Jump to content

jathys

Members
  • Content Count

    127
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About jathys

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 04/01/1977

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    western MA
  1. Totally agree that a subway and a dishwasher have almost nothing to do with each other. This subway and this dishwasher though... If I were an automated computer system following an algorithm, what would I see? 1) Similar shades of orange 2) Similar shades of shiny silver metal 3) Lots of darkness 4) Both images are the interiors of machines 5) Most metal pieces are in straight lines Keywords and photographer should definitely be the highest priority for the algorithm (say, 80-90%). This needs to be fixed. But the similar images do have similarities with the photos above them. Just different
  2. Lightroom: Cropped. Moderate changes to sliders in the Basic panel. Graduated filter affecting clarity in the sky. One localized adjustment brush to darken some distracting lights in the silhouette. Noise reduction and sharpening. Nothing else was done. Nothing. Reference image is being required. To bring out the detail in the deliberately silhouetted areas of the photo (the only reason I can see for demanding a reference image), I need to overexpose the photo by 5 stops, making the reference image look fake and painted. I almost wonder if I'll get told to provide a reference image for my
  3. What are the specific requirements for the reference image? I don't mean to be dense, but I've looked and cannot find the specifications (long day at work and my brain is not totally functioning at the moment). I want to make 100% sure my photographs don't get rejected (again) for lack of a reference image... I don't even understand why I'm about to overexpose my photos by 5 full exposures in order to create "original" reference images anyway. How does forcefully coercing out details within intentionally silhouetted areas of a photo prove that the photo came from my camera? (*face slams onto d
  4. In another thread (http://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/90040-rejection-reasons-incorrect/page-2), it's been said that this should now be fixed. Crossing fingers and doing some submitting again.
  5. This is fantastic news. Was about to submit and wasn't sure if it was safe yet to do so. Thanks for lettings us know that it should be better now.
  6. A lot of people seem to be having this issue in the past few days. Appears to be a technical glitch. 4MP (megapixels, not megabytes) minimum. I had a 15.5MP image rejected due to the size. There's not a maximum size limit that I'm aware of, but even if there is, I'd imagine it's at least 50MP or larger. There's a few other threads where people are discussing having the same issue and others. I've had two photos mistaken for paintings/vectors, for example.
  7. Same issue here. One image rejected for size (5.45MB) or not enough pixels (15.5MP)... Hoping to figure out if I'm able to resubmit when there's clearly nothing for me to fix on this end. Had two other photographs (photographs... that's the important word here) rejected earlier in the week for not having reference images included... Getting quite frustrated having images rejected for non-existing issues that aren't anything I can fix. At least when I get told that it's not sharp enough or there's too much noise... I may disagree at times, but at least it gives me feedback I can work with.
  8. Picture of a panda, rejected for lack of property release. All pandas are the property of the Chinese government, not the zoos they belong to. I doubt most photographers obtain releases from China, so I have to assume the release is needed for either the grass or the rocks visible in the picture... I've seen this exact same panda in this exact same scenery in other photos, none of which appear to have a release... What gives?
  9. Haven't submitted anything in a long time and my downloads have been significantly low as a result. Submitted this late last night. Didn't think it would even get accepted due to it being abstract/blurry/etc... Accepted this morning and already downloaded. If only all images had that kind of response time! http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=544103494
  10. October 13th I sent out a message asking if there was a problem with my W-9, preventing it from getting processed. October 19th I sent out another message, as I still hadn't heard anything. Now it's been exactly one week since the first message. No response yet. I did, however, receive a computer generated e-mail telling me that I haven't sent in my W-9 yet. Funny. I could have sworn I've sent in 4 of them during the passed two months. Edit: 15 hours after posting here, issue resolved
  11. Been away for quite a while and just saw this. Very happy with the new content editor. On first usage at least, seems to save significant time when working with images that share a lot of keywords. I used to copy/paste or retype keywords as I compared lists. This is much better.
  12. Version 8.0 of Elements, I'm guessing? I'm thinking of reverting back two versions because of some of the issues I've had with it. Gimp (imho) can definitely be a substitute for Elements. There will be a slight learning curve, as you'll need different steps to do things you're used to doing already.
  13. I don't have the wisdom you speak of... But have you checked out whether DSL could be a working option through your phone company (or another)? Not as fast as high speed wireless, but many times faster than dial up (around 10x faster if you get the slow connection).
×
×
  • Create New...