it to upload the rest of my portfolio. Having an entire batch rejected indicates your standards are too high for me (I'm not saying I'm the best photographer in the world, mind you), so it's just wasting my time and your reviewers' time.
-
I feel the same as kgtoh, asking myself if it's worth uploading, but I took the time to sent you the id's. I didn't expected you to accept all my photos. But I uploaded 50 photos, of which 47 where reviewd and 43 are rejected. so for me it's a waste of time.
23 of those had "This is a nice image, but because there are typically so many images in this category, each one must be exemplary to be marketable as midstock." The rest for bad lighting, quality or composition.
So my photos don't meet your standards and it's better for me to upload those bad photos to other sites. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
same here
487 rejections of 550 ???
imagine if they mage to go up in sales too
they would reject 549 / 550
PS: average rejection for this images among all sites is 150-200/550!!!!
-
Thanks for the info.
Kgtoh - I appreciate the specific example. For me, yes the airport lounge photo does look indeed exactly how it should giving the kind of lighting present in such a room. From my experience however, best-selling interior shots use lighting that compliments the theme at hand. Do you agree that this shot may be more useful if there was a bit more tonal range, I personally think, to sit in such a brightly lit room would be unpleasant. An airport first-class lounge is supposed to look mellow and relaxing; the light ambiance in that shot in particular looks very harsh and clinical to me.
I know you do not want to justify individual photos, but this is our job: to look at individual photos and sell them. Your existing $ earnings must be tabulated against actual time/bandwidth to decide whether we are right for you. We are simply not at full operational level yet so I think a practical approach is to wait before making a decision on continued participation.
Claudia - You look at 43 out of 47 rejected as a glass half-empty, we look at it as a glass half-full- you have 4 photos online now, which we try to make work harder to sell themselves than what you may be used to. Yes that batch is much lower than our normal acceptance rates. I really can't see a practical point in deciding general agency participation based on how many photos they approve of yours? Yes it takes time to select and upload. Yes it takes time to describe files. Logging in to check up on statuses, yes. Most importantly; the files are -your- productions which you've put a lot of work into creating. We understand this in detail. Why throw out the time already invested in doing that before you've even had some files online for a while, is my question. :)
-
Perhaps Keith or Paul can explain the logic for refusing images just because there are a bunch in a given category because I don't understand it...
If an image meets all of your technical standards and guidelines, why reject it at all?
Isn't the goal to get as many choices in front of buyers as possible? Isn't it likely that a category with no new (or very few) submissions will get stagnant in time? Aren't designers hungry for new and different images all the time? Even if that difference is only slight?
I remember reading about a behavioral study done by Penn State a number of years back where they took 360 pictures of the same object, one for each degree in a circle around the object. Over 2500 students participated in they study.
Over 360 images, they found a fairly even distribution over the 2500+ students. Although the difference between most images was slight, students still chose a different image for various reasons than the one next to it.
What was very interesting was the experiment was in two parts. The first part students were just asked to pick their favorite. 71% of the picks were in the first 60 images shown (they got tired or bored of looking). In the second part, students were required to review all of the images before making their selection and 79% of them changed their selection to images later in the batch (even a few who chose the very last image).
For the first part of the experiment, almost all of the 29% who selected later images were art or artistic related majors and took the time to find what they felt was the right image.
If I can find the link to the article again, I'll post it.
-
Well, it is not so bad in my case - but I think it is only because I uploaded my images much earlier - they were slightly less picky that time. I have no "This is a nice image ..." rejection e.g. They accepted about 65 and rejected about 25 images of mine. All of them were accepted elsewhere.
But just the same - I think I will upload my bad photos to other agencies which are able to sell them. How do you close your account? Do you have to write to the admin? Or is there an easier way?
-
Rejections, rejections, rejections...
An ongoing topic here, in this forum. let me explain our policy in details so it will make more sense to all :
Our editors are not machine. They carefully inspect every image at 100% of their size for any default and imperfections. You would be amazed on how many images we get with dust on them. If your were purchasing an image, regardless of the price, I do not think you would be happy if you had also to clean it up before usage.
Because we are not in a race to be the first to license 4 gazillion images, we spend quality time with all the submitted images.
Every rejection has an explanation. Instead of posting how many rejections you had, try reading the reasons and tell us if you disagree with them and why. We are open to dialogue, as you can see. We more than appreciate feedback and we know that editing is not an exact science. as Chief Editor, I am always available for comments on our editing team.
We reject with a purpose : it is not the photographer that we reject, it is the image. We add comments that hopefully will make the images more marketable. All our editors know how much work and passion you have put in your images and respect it tremendously. Some of you complain about the long editing time..Well, part of it is due to a thorough editing team that can sometimes spend a lot of time on an image, discussing it with other editor.
We know our clients : we have a lot of valuable data and feedback from our image buyers. Our editors are aware of it. Their editing is made to get you the highest ratio of image uploaded/images sold.
Quality brings quality : the higher the bar, the highest respect you get, the highest price per image you receive.
Finally, let's not focus on the rejection numbers but what explanation you receive for them. The answer to all of your questions about our editing policy is in them. If you still continue to have doubts, let me know and together, we will solve it .
hope that helps
PM
-
Good advice ZymnnMan...
I think if we have a complaint about a rejection it would serve well for all of us to see an individual image with an individual rejection. That way we can discuss what we think about it, and Zymmetrical can defend their position and hopefully we will all become better photographers because of it.
-just be prepared to have a full critique of your photo if you bring it into the public spotlight.
-
Paul,
I am not questioning a rejection for technical reasons. I agree 200% about not making the customer clean up something that should have been fixed before it was submitted.
What I am specifically asking about is the logic behind rejecting images for non-technical reasons. Images that meet all the technical and general submission guidelines, but are rejected because the reviewer feels there are already too many of that given subject. Or they feel it's too similar (but still different) to another image.
That just doesn't make any sense to me.
-
One of my bestsellers is rejected with the reason "The lighting and composition of this image limit its stock value." The subject of the picture is a set of bottles of sparkling wine "Ferrari" during fermentation period. In other words, the cellar with bottles should be in complete darkness. I did my best to show the real production of Ferrari sparkling wine. Trust me, the light on the picture is perfectly correct. The composition is just amazing. The image is being sold everywhere ::)
Another funny rejection: "We cannot accept images with artwork as the main element/subject without a property release." Try to guess the subject of the image. Public statue in public place. The artist, Auguste Rodin mentioned in description for the picture, died in 1917. Is property release still required? I'm affraid its impossible even if the answer is "Yes".
-
Dear Dnavarrojr,
You are absolutely right. It makes no sense to refuse images because a lot of similar already populate the database. However, you would be surprise at how many copy cats are out there that systematically copy images that are best sellers in the hope of getting high results.
What our reviewers are looking for, exactly like our image buyers, are images full of creativity and innovation. Photographs that change the rules of what has been seen and sold before. They reject similar images because they do not feel that adding them to our offering will bring any additional choice to our image buyers, besides maybe more "noise".
As much as we would love to keep every single image submitted to us, as much as we want ( need) to offer those who come to our site to purchase images a sincere and contrasted choice that reflect the imagination, passion and creativity of our photographers.
on a more general, I would like to say, as everyone on this forum well knows, editing is in no way an exact science with a clearly defined set of rules. What works for certain sites will not for others. In no way will I ever tell Istock or Dreamstime how to edit the images they receive, although I do have my opinion. It is the eternal debate of what taste better, Pepsi or Coke ?
An old French saying goes a little bit like this : " Taste and colors are not a subject of argument". Why ? because no one will ever be right.
I believe it applies well to editing.
best
PM
-
Is Mona lisa on sale on microstock too ?
-
Thanks for the answer. I still believe that unless there is an issue with storage space, it does not hurt in any way shape or form to accept every image that has no technical issues or violates your guidelines.
I can understand the need to combat outright image theft, but if I go out and shoot a similar image to the most popular selling image on your site, it's still gonna be different in some fashion and (in my opinion) you'd be robbing your customers and yourself by not allowing it on your site.
But I understand you have to do what you have to do.
-
just amazing
Here is the point I totally agree here.
-
The composition and lighting of this image limit its stock value.
This rejection reason hit the entire first batch i submitted.
I understand what is right for one company isn't always right for another, but this was first batch of about a thousand available, and I did pick and choose.
So, my feeling is, if these images aren't good enough for your site, I just have more of the same, so I just can't see spending the time.
No bad feelings, it's just not a good match.
-
Hi,
Thanks, I appreciate that you made a selective approach to your first submission, a bit of critical thinking really saves us all a lot of effort. :) We deal a lot with a malady called 'uploadwholeharddriveitis', which some other agencies deal with by imposing upload restrictions. We prefer the human approach.
I had a look, and your stats currently are at : 22 waiting, 7 approved, 17 rejected (as visible in the 'Statistics' area at the bottom of the page).
The reasons for the 17 rejected all appear absolutely valid from my point of view. There's a lot of competent judges around this forum, I would propose you post a couple of those rejected image in this message thread with the reject reasons and we can discuss. I think we could all gain from it.
-
Any word on this, RGebbie? I'd like to get to the bottom of this, and hopefully help improve communications in the future about what is and isn't accepted.
Thanks.
-
A month ago I upload a batch of 5 images there. 2 were accepted, one rejected and 2 are still pending! It's time to say goodbye to Zymmetrical.
-
Last batch I uploaded (after sending a mail to the support because their ftp didnt work correctly) has been rejected for "please correct keywords"...
Perhaps I dont understand very process at zymm
-
A month ago I upload a batch of 5 images there. 2 were accepted, one rejected and 2 are still pending! It's time to say goodbye to Zymmetrical.
Rene,
Rejected: As I offered to Rgebbie, by all means post some low-res copies of the rejected photos here and we can all have a look and discuss. If you don't want to do at least that, that's cool too, but we can't offer much more to you in that case.
Waiting: We receive hundred of submissions daily, and each one is professionally reviewed. We do not promise first-come, first-served, but instead approve to keep a constant variety of unique images coming to the buyers. If you have experienced an exceptionally long wait time, then it would be prudent to use the available support options on Zymmetrical, we are always available.
-
Last batch I uploaded (after sending a mail to the support because their ftp didnt work correctly) has been rejected for "please correct keywords"...
Perhaps I dont understand very process at zymm
Hi Trebuchet,
I will look into this and get you an answer, thanks.
-
Last batch I uploaded (after sending a mail to the support because their ftp didnt work correctly) has been rejected for "please correct keywords"...
Perhaps I dont understand very process at zymm
PM sent
-
Keith,
While I appreciate your concern, it was never my intention to ask you to change your review of our images.
I am quite happy with the results I get from the images we have for sale. There are some companies that quite definitely like our style, and we sell well with them. There are other sites that don't sell very well, but the sales are consistant enough to keep me interested.
I have dropped sites that didn't work for us, I see no reason to have my images up at a site if they do not match the general feel that site is trying to achieve.
Like I said, no hard feelings, it's just not going to work for us at this time.
Zym was going to be one of the sites I speculated on, but not one of the ones I would count on. I'm not one that demands sales within five days of my images going live on a site, and I understand the risks involved joining a new site.
I do wish you well, I'm sure you will be quite successful. There is a great pool of talent already accepted at your site!
I have 20 images still locked up in the pending queue that I would like to have a resolution on. Good or bad, I just would like an answer on them.
Oh, another thing, I noticed there is no delete key. So now, I ask, how difficult is it to delete an image at Zym?
Interested in your reply :)
Gebbie
-
Hi Gebbie,
Thanks for the positive words!
Well I would never consider uploading to us a risk, but that is of course my biased point of view only. We do stick to our guns and are not wholesaling peoples content on a subscription basis so I would be glad to get the benefit of the doubt. ;)
Completely directly however, I would not ask the trust of professional creatives, unless I believe myself that there is a future for Zymmetrical. It is one of the hardest battles that could possibly be fought on the internet these days: professional content vs the youtube generation where the only question is "how cheap?".
While you do naturally have an already-formed impression of a general feel we are trying to achieve (first impressions are always lasting in everything), our 'feel' is based on our in-house review team, but also feedback from you - you are on the frontlines of selling, just as much as we are - if you know for a fact a certain type or quality of image is moving strongly, in the micro or macrostock level, then by letting us know your opinion, you are affecting our editorial bottom line in a real way, we do pay attention.
We just brought on a hundred or so new Categories this week, and even this list was revised at the last moment to take into account some new market intelligence - you can be sure that we are on our toes to keep up in this industry.
For 'deletes' - in the Submission 'Describe' section: button is coming soon, because people do make mistakes in uploading daily. In general for live content: ask and ye shall receive (usually with a bit of 'WHY MAN WHY')- but there is no automatic option planned, we don't put stuff online that we don't love so a delete button for that would just make it easy for our competition to break our hearts. ;)
Your 20 or so remaining files are being approached, we have 3 new crack Reviewers and the backlog is being sent to Valhalla in a quick way.
-
Keith,
Forgive me for calling it a risk to upload to your site. I did not mean that in a BEWARE type of way. I said it because your site is brand new and does not have the traffic, nor the sales to make it an educated or strategic jump. It is a speculation.
My formed impression of your site came from the review team, when they rejected our images. AGAIN, I don't have any problem with the rejections. The images I selected were some of our better sellers at DT and SS. But I am not here to whine about you not accepting them, I am merely stating that our styles do not compliment eachother.
I currently manage 12 sites. Not all of my images are accepted across the board. And some images sell like hotcakes at one site, but get zero views on others. And I'm ok with that, because I know people go to the sites that "feel" right to them. If they like the site, the way it performs, then they choose to spend their dollars there. And if a company knows their clients, they know what will sell.
I know the quality of our images. I know there are sites that sell our work. But I would never dare to insist that you take my images. Not if they do not match what you sell. Because then, your purpose is defeated. You get a bad review from me, because your site doesn't move for my portfolio, and your customers complain because there are a ton of images that aren't even remotely what they might be interested in.
So, I will leave our account open with the few images that get approved, and maybe in a few months when there is more information on your company performance, I might revisit and see if our current images are more suited.
Again, I wish you nothing but success!
Gebbie
-
Thanks Gebbie, I appreciate you sticking around for a while longer, and for being laid-back with our reviews of your images so far. We are trying not to promise the world but just move step by step to having a smooth running and popular marketplace. We are not there yet so there's a lot of work to be done still - and it would be a shame if we lose talented creatives in the very beginning due to lack of communication or technical glitches - chances are whatever seems like a drag one week gets fixed by the next.
-
A month ago I upload a batch of 5 images there. 2 were accepted, one rejected and 2 are still pending! It's time to say goodbye to Zymmetrical.
Rene,
Rejected: As I offered to Rgebbie, by all means post some low-res copies of the rejected photos here and we can all have a look and discuss. If you don't want to do at least that, that's cool too, but we can't offer much more to you in that case.
The problem is not 1 rejected image but one month pending time.
-
Got it. We have brought on 3 new reviewers in the past weeks, and they are quickly dealing with the big submissions backlog. We are up to August for the oldest files and expect to be up-to-the-hour this week. I will ensure your file gets attended to, I just need you to PM or use our own help system to let me know your username on Zymm.
Thanks
-
Keith,
The last 20 were reviewed. While I LOVE this image:
(http://www.zymmetrical.com/Desktopmodules/Portalstore/files/StoreImages/1/PackageImages/x-ZY.jpg)
I think sixteen copies of the image in my portfolio is a BIT much.
Also, there is still weird html stuff where the prices should be on most of the images when I pull them up.
Thank you for your help so far! And, may I say, I admire the quick response from you.
Gebbie
-
Eek, Sorry this is a known issue related to adding 100 or so new categories in the past days. Should have been all cleaned up but clearly not, will get this fixed pronto. Thanks
-
LOL no worries.
The werms are our mascots, I make them myself. It was a real huge laugh when I pulled all of them up!
Thanks again!
Gebbie
-
Interesting, that picture is not the original one I linked. I wonder who it belongs to...?
Gebbie
-
Keith,
The last 20 were reviewed. While I LOVE this image:
([url]http://www.zymmetrical.com/Desktopmodules/Portalstore/files/StoreImages/1/PackageImages/x-ZY.jpg[/url])
I think sixteen copies of the image in my portfolio is a BIT much.
Also, there is still weird html stuff where the prices should be on most of the images when I pull them up.
Thank you for your help so far! And, may I say, I admire the quick response from you.
Gebbie
Thought I recognised that typewriter:) It is mine but now I seem to have lots of copies in my profile page.
http://www.zymmetrical.com/artists/artist-profile/uid/50138/
-
LOL the image keeps changing!
It started as some Wermz, like the one in my avitar.
Then it was a park scene, now it's a typewriter!!
ooOOOOooohhh I wonder what it will be next!!
I think it has something to do with a damaged placer link, the image I copied had multiples, then completely disappeared from the site.
Gebbie
-
I have alot to say about my... ADVENTURE in Zymm...
images disapear and appear and more and more...
But I WANT TO CONTACT....
DOES ANYONE HANDLING THAT CONTACT TICKET stafff??
i've send 4 tickets and no answer?????
-
The reason that image is changing is because it is not a file intended for public display, you will note the file name is : http://www.zymmetrical.com/Desktopmodules/Portalstore/files/StoreImages/1/PackageImages/x-ZY.jpg (lacking a full inventoryname such as ZYIMGPPL00223) which shows that it is the symptom of this category bug we had.
That image is the correct image for Sharplydone/Wayoutwest, and is the first one in the new Business category: http://www.zymmetrical.com/art/photos/photos-business/fileid/zyimgbiz00001/ (http://www.zymmetrical.com/art/photos/photos-business/fileid/zyimgbiz00001/)
As my 'title' in Instant Messenger has been for months now; 'Ctrl-F5'. We use a lot of different caching methods, so doing a hard refresh on the page usually works wonders. I again apologize if this seems sloppy but please consider that we are doing some very complex things behind the scenes:
- up to 7 Reviewers working with files at once
- spatial (Freerange), color, and metadata (EXIF/IPTC) on the files
- translation of keywords into 7 languages
- distributing files to geographically diverse servers (USA <> Europe)
All the while with this new fast submissions system for Artists with multiple upload options, combined with no upload limits other than incurring the wrath of a Reviewer by uploading your whole hard drive. Throw into the mix our Editorial staff asking for 100+ new and improved categories, and wanting to merge/rename existing categories - sometimes the task for the tech dept. is a rough one. There is never an excuse to show buggy results on the public side of the site, but errors happen even with the best planning, if you could plan every contingency, the project would be done already. :)
Please do report what you see, but just remember that a public forum is not necessarily going to be the best place for this communication - a PM here or a ticket on our site can allow better service.
-
Lobby,
I responded to your ticket:
Sorry for the delay in response, we have to prioritize support requests in the order they come in, and the nature of their request.
As you know, we still in pre-launch stage. Also, we impose no daily upload limits like some other agencies. Therefore, we need to ask for a relaxed approach to your submissions: we get to them all, in the order they arrive. Whether in FTP, or Described.
Things got slowed down in the last week, because even though we have new Reviewers, we added 100+ categories and restructured the existing ones, which forced a pause in reviews.
I am pushing your FTP files through now, and thank you for your patience and understanding - we cannot process all files uploaded from everyone, at the same time! :)
-
P.S. We have just taken the 'Help Ticket' system offline for now - it has been more headache then it's been worth: the main problem being us not getting timely notifications.
There is now just a plain simple Contact form, which will get to us instantly and get you a response in a more fair timeframe.
Thanks
-
That image is the correct image for Sharplydone/Wayoutwest, and is the first one in the new Business category: [url]http://www.zymmetrical.com/art/photos/photos-business/fileid/zyimgbiz00001/[/url] ([url]http://www.zymmetrical.com/art/photos/photos-business/fileid/zyimgbiz00001/[/url])
I think you meant sharpshot/wayoutwest. I am nowhere near as good as sharply_done :)
-
Erp. :-[ Yes sorry. Mixed up my Sharps.
-
Woohoooo :D I am the winner! I have 24 of 24 rejected, mostly with reason: "The composition and overall technical quality of this image limit its stock value". Maybe some people should take a look at other portfolios of the same contributor to see if maybe they are making mistake by rejecting images that are pretty good sellers. :) Otherwise we all may lose money :) some of us less, some of us more...
-
here also a lot of rejections twice for keywording while I'm sure there were 10 or more with them I did the last one manual and still the same rejection reason. MAYBE A BUG I already contacted suport regards this issue so any one else this problem????????or am I the only one with this problem??????
also ghost pictures appair frequent in my port for the third time.........
I think of closing my account this is the only site with this much trouble and I don't like this.
One good thing about zymmetrical normaly the support respons very quick and try to figure out the problem.
-
Well, guys I contacted support, and here is my conclusion. Zymmetrical has high standard. Looks like it's higher than IS. They know what they want and their rejections are not random, that's for sure. I will stick to Zymmertrical because I like when people explain to me what they want from me. They wrote me prety long email with explanation of my rejections and I appreciate it.
-
I can also only say good things about their support. They have been very quick to solve the issues that came up, sometimes even interactively. I hope they will soon get behind the start up issues they have been facing. I definitely plan to keep uploading there.
-
I am giving up from first batch rejected due to 'LIMITED STOCK' ;-)
I sent them my best images frequently downloaded from other agencies as Extended Licences which are printed in many cook books and otherr magazines and they rejected...
What to say further?
No more uploading there...
-
Milinz I have just got your email regarding your rejections, I cannot quite understand why you would simultaneously post on MSG before even getting a word back from us - can I have 10 minutes to look at the issue before we are tarred and feathered? ;)
-
Well, guys I contacted support, and here is my conclusion. Zymmetrical has high standard. Looks like it's higher than IS. They know what they want and their rejections are not random, that's for sure. I will stick to Zymmertrical because I like when people explain to me what they want from me. They wrote me prety long email with explanation of my rejections and I appreciate it.
ditto 8)
-
Thanks Hali.
Milinz, I am not sure whether it is appropriate to discuss this here, but since you came to MSG to discuss before getting a word back from our support team I will assume you are willing to communicate in this forum -
You have 26 submissions in the system.
- 1 flower shot, rejected with 'This is a nice image, but because there are typically so many images in this category, each one must be exemplary to be marketable as midstock.' . I think most everyone can relate that flower shots are a saturated theme and it's hard to market them in a general sense. They do of course sell but there is a reason they are downgraded by most agencies in terms of desirability.
- 2 closeups of sausages on a grill, rejected for 'The composition of this image limits its stock value.'. I have asked the Reviewer for a more particular explanation, however due to time zone differences they are currently out of office. As soon as I hear from them I will expand on why they were rejected. I have my own opinions, and we all of course work from (as close to as possible) standardized guidelines for reviews, however we don't employ robots we work with humans so i'd like to hear what they have to say.
- 23 files marked as 'Deleted by Artist', in other words, you deleted them while they were in the 'Describe' stage.
So, I don't know how this constitutes rejecting your 'whole batch'? It looks like 3 files got rejected, you didn't like the reasons given, and removed the rest. Is this the case?
At any rate.. while we would go broke trying to write an essay on every reject we do, I am happy to give beginner and pro photographers alike the benefit of the doubt and re-check when someone feels the rejects are unfounded. I can say that I don't recall any reviews being overturned for opinions such as composition.
-
Thanks Hali.
Milinz, I am not sure whether it is appropriate to discuss this here, but since you came to MSG to discuss before getting a word back from our support team I will assume you are willing to communicate in this forum -
You have 26 submissions in the system.
- 1 flower shot, rejected with 'This is a nice image, but because there are typically so many images in this category, each one must be exemplary to be marketable as midstock.' . I think most everyone can relate that flower shots are a saturated theme and it's hard to market them in a general sense. They do of course sell but there is a reason they are downgraded by most agencies in terms of desirability.
- 2 closeups of sausages on a grill, rejected for 'The composition of this image limits its stock value.'. I have asked the Reviewer for a more particular explanation, however due to time zone differences they are currently out of office. As soon as I hear from them I will expand on why they were rejected. I have my own opinions, and we all of course work from (as close to as possible) standardized guidelines for reviews, however we don't employ robots we work with humans so i'd like to hear what they have to say.
- 23 files marked as 'Deleted by Artist', in other words, you deleted them while they were in the 'Describe' stage.
So, I don't know how this constitutes rejecting your 'whole batch'? It looks like 3 files got rejected, you didn't like the reasons given, and removed the rest. Is this the case?
At any rate.. while we would go broke trying to write an essay on every reject we do, I am happy to give beginner and pro photographers alike the benefit of the doubt and re-check when someone feels the rejects are unfounded. I can say that I don't recall any reviews being overturned for opinions such as composition.
Now that all seems very reasonable to me. Milinz, you are clearly trying to make yourself out to be the victim here and despite your chasing the sympathy vote I cannot empathise with one word of that you've written. Get over yourself and put a filter on your ego before you give yourself a stroke.
-
Iriz I definitely don't want to have anyone 'come down' on - it is entirely possible that being new to the system, he accidentally deleted the other 23 (the buttons for 'Submit' or 'Reject' are in the same general area, it could happen), didn't read all the rejection reasons, and has just interpreted it that we blew off his whole batch. We cannot know until the response is given, this is the nature of support in the technical side of things. Sometimes it's a detective story, sometimes it's a drama. :) Just need to get the facts out and then go from there.
-
Closed my account for multiple issues.
One big plus for zymmetrical very quick respons and support and trying to fix problems .To bad it didn't work for me.
Have fun,have a great time,and my best wishes.
-
*...
Is it just me, or is the zymmetrical website just running in snail speed? I have never before, experienced such slow web application!
.. since the unreasonable and unjustified rejections just keep coming, I must say that I really do consider closoíng my account as well..
Perhaps zymmetrical aim to compete with crestock when it comes to "attracting" contributors ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
The web application works like crap and the rejection rates are getting closer and closer to the crestock rates :D :D :D :D :D :D
- The reasons for rejections are just as justified as crestock's ;D ;D ;D
-
i closed mine for that reason too
-
Guys, you can't really compare Crestock and Zymmetrical. Crestock gives you 25 cents per DL, and Zymmetrical gives you much more. And lets be honest, Crestocs rejections are uncomparable to rejections at Zymmetrical. Maybe you just expected of Zymmetrical to be extremly mild like most of new sites. Well, they aren't... but you can't say they are like Crestock. My friend who started microstock in august doesn't have more than 60 images on any agency, but he has 39 on Zymmetrical, and he already has one sale. He earned about 7,5$ from that one sale. He is very tallented photographer, but let's be honest, he is in this business only 4 months.
-
Ok guys, top priority at the moment is the noticed site slowness. DBA is working on it, we plan ahead and deploy hardware in advance of anticipated spikes (I think I was discussing the pains of moving to x64 with a member here recently), but sometimes there is a perfect storm of usage that can't be easily foreseen. Should be back to normal shortly ..
For the rejection for Milinz: I am not going to post the image preview here as I don't want to 'out' anyones photos, and if he truly is closing his account I don't want any copyright issues. If he wants to post he can. Here is the reviewers expansion on it:
Food stying shots are difficult, and meat shots the most difficult to make look truly appetizing, since they're not fresh and vibrant like fruits and veggies, or homey and enticing like soups or pasta dishes. Therefore, meat shots need a lot of work to make them look like anything other than what they are: flesh. These particular shots are not very well-composed: parts of the subjects are cut off, there is no interesting angle (often a must in food photography to keep it from looking like a take-out menu), and they're somewhat flat and just a bit dim. Take a look at food magazines to see how they style their shots, and at successful, stylish food photographers' portfolios online, learn from the best, and strive to become one of the best if food photography is what you really want to do.
I am still waiting for someone to present me with a business plan based around an agency that simply runs a script to approve files based on whether they exist on some other agencies inventory on the net. I can have the script drawn up in a few hours, you just make the pitch. ;) With the money saved kicking out those pesky Reviewers we can all take a nice south seas vacation.
-
hey we all get our fair share of rejections. from istock, dst, etc...
so why is zymm any different ?
i was once also out to close my account with them at the start, but an email from them changed my mind.
instead of just continue sending the same images that would surely be rejected by zymm's approval team, why not look at what was approved in your port and then shoot more in that style?
somehow, i don't think keith is out to get anyone of us to quit zymm.
what's the gain for him?
as Iriz mentioned, pull back on the ego, and learn from the rejections.
you'll find approvals more rapidly ...
chill ! ;)
-
hey we all get our fair share of rejections. from istock, dst, etc...
so why is zymm any different ?
i was once also out to close my account with them at the start, but an email from them changed my mind.
instead of just continue sending the same images that would surely be rejected by zymm's approval team, why not look at what was approved in your port and then shoot more in that style?
somehow, i don't think keith is out to get anyone of us to quit zymm.
what's the gain for him?
as Iriz mentioned, pull back on the ego, and learn from the rejections.
you'll find approvals more rapidly ...
chill ! ;)
Exactly hali...
-
Who cares aout ZYM rejections, as at the moment it is just impossible to upload anything in volume because all those fancy scripts crawl at the speed of a lame snail backwards? I didn't upload in months since it became worse. A year ago, the good old ZYM days, you could FTP and forget. Now, adding one MRF costs me 5 minutes and I have to restart the site from the top menu ...
-
FD, I have not (even though I would have liked to since you are a tech guy yourself and can understand what the heck I am talking about better than most) even had the time to reply to your post on our forum because this is a top priority and we are working all out on a fix. It is a database issue and the problem is understood, it is a matter of plowing through the code and making the update. Please don't spend time waiting for painfully slow loads, it will be fixed soon.
-
Sorry guys,
I was busy with my regular workflow so I am a bit late with my answer on topic.
I see my post in this forum pushed quite a few big waves - hapilly not a tsunami ;-)
http://www.fotolia.com/id/7394209 (http://www.fotolia.com/id/7394209)
Is rejected image downloaded on other agency by similar client group as zymmetrical has. Mostly byers from Germany and EU countries as I know.
On the image are not saussages or similar... That are cevapcici! If you don't know what is that, it is adviseable to see this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%86evapi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%86evapi)
To continue my reasons:
As you already said in our PM exchange before I've started to upload that you like small batches... I've uploaded 26 photos which are on-line on almost all agencies and have keyworded just 3 of them - I've put 4 images as batch on review with one intentionaly left unkeyworded...
Here is why I think your reviewers failed:
1. They've rejected simple, plain stock image of white wedding rose with gold shimmer on it and copy space on the left side. Reason given for rejection is out of clear logic due to that there is not a single one similar image on other agencies except just that one which is mine. Maybe it is not a perfect shot but it is unique shot!
2 & 3. Composition rejection is quite understandable for many, but I beleive that your reviewers like more space around grilling cevapcici or better formed main subject on that grill. Maybe they would like to see something more creative as 'GRILL' word on that grill made of cevapcici or what? Again, it is plain simple doccu stock image of cevapcici on grill and nothing more... That image is for cook books and magazines - it is just about how cevapcici are grilled during grilling ;-) It is not masterpiece and that image has good composition!
4. Image rejected - WOW! They did something right! Sure, I hoped that image No.4 will be rejected due to that I did not made keywords right.
If with some mirracle they happen to accepted that image No. 4, my decision would be the same - I don't let my images to be represented by amateurs. Zymmetrical is not so much amateur agency and that is good.
After I saw that rejections, I've mailed my reasons and deleted all remaining photos I've had uploaded.
@Iriz: No dude... I have my ego burried long time ago... But, still there is no logic in this rejections! I really don't care if I don't get some images approved on some agencies, but my choice for first batch was selection of images for MID and TRADITIONAL stock agencies quality, composition and all other segments some image must have to be marketable there... Also, that images are not sellers on microstock agencies - they sell ONLY AS extended licences or ON-DEMAND and not a single one as subscription! Logic tells that something what is not selling on micros would sell on MID/TRADITIONAL or nowhere ;-) Since that images already have proved that they are marketable, I think zymmetrical reviewers have made a mistake of not knowing their terrain (or to say buyers and possible market) which I am not ready to forgive.
This is industry with army of people involved and some of us are long time profesionals or amateurs. My first job is CEO in marketing/advertising agency which means I should have some know-how ;-)
I use camera since 1978. Also, I do design from scratch and create illustrations since 1992. Many companies carry logos that I've made as well as they have complete corporate identity which I've created or have lead team which did the job. Wacom tablet and free hand drawing are my extra skills and I can draw anything I wish or you request! That is all about my ego ;-) I'd better say that I am aware of my capabilies and my knowledge and expirience than that my ego worked in this case.
So, I doubt I can learn composition better than that zymmetrical reviewer who did not liked my composition ;-) I shoot as I see something - there are very rare examples when I use crop to extend compositon on my images and that is mostly because I wanted it on square format from begining. It is all there when I press the camera shutter button. If they made some other explanation about that rejection I'd maybe stay with them - this way I feel I am too old for such young agency and don't have time to bother with such issues as composition by the taste of reviewer.
So, after thinking and rethinking... I will stick with other three mid-stock agencies where I contribute and they have quite more understanding for my creative works.
Happy New Year to all!
-
Food stying shots are difficult, and meat shots the most difficult to make look truly appetizing, since they're not fresh and vibrant like fruits and veggies, or homey and enticing like soups or pasta dishes. Therefore, meat shots need a lot of work to make them look like anything other than what they are: flesh. These particular shots are not very well-composed: parts of the subjects are cut off, there is no interesting angle (often a must in food photography to keep it from looking like a take-out menu), and they're somewhat flat and just a bit dim. Take a look at food magazines to see how they style their shots, and at successful, stylish food photographers' portfolios online, learn from the best, and strive to become one of the best if food photography is what you really want to do.
I am still waiting for someone to present me with a business plan based around an agency that simply runs a script to approve files based on whether they exist on some other agencies inventory on the net. I can have the script drawn up in a few hours, you just make the pitch. ;) With the money saved kicking out those pesky Reviewers we can all take a nice south seas vacation.
As for this rejection reason, first your reviewer should see LIVE what is on the picture and then say that about 'flat', 'dim' and 'cut-off' - this is nothing except a pure ignorancy!
As for perception of particular reviewer - he should know that when something is grilling it could not look so much appetizing ;-) It was not served on portion as some 'trendy' image... But, you can check with Turks, Bosnians, Serbs, or Croats is this appetizing enough for them... I think it is because even I had buyers from Greece for this one ;-)
About your joke: Maybe you should kick some who think that know something they really don't have a clue about :-)
[edit] some typing errors handled
-
It is a database issue and the problem is understood
It is always a database problem in cases of server load and scaling. I wouldn't like to be in your shoes ;-)
Quite unnoticed on the DT forums: a DT tech guy explained why they had to remove some features for the comfort of the contributor (like contributor's name) on the popup thumbs because of the additional load of it, and they preferred to have a snappier experience for the buyer.
On the ZYM forum I already questioned the practice of exporting the keywords database to the full submission overview page, per thumb. Every time you tick a box next to the thumb to be submitted, all keywords are presented in a table. Imagine the database load of doing that. You could do this on a separate "edit keywords" page for that thumb and keep the general submission page lean and clean. Volume uploaders in general have their keywords right and all that has to be done is attaching a MRF (and picking a category, which we all hate) et voilà.
Good luck spending your New Year crawling through code ;-)
-
As for this rejection reason, first your reviewer should see LIVE what is on the picture and then say that about 'flat', 'dim' and 'cut-off' - this is nothing except a pure ignorancy!
As for perception of particular reviewer - he should know that when something is grilling it could not look so much appetizing ;-) It was not served on portion as some 'trendy' image... But, you can check with Turks, Bosnians, Serbs, or Croats is this appetizing enough for them... I think it is because even I had buyers from Greece for this one ;-)
Ok new years behind (well still have a bit of a headache ouch) now back onto the theme of sausage aesthetics. ;) I think the point is, there's no good or bad photo. It's just some pixels. Technical 'quality' in stock is related to market expectations - in our case, our core clientele are larger agencies who are prepared to spend more (in cases where they have dabbled in microstock already), or less (as opposed to using traditional RM). In either case, yes we do have more selective in submission selections. This means we need to accept only the photos that 'pop'. If there is even a hint of violation of widely accepted technical standards, then we cannot accept.
No one is questioning your experience as an Art Director, etc. I think we have established that Zymmetrical Reviewers do an excellent job as part of our overall business unit and while it's possible, it's pretty unlikely they make a rogue decision - we are constantly updating and reviewing ourselves to ensure the agencies growth path, which is steered by Editorial policies, is balanced.
We will never turn down an offer to discuss rejections, as for example in this exchange with you we learned the sausages in your rejected pics are a local style that may appear to be overcooked or not so pretty in nature compared to how that food typically looks in North American culture, but that's how they are expected to be. Having this piece of info now, could influence reviews of that subject matter in the future (file under S for Sausages). This unique factor does not however trump the other issues mentioned with the 2 rejected images.
You say 'this is an image for cookbooks', has it actually been published and if so i'd love to see the context (or if you know where your other buyers used it). I am not meaning that as a challenge i'm just genuinely curious as to your extreme faith in those 2 shots.
-
p.s. Site slowdown problem was fixed, some rogue code related to the new site cosmetic makeover and not a general system design flaw- we are expanding rapidly and have the technical base to accommodate the future. Apologies for any frustrations experienced.
-
Ok new years behind (well still have a bit of a headache ouch) now back onto the theme of sausage aesthetics. ;) I think the point is, there's no good or bad photo. It's just some pixels. Technical 'quality' in stock is related to market expectations - in our case, our core clientele are larger agencies who are prepared to spend more (in cases where they have dabbled in microstock already), or less (as opposed to using traditional RM). In either case, yes we do have more selective in submission selections. This means we need to accept only the photos that 'pop'. If there is even a hint of violation of widely accepted technical standards, then we cannot accept.
No one is questioning your experience as an Art Director, etc. I think we have established that Zymmetrical Reviewers do an excellent job as part of our overall business unit and while it's possible, it's pretty unlikely they make a rogue decision - we are constantly updating and reviewing ourselves to ensure the agencies growth path, which is steered by Editorial policies, is balanced.
We will never turn down an offer to discuss rejections, as for example in this exchange with you we learned the sausages in your rejected pics are a local style that may appear to be overcooked or not so pretty in nature compared to how that food typically looks in North American culture, but that's how they are expected to be. Having this piece of info now, could influence reviews of that subject matter in the future (file under S for Sausages). This unique factor does not however trump the other issues mentioned with the 2 rejected images.
You say 'this is an image for cookbooks', has it actually been published and if so i'd love to see the context (or if you know where your other buyers used it). I am not meaning that as a challenge i'm just genuinely curious as to your extreme faith in those 2 shots.
Pixels? Do you have any reviewer there who knows what was dark room, film and photo paper? You know: that what looks like lab and you must first use some chemicals under red light bulb to see what you've taken on that film? All in photography is about light capture... After that comes all other segments as composition of subject and distance from it ;-)
I am sorry, but it seems that you don't beleive that image is pure example of cevapcici and published already and it is too funny to do so ;-)
I don't need to prove anything here except that same client group as zymmetrical clients downloaded it 3 times with Extended Licences from pointed site as visible in download mark on example. Also there are few (I've checked upon your question) on-line cook-books with recipes illustrated with that image ;-) It would not be under terms and conditions if I uncover extended licences from Fotolia, as well as I really don't have a clue for some other sites because they don't provide data about that to contributors.
But, to assure others here is web size downloaded from istockphoto published on German language site (Austira): http://www.ichkoche.at/Cevapcici-Kroatien/rezepte/detail/html/93283 (http://www.ichkoche.at/Cevapcici-Kroatien/rezepte/detail/html/93283)
By the way how would react some author if he put beautiful black lady photo on review and after rejection someone talk about model like that is a Cow or Monkey? Learn something: Read link about cevapcici (not saussages) I've provided to wikipedia in my essay :-)
Also, I am sure that your reviewers would even reject images of sarma, burek, pljeskavica and similar exotic cooking specialties because you don't have food reviewer who really know to shoot food and that one don't know that field at all!
[edit] ... this is shorter version ;-)
-
At any rate this particular discussion does not seem to be productive any more so I digress. Maybe we can work together on the illustration side of things where there is less room for debate over content selection.
-
But, to assure others here is web size downloaded from istockphoto published on German language site (Austira): [url]http://www.ichkoche.at/Cevapcici-Kroatien/rezepte/detail/html/93283[/url] ([url]http://www.ichkoche.at/Cevapcici-Kroatien/rezepte/detail/html/93283[/url])
Nothing personal but if this is the rejected shot you're referring to I think you should bow out gracefully.
-
At any rate this particular discussion does not seem to be productive any more so I digress. Maybe we can work together on the illustration side of things where there is less room for debate over content selection.
Ok. Enough for photography...
Why would be less debate over content selection when illustration is in question? Why illustration has better acceptance rate than photos? Does it means that you don't have reviewers for illustrations or just that illustrations are more needed so you have lower standards for that?
-
But, to assure others here is web size downloaded from istockphoto published on German language site (Austira): [url]http://www.ichkoche.at/Cevapcici-Kroatien/rezepte/detail/html/93283[/url] ([url]http://www.ichkoche.at/Cevapcici-Kroatien/rezepte/detail/html/93283[/url])
Nothing personal but if this is the rejected shot you're referring to I think you should bow out gracefully.
2nd nomination here. It may have been published, but it's not a good stock photo at all. Sorry !
Got to go with Keith and his crew ! Time out for sure !
-
But, to assure others here is web size downloaded from istockphoto published on German language site (Austira): [url]http://www.ichkoche.at/Cevapcici-Kroatien/rezepte/detail/html/93283[/url] ([url]http://www.ichkoche.at/Cevapcici-Kroatien/rezepte/detail/html/93283[/url])
Nothing personal but if this is the rejected shot you're referring to I think you should bow out gracefully.
Did you think on Phrasal Verb:
bow out which means To remove oneself; withdraw.
I did that... But, with removing all of my rest of uploaded photos from that site and making it a bit public here due to that they made it 'composition' rejection.
[edit] made my reply more clear.
-
But, to assure others here is web size downloaded from istockphoto published on German language site (Austira): [url]http://www.ichkoche.at/Cevapcici-Kroatien/rezepte/detail/html/93283[/url] ([url]http://www.ichkoche.at/Cevapcici-Kroatien/rezepte/detail/html/93283[/url])
Nothing personal but if this is the rejected shot you're referring to I think you should bow out gracefully.
2nd nomination here. It may have been published, but it's not a good stock photo at all. Sorry !
Got to go with Keith and his crew ! Time out for sure !
Thanks for your opinion - no need to express you are sorry... It is just a photo... When you say it is bad or good - that depends on market needs and downloads ;-)
-
Well then, no, I'm not sorry ;)
btw who did you say was the site that approved, accepted and sold that image for you? and how much did you earn for that dl ?
-
Well then, no, I'm not sorry ;)
btw who did you say was the site that approved, accepted and sold that image for you? and how much did you earn for that dl ?
istock, shutterstock, fotolia, JUI, Fotosearch and almost all others including that image was even accepted on CRESTOCK while I was member there - beleive it or not!
That image earned something a bit more than $300 for 6 months on-line...
Imagine only how much it would earn if it is shoot like a 'good stock image' ;-)
To add one very interesting segment: You know that stock image for Europeans is quite different than for US customers as well as there is Asian market with its own taste.
So, from point of view of specific market this image was uploaded for it is good image. It is not 'fancy' image as I already said and that style will be something on plate or portion and table top shot which I have but not yet managed to process because of my workload is qute huge!
When we talk for giving some remarks to some image, I usually don't comment is it good or bad for stock because I never know what would sell before it is uploaded and on-line for some time. 'Good stock image' can be some image shoot by the book - and also some image completely opposite shoot than how book says it should be... Again, market is what buys that what is needed - not any other opinions!
[edit] added two pharagraphs.
-
Please take this the way it is meant I'm not trying to insult you.
The image is terrible, I doubt it's made you $300 in 6 months but if you say so all well and good.
But the reason it has 1 sale on iStock and 3 on Fotolia is not because it's a good stock image and has nothing to do with Europeans taste in photography to that of Americans, it is purely and simply because it is one of only five shots featuring that particular sausage on microstock sites, and the others seem to have other items on the grill.
Now this is good and bad, it's good because you may have cornered the market in something, but it might be bad because that might mean this particular subject doesn't sell.
Either way your image is not a good stock image no matter how you try and defend it and 4 sales in 6 months ain't worth shouting about, a good way to define the difference between a good and a bad stock image is ask yourself the question 'Could I have taken the same shot with my camera phone'. I'll let you decide the answer!
You happen to have a shot with little competition and a small demand, my advice is take the $300 buy some more sausages and shoot it better.
-
Please take this the way it is meant I'm not trying to insult you.
The image is terrible, I doubt it's made you $300 in 6 months but if you say so all well and good.
But the reason it has 1 sale on iStock and 3 on Fotolia is not because it's a good stock image and has nothing to do with Europeans taste in photography to that of Americans, it is purely and simply because it is one of only five shots featuring that particular sausage on microstock sites, and the others seem to have other items on the grill.
Now this is good and bad, it's good because you may have cornered the market in something, but it might be bad because that might mean this particular subject doesn't sell.
Either way your image is not a good stock image no matter how you try and defend it and 4 sales in 6 months ain't worth shouting about, a good way to define the difference between a good and a bad stock image is ask yourself the question 'Could I have taken the same shot with my camera phone'. I'll let you decide the answer!
You happen to have a shot with little competition and a small demand, my advice is take the $300 buy some more sausages and shoot it better.
Haha! Good advice... I spent that and a little extra on Wacom Intuos 3 tablet... It is much better investment than cevapcici or remake of that image ;-)
Nevertheless, no - it couldn't be shot with cell phone even as you say 'so badly' as that image... Simple because it was shot on field and with tripod and with additional soft lights under very short time given to do whole restaurant series of over 50 images for catalogue. I am very glad you did not noticed that image was taken with additional lights - that means I did it well!
The way to rethink is that when you start upload to traditional stock agencies and mid-stock is traffic and buyers... When you make $300 from one image on traditional or mid-stock agency, you will be at least 6-12 months older! The micros are something different and there is mass-downloading... I have my images on micros, traditional and mid stock agencies all over... Traditional and mid stock agencies are something completely different as you will learn in the future if you already are not represented by some.
That what you have in your port on istock or me on Shutterstock (with both some not numerous exceptions from our portfolios) is really low potential for traditional and even mid stock agencies.
I am just trying to make some balance in how to shoot what for where... If you understand me... Microstock shot should be 'wow' or 'trendy' and mid / traditional should have all that plus something extra - or to be as you said special enough to be sold... So, cornering the market is one point where I've counted with zymmetrical for that submissions. Traditional / mid stock does not mean that one image will sell many, many times (but we all count on that), it is more about that image is carrying specific message or picture needed to illustrate something what is to be published and needed on the market - it is as simple as that.
So my 'terrible' stock image of cevapcici has its purpose in field where buyer need to show how it looks when that dish is prepared. Yes - no open fire: it is just glowing coal because it is the real illustration of how it is to be prepared. If someone who knows cooking sees that you shot some grill with open fire - he will laugh because that is not how it should be done and that way crucial thing to know that any grill prepared on open fire is extremely cancerogenous!
... just my 2 cents...
So, $300 of income which you don't beleive is quite good achievement for 'so bad' image and I am glad that I made it.
-
... just my 2 cents...
So, $300 of income which you don't beleive is quite good achievement for 'so bad' image and I am glad that I made it.
OK OK.. you 've won me over. I am your biggest fan !
You are the epitome that one does not have to be a good photographer to be a successful stock photographer. Woo hoo !
Where do I submit my tuppence money order to join your fan club ;)
-
... just my 2 cents...
So, $300 of income which you don't beleive is quite good achievement for 'so bad' image and I am glad that I made it.
OK OK.. you 've won me over. I am your biggest fan !
You are the epitome that one does not have to be a good photographer to be a successful stock photographer. Woo hoo !
Where do I submit my tuppence money order to join your fan club ;)
What makes a good photographer? Good photo or sellable photo? One photo sold for $10K after he died?
I think that some technicals must be met. But, in order to sell photo you just need such capture as someone needs to buy it to earn money.
On the other side of this story, I really can compete with cream photgraphers in most categories. The only jury I recognize is market - not people who have made some rules and stick to them like driving just on one side of roadway... In this time of market saturation, you sometimes must even drive through one way street in opposite direction to get on your destination and on time ;-) I hope this is something what you will not uderstand wrong.
Also, you can not call me as 'epitome' of not being good photographer because that is simply not true and you owe me apology.
I am as good as you or someone else who do stock... Also, I am not just a photographer - so, if you wish to be better photographer than me, you are welcome ;-) It is not point in being better photographer or illustrator from someone else... It is point in living from your images... If you do so, then you are good. If you are not living from your own work, then you are bad whatever you are.
To conclude this with one old clever sentence from Angela Monet that I and some of my old fellow photographers used in cases similar to yours:
"Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who couldn't hear the music."
Cheers dude!
-
The way to rethink is that when you start upload to traditional stock agencies and mid-stock is traffic and buyers... When you make $300 from one image on traditional or mid-stock agency, you will be at least 6-12 months older! The micros are something different and there is mass-downloading... I have my images on micros, traditional and mid stock agencies all over... Traditional and mid stock agencies are something completely different as you will learn in the future if you already are not represented by some.
Well I've been submitting to macro sites for 6 years so I think I have an idea of what makes a good stock photo, one thing is true however and that is nobody can tell what will and won't sell.
However one thing I have learnt in all that time is what is a good well composed well lit photo, and what is a snapshot, are you really trying to tell me you used additional lighting and spent time composing that shot - come on as I said earlier bow out now you're just making yourself look silly.
By the way which macro agency is this shot on, it's not on Getty, Alamy, Jupiter, Corbis or Inmagine so where exactly did you make this illustrious $300 sale which incidentally is a not a big sale on macro.
As I said earlier there are hardly any shots of this 'cevapcici' sausage thing on any sites be it micro or macro and that and that alone is the only reason the photo has sold it is nothing to do with the technical quality of the shot.
I'm pleased for you that you're happy with the shot and the amount you say it has made, but your original argument was because it got rejected and you're trying to convince everyone it's a great shot which quite obviously it isn't, it's the type of shot that makes me think you were at a bbq with your camera and while standing in front of the grill you decided to take a quick picture, which you've then uploaded to a few sites and had a few sales.
A couple of years ago someone used their camera phone to take a photo of Beckham in a night club with another woman, they made a fortune from a small badly composed pixelated image, but that doesn't make them a good photographer and it was still a crap photo.
Good luck for the future.
-
To conclude this with one old clever sentence from Angela Monet that I and some of my old fellow photographers used in cases similar to yours:
"Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who couldn't hear the music."
Cheers dude!
Oh lucky you, Angela Monet was at your BBQ? Or was she holding up the reflector? ;)
-
Well I've been submitting to macro sites for 6 years so I think I have an idea of what makes a good stock photo, one thing is true however and that is nobody can tell what will and won't sell.
However one thing I have learnt in all that time is what is a good well composed well lit photo, and what is a snapshot, are you really trying to tell me you used additional lighting and spent time composing that shot - come on as I said earlier bow out now you're just making yourself look silly.
By the way which macro agency is this shot on, it's not on Getty, Alamy, Jupiter, Corbis or Inmagine so where exactly did you make this illustrious $300 sale which incidentally is a not a big sale on macro.
As I said earlier there are hardly any shots of this 'cevapcici' sausage thing on any sites be it micro or macro and that and that alone is the only reason the photo has sold it is nothing to do with the technical quality of the shot.
I'm pleased for you that you're happy with the shot and the amount you say it has made, but your original argument was because it got rejected and you're trying to convince everyone it's a great shot which quite obviously it isn't, it's the type of shot that makes me think you were at a bbq with your camera and while standing in front of the grill you decided to take a quick picture, which you've then uploaded to a few sites and had a few sales.
A couple of years ago someone used their camera phone to take a photo of Beckham in a night club with another woman, they made a fortune from a small badly composed pixelated image, but that doesn't make them a good photographer and it was still a crap photo.
Good luck for the future.
Composition was rejection reason. I never said it is perfect shot as well as only what this photo is about and that it is unique. Other of that you are asking where that image made money - I already said... It made money mostly as Extended Licence downloads spread via many agencies.
Quick snap you say? Lol!
ОК - you win... I will learn how to make 'good' photos... But, I think you will not start to like my images ;-)
Thanks for wishing me luck!
Best Regards,
-
To conclude this with one old clever sentence from Angela Monet that I and some of my old fellow photographers used in cases similar to yours:
"Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who couldn't hear the music."
Cheers dude!
Oh lucky you, Angela Monet was at your BBQ? Or was she holding up the reflector? ;)
What reflector? Did you read what your fellow dude wrote?
::)
Strobes with soft box are used here (2x600ws) to make such 'bad looking' photo...
-
What reflector? Did you read what your fellow dude wrote?
::)
Strobes with soft box are used here (2x600ws) to make such 'bad looking' photo...
WOW ! 2 x600ws ! Incredible !
-
WOW ! 2 x600ws ! Incredible !
As I said... Find shadows in that as you call it 'snapshot' ;-) And you'll figure out how much lights was used as well as where they was positioned... But, since you don't see the obvious, I doubt you will see anything...
So, You do your images... I will do mine... And we'll see who will be where in say year or two time from now ;-)
Happy learning shooting to me ;-) Also, Happy learning observing to you ;-)
-
Milinz, I think we talked enough about your cevapcici. Yes, I adore cevapcici, and they look tasty to me on your image because I know how they should look like. They look on your image exactly how they look like on real BBQ. Ok, you didn't take this image from some extraordinary angle, but the image is OK. You could crop it just a little on the right side, on on both sides like this designer did here http://www.ichkoche.at/Cevapcici-Kroatien/rezepte/detail/html/93283 because cevapcici are spread over BBQ pretty evenly, and it looks bit strange that you leaved those uneven spaces on the sides of the image. No matter you had expensive light equipment, because of non existing crop, and because of an angle, this image could look like a snapshot to someone. Maybe the reviewer should recognize a state of art in this image because he is paid to do it. But for God's sake, how long we will discuss this image? If it's your good seller you will continue to sell it on other sites, and Zymmetrical will be without this image, that's all. Is it so important for you to sell this image exactly on Zymmetrical?? I don't get you really. If they don't want this image why you so badly trying to prove them that your cevapcici look tasty on this image? Reviewers are human beings and they will always make mistakes. What I know, is that some of reviewers on Zymmetrical are (or were) most remarkable reviewers on some other very well known agency that you like so much. So, it's the same people basically. Why don't you leave it this way, and leave Zymmetrical without this image? If you want, you can continue to upload to Zymmetrical, or you can stop it. The choice is yours. They rejected many of my images, so what? I have those images on other sites and they sell. You act like this is the only image that is important to you. I mean, I don't know what you trying to prove? Are you trying to prove that your image of cevapcici is so remarkable, or you want to prove that some reviewer on Zymmetrical should be fired, or you want to prove that Zymmetrical is poor agency, or you maybe want to show to everybody that you are from here (Balkan peninsula) and that we are able to get through the wall with our heads and to lose days to prove something that isn't important to anybody else?
-
On the other side of this story, I really can compete with cream photgraphers in most categories.
I am as good as you or someone else who do stock.
I think not. Your photography is, ehmm, how do I put this, without meaning to offend......?
shite!
Great illustrations if you're into loadza bling like my 5 year old daughter is but I'm afraid your perception that you're up there with the best of photographers is not immediately evident.
Would you like to provide a few examples maybe because there is always the possibility that you haven't uploaded your best stuff yet and I'm dying to see it as I'm sure everyone else is now that you've sold some sausages for $300!!!
-
Milinz, I think we talked enough about your cevapcici. Yes, I adore cevapcici, and they look tasty to me on your image because I know how they should look like. They look on your image exactly how they look like on real BBQ.
.............
But for God's sake, how long we will discuss this image? ....
...... Why don't you leave it this way, and leave Zymmetrical without this image? If you want, you can continue to upload to Zymmetrical, or you can stop it. The choice is yours. They rejected many of my images, so what? ....
you want to prove that Zymmetrical is poor agency, or you maybe want to show to everybody that you are from here (Balkan peninsula) and that we are able to get through the wall with our heads and to lose days to prove something that isn't important to anybody else?
EDITED FOR BREVITY.
I have to agree again with whitechild . I wrote Keith first time my image got rejected. I got too attached to my work, and was not happy with the reviewer(s) decision. But after an explanation from Keith, I realised that he was not out to insult me or anyone's photography, just trying to run his stock photo business like a business. He and his team , hopefully, know what they are looking for , to sell more images and be viable.
So, I left it at that. Sure, till this day, I still disagree with some rejections. But hey, if I am not happy with Zymm, I will stop uploading to them. Or I will start my own stock site and compete with Zymm,
and put all my rejected photos on the front page. ;D
So, what will that achieve?
Like Whitechild, I don't do that. I simply submit those images to other sites and they accepted them,
and some sold as well. The buyers are not all made of the same stripe. It would be wonderful if there is a site that will accept all your images. In fact, there are a few that will do just that.
If it means so much to you Milinz, to be proved right as stone, then submit your images to those sites, and forgot about Zymm.
If , as you so strongly believe, you are a unique photographer, then it's Zymmetrical 's loss,
and ours too ;)
I think this thread is going a little too long. And agree with Whitechild. Stop banging your head against a brick wall to prove you have been victimized.
Peace ! 8)
-
Ok!
Thanks whitechild, iriz and hali!
Iriz, I'd like to see some of your best images and make some constructive comments on them - just to show you how differently You and me look at same image! Also, there would be quite interesting to us two to make some photo challenge about some subject ? Better sellable image wins that extra prize and if you dare to do it - my challenge call is open!
No any problem left with zymmetrical... Only with 2-3 people who called my work 'crap', 'snapshots' and gave me insults about what kind of photographer I am...
So waves came from other people who think that they know something just because I made image which is not 'fancy' and which is earning me some nice money...
As for commentators of my 'bad work' I'd say just one thing... You'll come ty my review some day - and then... I'd really accept your images to be added to image base just because I know that you are doing your jobs with your best pushes - But, only if they are technically OK ;)
So, I know reviewers make mistakes, even some of them have plans for how much images they want to 'see' in their working time for a day... And surely many reviews are subjective and that is what I don't like - not just on stock - it is mostly everywhere - on competitions (jury has its own taste), even in life (when someone does not like car you drive) and so on...
So TO ALL - even to you who gave me that nice insults without reason - I am backing off...
Happy shooting and reviews to all!
I will not do any further comments in this thread and topic with cevapcici, my capabilities as photographer is closed here.
Iriz, if you are accepting my challenge, we'll handle it via PM and we make new thread ;-)
FULL STOP
-
I had a rejection once in Zymm that did not make sense to me. I have three images, basically the same composition, but using three different banknotes (USA dollar, Euro, Brazilian Real). They are here (http://www.stockxpert.com/browse_image/view/2855291). Only the USD one was accepted, the other two were rejected for "too similar". I sent them an email, they forwarded it to the reviewer because it was her job, and the reviewer said she would forward it to Kevin because it was out of her hands. Too confusing and I am not sure I ever got a final reply about this.
There was another series (this one (http://www.stockxpert.com/browse_image/view/5355901)), also only one accepted and the others were "too similar". I agree with the horizontal ones, but the vertical one at least should have been accepted. One of my best sellers (this one (http://www.stockxpert.com/browse_image/view/541165)) was rejected for "limited stock usage".
However Zymm gets good earnings when I sell, so I intend to keep on uploading. I only wished reviews made more sense.
Regards,
Adelaide
-
Iriz, I'd like to see some of your best images and make some constructive comments on them - just to show you how differently You and me look at same image! Also, there would be quite interesting to us two to make some photo challenge about some subject ? Better sellable image wins that extra prize and if you dare to do it - my challenge call is open!
Milinz, with respect, how you view an image and how I view an image are so far apart that not even the Lord would be able to see your point of view without the aid of Hubble. Were you even within spitting distance I'd have no difficulty rising to your challenge but for that reason I'm not going to be drawn into another ego boosting exercise.
There are one or two people on here who already know what I produce and might offer you an opinion, but for now that's all you need to know.
-
I sent them an email, they forwarded it to the reviewer because it was her job, and the reviewer said she would forward it to Kevin because it was out of her hands.
(EDITED FOR BREVITY)
However Zymm gets good earnings when I sell, so I intend to keep on uploading. I only wished reviews made more sense.Regards,Adelaide
you mean Keith, don't you ? Adelaide? ...
yes, like other sites, rejections sometimes do not make sense to us. but unless it's a big deal, which it seldom is, i just give them the benefit of the doubt, since they are the rule-makers.
i like most of what i see at zymm, so i think i'll continue to upload there.
-
you mean Keith, don't you ? Adelaide? ...
Yes, right. I even checked the email now, she said "to Keith and Paul".
As I said, I wouldn't mind some of the rejections, but I don't understand accepting the horizontal but rejecting the vertical for "too similar" when orientation is a search criteria, or taking an image with dollars but not the one with euros as they cater different public (the one with reals one may say that it has a very limited market, I could accept that, although they sell well for my standards).
Regards,
Adelaide
-
Milinz you need to relax, you're going to give yourself an ulcer obsessing over rejections like this.
You are also not going to improve as a photographer till you learn to take criticism.
-
Oh, God. I can't stand these rejections of my bestsellers.
Hey, Zymm-people, I will reveal a big secret for you right now: in Calabria (Southern Italy), there will be started soon the construction of the longest bridge in the world, bridge over the strait of Messina. Now, you reject all my pictures from that region, so you must be not very intelligent.
SS and IS will gain more profit.
:P
Hren s vami :-*
-
I am not sure I understand - would it not be more relevant when the bridge is under construction or actually completed? Surely if someone took a picture of the valley of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millau_Viaduct (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millau_Viaduct) before it was constructed, the image would have some extra worth as a historical archive photo (compared to any other picture of the French countryside), but I would certainly expect pictures of the completed project to be worth more. I am not quite sure how we could predict such projects in a practical way however, the bridge you are referencing has been 'in the works' since Roman times.
My uncle is an architect who helped design the http://www.confederationbridge.com/ (http://www.confederationbridge.com/) connecting the provinces of New Brunswick to PEI. I don't think that the specific location of the bridge, before it was made, was somehow more photo-worthy than any other part of coastline of those areas. Just a basic East Coast Canada beach mostly.
We rely on artist and client feedback for so much - if you are a plant specialist you are going to be able to come up with the scientific names of flowers for the keywords that we just wouldn't have the resources to come up with, if you are a graphic designer with a large inventory of little bird graphics you should remind us that they are selling like hotcakes because they are the Twitter icon and in-demand currently. There's no need to get frustrated - if you have a good point we will listen and in some cases adjust our ideas based on information provided. Unfortunately accessing sales statistics directly from competing business is not only a grey ethics area, it's also not permitted by any terms of use I know of. I know, as a techie engineer-type, I wouldn't appreciate my web system being assaulted by robots (or poor interns/outsourcers given a dirty job) only visiting to collect my data for the purpose of outselling my agency, I wouldn't wish it upon others either.
So to know in advance the trends and future sellers we rely on our own internal policies and experience - opinions, feelings, emotions. As mentioned in this thread before, it's never an exact science. When it does become an exact science, I think something must be severely broken because we are not selling car parts here but visual imagery. :)
-
I recently joined Zymmetrical. It's on iSyndica, so I thought why not. Sent 3 images to them. Took weeks for it to be reviewed. I actually logged on today to ask them when they will be reviewed. I saw all 3 rejected for the same reason, "The overall technical quality of this image limits its stock value." I guess if they were rejected for different reasons, I could believe more that the reviewer spent time analysing them. Yes I don't have the best camera in the world, but 2 of the 3 I sent are on SS and I find SS pretty tough. That's pretty frustrating. I'll keep sending to them, I just hope Zymmetrical is not one of the illogical agencies out there.
-
Perhaps Keith or Paul can explain the logic for refusing images just because there are a bunch in a given category because I don't understand it...
If an image meets all of your technical standards and guidelines, why reject it at all?
Isn't the goal to get as many choices in front of buyers as possible? Isn't it likely that a category with no new (or very few) submissions will get stagnant in time? Aren't designers hungry for new and different images all the time? Even if that difference is only slight?
>....
<....
What was very interesting was the experiment was in two parts. The first part students were just asked to pick their favorite. 71% of the picks were in the first 60 images shown (they got tired or bored of looking). In the second part, students were required to review all of the images before making their selection and 79% of them changed their selection to images later in the batch (even a few who chose the very last image).
On alamy they have a lot of real search data only from selected buyers, that the contributors can look at and download, I collated 6 months worth of all buyer data, over on Alamy you have up to 120 thumbnails a page, and I found that the averages were, buyers viewed about 2 pages from a search, 210 thumbnail were viewed, they have large 170px thumbnails and buyers zoomed only 2 images in 100 which is 1%, by using a diversity function they split images from the same contributor in the search, giving a more even selection and a more varied image search, the buyer can see sibling images from a contributor on a drill down, this gives my images more of a chance of getting a view, I have a small port on Alamy and they have over 16 million images on their macrostock website, and I still get daily views on the first two - three pages of a search.
To be fair the students were not buyers which is not the best data, I have seen data where a buyer has viewed thousands of thumbnails and zoomed tens of images, if there are to many similar images being returned from a search term, then you can understand it would just be an overhead to the website and the buyer, with a smaller set of selected and returned images it is easy to see most of what is on offer, the only problem I can see with this is keeping the collection fresh, and rotation to give ones at the back a chance, if a buyer returns after a month to do the same search they should get a different set of images, these are normally the latest uploads mixed in with best sellers.
With most of the rejections being not quality but to many in this category, the experienced contributors will stop uploading images in these categories, leaving the fresh images needed to update a category later to come from new artists to keep the search fresh.
If you already know which categories are full then why not let contributors know, this will not waste time for you or the contributors, then later when things pick up and you need new assets open the category again and let contributors know, this will keep down rejection rates and contributors own stats will look better, as you know by other posts reward / effort is the key to keeping contributors happy, uploading assets that an agency knows they are going to reject as the category is full is effort than can be avoided, also a reduced cost to the agency, I am sure letting contributors know which categories in the collection are strong or weak is positive communication and would be well received.
David :)
-
Komar, sorry you are frustrated, but speculation (that because 3 images get the same review that we are not actually reviewing them, that a subscription agencies review standard is very relevant to a direct-buy, varied price marketplace) does not assist much - we have, again and again, over years, consistently offered to discuss and rejections till all parties can come to terms with them.
As you can see my response above your message, we make a lot of effort to give 'logical' responses, and in cases like the one above, the Artist does not even respond to carry on the conversation.. kind of ironic, I guess my message got rejected for technical reasons by Nata :) . So please, post some low-res thumbs of the rejects and we can all learn. I realize it is hard to know what content is wanted without the nice documentation that some other agencies have, so until the time that can expand on that the best solution seems to be through personal communication.
I recently joined Zymmetrical. It's on iSyndica, so I thought why not. Sent 3 images to them. Took weeks for it to be reviewed. I actually logged on today to ask them when they will be reviewed. I saw all 3 rejected for the same reason, "The overall technical quality of this image limits its stock value." I guess if they were rejected for different reasons, I could believe more that the reviewer spent time analysing them. Yes I don't have the best camera in the world, but 2 of the 3 I sent are on SS and I find SS pretty tough. That's pretty frustrating. I'll keep sending to them, I just hope Zymmetrical is not one of the illogical agencies out there.
-
Thanks for the response. You make valid points. Although, standards are pretty high these days, whether subscription agencies or not. It just seems that a contributor has to learn what an agency wants, which is often difficult as standard rejection answers are often too vague. However, I'm all for learning. These are the photos.
(http://thumb15.shutterstock.com.edgesuite.net/display_pic_with_logo/111598/111598,1245319636,1/stock-photo-trees-intertwined-with-the-ruins-of-bayon-temple-siem-reap-cambodia-32237221.jpg)
(http://thumb15.shutterstock.com.edgesuite.net/display_pic_with_logo/111598/111598,1244877770,1/stock-photo-a-bat-sleeping-at-a-market-the-bat-is-for-attracting-customers-to-that-particular-stall-tanah-lot-31942141.jpg)
(http://static.bigstockphoto.com/thumbs/3/3/5/large/5339182.jpg)
-
Thanks for the response. You make valid points. Although, standards are pretty high these days, whether subscription agencies or not. It just seems that a contributor has to learn what an agency wants, which is often difficult as standard rejection answers are often too vague. However, I'm all for learning.
It's a matter of scaling, not that we would not like to go into complete detail for every reject. You're most likely a reasonable guy, and would read and action specific rejection reasons. There are other's who simply do not read them, or worse, get upset, pack their bags and ask to close their account because they have their own idea of how an agency should be run. We owe it to members who play fair, to not expose too many business resources to the big open void of the internet.
I do realize that many technical reject reasons intersect with a particular agencies designated threshold, which is always going to be a grey area. We never claimed to be interested in what a competitor rejects or accepts, we are focused on our own business unit and no one else. We can, as I offered, respond to individual reject cases, preferably like this in public so that others can see and understand too - straight from the reviewer:
(http://static.bigstockphoto.com/thumbs/3/3/5/large/5339182.jpg)
Lighting: it's a bit harsh in areas, and there is chromatic aberration present. Comp: it's off center, and the overall comp could have been improved with some post-p work.
(http://thumb15.shutterstock.com.edgesuite.net/display_pic_with_logo/111598/111598,1244877770,1/stock-photo-a-bat-sleeping-at-a-market-the-bat-is-for-attracting-customers-to-that-particular-stall-tanah-lot-31942141.jpg)
Comp: it's very busy (cluttered b/g), the top of the subject is cut off in-camera, the image is slightly tilted to the left. Lighting: the subject's face is poorly lit, lacking detail.
(http://thumb15.shutterstock.com.edgesuite.net/display_pic_with_logo/111598/111598,1245319636,1/stock-photo-trees-intertwined-with-the-ruins-of-bayon-temple-siem-reap-cambodia-32237221.jpg)
Exposure: the sky is overexposed, resulting in some of the foliage in that area being whited-out and/or having a Day-Glo appearance; some lower areas of the image are slightly underexposed. Comp: could have been improved from shooting more toward the right, making the lower area and the large tree on the right (roots and texture) more the subject, shooting to maximize that and the mix of textures in the photo rather than trying to get the tower dead center, and cutting out the less interesting trees to the left. Also, if the image could have been shot more from above and to the right, cutting out most of the sky and exposed more for the lower half of the photo, another image could then have been shot with the tower as the subject, exposing properly for that area. But those are could-have-beens, just what I see in potential. As it is, the exposure is the biggest problem in this image.
**Edit - sorry I mixed up the order pasting the reasons, fixed now
-
off topic sorry but I think I just found the whole cevapcici thing (and why milinz left), now I am enlightened :):):)
-
"We can, as I offered, respond to individual reject cases, preferably like this in public so that others can see and understand too - straight from the reviewer"
Well that's great I'm often left with entirely different signals. I get a lot of rejections which indicates I'm doing something wrong, however the images I get on line, to be frank, sell like hot cakes which indicates I'm doing something right. If I could sort out the first part I'm laughin.
It's got to be hard balancing act being a reviewer. Hopefully, they get it right more than wrong. However, every photographer has his stories about how they get it wrong. Around 2 weeks ago I sent an image twice by mistake to an agency, the first file was rejected for composition, the second was accepted. It sold a day later.
"we are focused on our own business unit and no one else." Well we are focused on all of you and everyone else. So you will always be compared by us and it's not such a bad idea to compare yourself with others in order to improve yourself. If I look to the right, I see you in New Sites/Low Earners and I know you're not a new site. Although I would love you to be right up there with the model you have.
However, it is remarkable that you have spent the time giving me details of what you think could be improved with my images (Not that I agree with all the points, but a lot of them are valid). I still believe that more adequate answers could be provided by you and other agencies. "The overall technical quality of this image limits its stock value." This just pisses me off as it doesn't tell me anything. It doesn't have to be personally typed by the reviewer, just more details in the standardised replies. I could be wrong but I think I am less likely to run away if I'm told why I was rejected, although others might react differently.
I appreciate the time you spent and your sincerity. See you on my next round of rejections ;D
-
351151 is refused with "We cannot accept images of people without model releases"
Of course, because crappy flash-interface is full of bugs, because the release was in fact attached.
Resubmit, now # 351356 is refused with "This image is a duplicate of an image you have already submitted. Please do not resubmit it again"
Is this is a joke?
Either give me a valid rejection reason or accept my image, zymmetrical. And don't ask me for respect towards your agency and stuff. >:(
-
Please refer to the support channels on our website for more effective help.
1. 351151 - There is no model release associated with it. Many other people from all over upload daily, and successfully attach model releases. If you have a technical issue to report then why not report through proper support channels, with sufficient information?
2. 351356 - The image is a duplicate. Here is the direct output from the database:
ID# 351356
Submitted: 2009-10-25 10:14:04.033
Filename: Sveta-2897.jpg
ID #351151
Submitted: 2009-10-23 05:10:58.690
Filename: Sveta-2897.jpg
-
Keith,
i assume there might be a slight problem on your side...
I had a rejection with the same reason (""This image is a duplicate of an image you have already submitted. Please do not resubmit it again"), for file ID # 356113.
I double (and triple-)checked, both in my own accounting and on your website this file cannot be found in neither the accepted nor the rejected files.
As to using the support channels on the website: I sent a question there a few weeks ago (can't say when exactly, and the ticket can't be found on the website itself...) and never received any feedback...
Sometimes it looks as though asking here gets far quicker responses...
Regards,
Dirk
-
Nata_rass:
In the email you sent to us at the same time as posting here, you explained the issue better, and you are right - it is not the intended outcome. We recently installed new duplicate image checking steps, based on "has this member uploaded a file with this exact name before", and other elements - your re-submission, although requested, tripped the warning for the reviewers that it was a duplicate.
It is suggested that any images resubmited should have a versioned filename - for example, "myimage.jpg" would become "myimage-isolationfixed.jpg" - this would normally be part of an organized workflow, helping both you and us keep track of fixes to an image. In your case, it does not make sense to "version" the filename based on a model release being missing (missing metadata) - so, we will fix this with full priority, so reviewers can have the info available to make the correct decision.
Dirk:
The support channels are the quickest method, and less prone to confusion. We have recently removed the front-end support ticket system in favor of a simple contact form, to speed thing's up. There should be no outstanding tickets, but I will have a look and contact you with the findings.
Thanks to all for patience - people uploading dupes is a problem and we make adjustments to deal with the it and keep things fair for everyone.
-
Every rejection has an explanation.
I can only second that.
-
And just when my stuff was starting to be accepted on Zymm, they shut shop lol. Thanks Keith for all the time you spent here, I wish some other agencies could take a leaf out of your book.