Jump to content

Holly Kuchera

Members
  • Content Count

    1,557
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Holly Kuchera

  1. Well, if that was the case they should have given that as a reason and not noise, wouldn't you think? If that was the case, they'd say the same about the hinge (Stanley).
  2. Good point. Bricks: Original size 3008 x 2000 ... cropped from actual pixels, 100% Hinge: Original size 3008 x 2000 ... cropped from actual pixels, 100% I didn't include the leaf because it was rejected for non-stock oriented reasons. I tried to attach tifs here through the forum (under the 256 KB limit) but seem have to discovered something. When they say your have zero upload priviledges, they mean it! Either that or I'm doing something really really wrong.
  3. Well, if you can find a site that allows 18,000 and up KB tifs, I'd be happy to. *grin*
  4. I know what you're talking about. I just had all ten of my submissions rejected (which means I'm banned for 3 months). It hurt. It hurt bad! But, I've had a week to think about it and understand some of the rejections. 5 were scanned slides and were rejected due to "Noise, artifacts or hazing at full size". Okay, I guess I can understand that. I guess it also means slide submissions are right out. The other 5 were digital. * Maple leaf: "Not stock oriented composition or subject..." * Hinge: "Nice composition, but bad noise at full size" The other 3 were, you got it, ""Noise, artifacts or hazing at full size". Hmmmm... can someone point out the noise, artifacts or hazing on this photo of brick work? It'll help me learn what I'm doing wrong in my post-processing. The real kick to the head is that all 10 of hubby's images were approved, without question, just a week earlier. (And, in my opinion, one of them is somewhat noisy: http://shutterstock.com/pic-428988.html) We're guessing we caught a reviewer on a bad day, the images are really THAT bad, or because 5 were off slides and contained noise the rest were rejected out of hand. Doesn't really matter, I guess. If I can learn how to see the noise the reviewer referred to I'll be correcting my mistakes and try again in 3 months (or maybe find another stock site and try there). As for your images, natse... I don't understand the rejection reason for the leaves (unless the reviewer messed up and selected the wrong reason). It's not a hard thing to do in PS and kind of mundane, but I could see stock uses for it. The 2nd? Well... it's a cool shot but personally I don't think it's stock. 'Course, what do I know? I got one rejected for that very reason! *smirk* Happy shootin'!
×
×
  • Create New...