Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It never happened before, but almost all of my pictures are rejected for noise, grain. I really don't see any noise, so maybe somone can help me with this thing that is going to be ridicolous

This is one of the pictures I'm trying to upload and a 100% scale of a detail. I can't see noise, but maybe it's me?

_DSC2646-2.jpg

Schermata 2020-09-09 alle 17.58.08.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Luisa Puccini said:

It never happened before, but almost all of my pictures are rejected for noise, grain.

No - SS is very demanding - for 10 cent ..! 😡

By the way if I’m allowed to critizise something else - I dont understand that a great and skilled photographer as you shoot images with dead or withered flowers .. 🤔 And in number two image I would clone away the iron thing. Just my opinion. If your other images were bad I wouldn’t mention it ... 👍😀

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Luisa Puccini said:

It never happened before, but almost all of my pictures are rejected for noise, grain

I really don't bother to watch your images at 100 %, it is happening for me too, for drone shots, for M 4/3 and full frame sensor too.

On the attached image i really can't see any noise but the reviewer with those eagle eyes spotted them and hit the reject button.

_ALP5724.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a photo of a butterfly, totally noise free, that I can't get through. I think the reviewing process changed and AI is prominent now, otherwise how could images be accepted/rejected in less than a minute. As a consequence, I think there is less chance than on resubmitting, a previously rejected image will be accepted, unless there are changes done to the algorithm. And likely, for some reason, on some photos, the system does not evaluate correctly. Anyone noticed that as well, any thoughts?

@Luisa Puccini I see some posterization on the sky of the first photo you posted, however it may be because this is a low res jpg?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, oleschwander said:

Yes - that’s typical. They don’t like certain textures, It’s a tragegy. 😡

Yes it is, i found some used pallet wood in my garden , i built a background very quickly, some of the images i submitted a week ago are selling.  Submitting again is a real solution, a year ago i wouldn't submit an image twice, nowdays is a must :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, oleschwander said:

No - SS is very demanding - for 10 cent ..! 😡

By the way if I’m allowed to critizise something else - I dont understand that a great and skilled photographer as you shoot images with dead or withered flowers .. 🤔 And in number two image I would clone away the iron thing. Just my opinion. If your other images were bad I wouldn’t mention it ... 👍😀

Thank you for the "skilled". I don't deserve it. You are absolutely right about the flowers, but in this season all the wisteria are like these in my picture. I could have not include them (and I have pictures without them) but I think they add color. I can clone away the withered flowers, and maybe I will, but first of all I must solve my problem with rejections. I'm sure it is AI, but there must be something to do otherwise I can stop uploading: almost all of my pictures are rejected for noise. Maybe I can add an alert in the description? Like: "Ehi! Attention please! There are textures in this pictures! Textures are not noise!"

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Luisa Puccini said:

It never happened before, but almost all of my pictures are rejected for noise, grain. I really don't see any noise, so maybe somone can help me with this thing that is going to be ridicolous

This is one of the pictures I'm trying to upload and a 100% scale of a detail. I can't see noise, but maybe it's me?

_DSC2646-2.jpg

 

Luisa,

I don't know how much the pictures here in this preview are compressed. But the sky has steps in the preview image. It is not a clean blue gradient. If this concerns only this preview picture, then you shouldn't care about my statement.

Anyway: Why do you bother? If shutterstock doesn't want the photos, offer them somewhere else. Why invest the time to upload the images again and again if there are no problems elsewhere? Why reward shutterstock with double the effort if they pay 10 cents later?

Especially the first image is really beautiful. Simply because I could imagine spending a holiday in exactly this bay - wherever it is. Regardless of the fact that the hydrangeas/wisterias are not perfect.  We took ours from the balcony and planted them in the garden because they looked just as bad. We will see next year whether this will be of any use.

But don't be annoyed with the AI from shutterstock! There are so many other agencies with more appreciation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wilm Ihlenfeld, it's only the preview that is really compressed. There are not steps in the high resolution. This bay is in France, in Brittany: it is the bay of Saint Guirec. Yes I care for this situation for  many reasons. One is that I upload to many agencies, but my pictures seems to sell much more on SS than on the others. And only on SS I can get really good high downloads. A second reason is that I learned to shoot from the rejections on SS, by understanding my mistakes and before thinking that the reviewer or the AI is wrong I need to check it well. But this time I can't understand why the AI see noise. I submitted 6 images yesterday (same location) and 5 were rejected for  the same problem. This makes it impossible for me to grow my portfolio.

Studio 2: Wisteria / hidrangeas, sorry for my mistake: i confused the english name of the flowers. I think I explained why I care for this problem. They pay 10 cents most of the time, but sometimes, they pay $ 40, 50, even 100. It happens quite often to me. Plus, there is always something to learn in these rejections. I see that the review is often too fussy, but most of the time there is a reason for the rejections. I do not complain, but I try to understand. It is a way to learn and to be better.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Luisa Puccini said:

Wilm Ihlenfeld, it's only the preview that is really compressed. There are not steps in the high resolution. This bay is in France, in Brittany: it is the bay of Saint Guirec. Yes I care for this situation for  many reasons. One is that I upload to many agencies, but my pictures seems to sell much more on SS than on the others. And only on SS I can get really good high downloads. A second reason is that I learned to shoot from the rejections on SS, by understanding my mistakes and before thinking that the reviewer or the AI is wrong I need to check it well. But this time I can't understand why the AI see noise. I submitted 6 images yesterday (same location) and 5 were rejected for  the same problem. This makes it impossible for me to grow my portfolio.

Studio 2: Wisteria / hidrangeas, sorry for my mistake: i confused the english name of the flowers. I think I explained why I care for this problem. They pay 10 cents most of the time, but sometimes, they pay $ 40, 50, even 100. It happens quite often to me. Plus, there is always something to learn in these rejections. I see that the review is often too fussy, but most of the time there is a reason for the rejections. I do not complain, but I try to understand. It is a way to learn and to be better.

 

I love Brittany, but have not been there for a very long time.

Since we decided in Corona times not to use an airplane in the near future, we have Brittany in our sights as our next vacation destination.

Anyway: A nice photo!

It is easy to see that you have mastered the craft of photography.

I haven't uploaded an image here since the end of May. But before that I was annoyed several times, because I too had images rejected because of noise. Photos that would never have been rejected before.

From my point of view the HI (Human intelligence) had done a better job in the past than today the AI. Also because they did not only pay attention to noise or Out of Focus, but also to the potential commercial value of an image. Today, every image that is technically ok goes through, even if it is useless in terms of content or aesthetics. But the flood of images is now so immense that the review can no longer be done with a HI.

The mistake of the past was in my opinion that they abolished the contributor review. In the past you had to upload 10 images (I don't remember the number exactly) to prove that you know the job to make a good photo. With the abolition of this preliminary examination shutterstock has opened doors and gates for the daily flood of pictures.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Benedek Alpar said:

I really don't bother to watch your images at 100 %, it is happening for me too, for drone shots, for M 4/3 and full frame sensor too.

On the attached image i really can't see any noise but the reviewer with those eagle eyes spotted them and hit the reject button.

_ALP5724.jpg

The wood looks out of focus but the cherry twig is sharp, maybe they want the wood to be sharp too. The reviewers should know about depth of field buy an AI bot won't This is another reason to quit uploading.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Tony Dunn said:

The wood looks out of focus but the cherry twig is sharp, maybe they want the wood to be sharp too. The reviewers should know about depth of field buy an AI bot won't This is another reason to quit uploading.

The wood is out of focus but in this kind of pictures it must be on focus. Usually these photographs are used to add someting on the table/wood but you can't add anything if the table is out of focus.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Tony Dunn said:

There's some pixelating here but even I could see it without magnifying the photo much. But if the file was JPEG, even strait out of camera it should be better.  

_DSC2646-2.jpg.29d50894314bf9bb0d41fa7e9923f72d.jpg

I resubmited the picture, only working on the Hydrangea 😇 and nothing more. it's been approved now. THIS really bother me: it means there were no reasons to reject the photo in the first submission.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, oleschwander said:

Yes - that’s typical. They don’t like certain textures, It’s a tragegy. 😡

The rubbish AI doesn't like certain textures most likely. Besides they should be cutting down on all this QC for trusted contributors at least then they would save money & pay us more just like alamy does.. That would be the logical (Mr. Spock) thing to do. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Tony Dunn said:

The rubbish AI doesn't like certain textures most likely. Besides they should be cutting down on all this QC for trusted contributors at least then they would save money & pay us more just like alamy does.. That would be the logical (Mr. Spock) thing to do. 

Agree. It’s rediculous.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tony Dunn said:

The wood looks out of focus but the cherry twig is sharp, maybe they want the wood to be sharp too. The reviewers should know about depth of field buy an AI bot won't This is another reason to quit uploading.

Agreed 100 %, a year ago i submitted images taken with an F 1,4 aperture, no problem accepting them ,i will probably shoot from now on  F 11 :lol:

This is it, shallow depth of field era is over, now i need a new phone to got everything in focus :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its happening to me as well, very annoyed, I know, I should not upload anymore but I had my work ready for months, so I had to upload it somewhere instead of just sitting on my HDD, anyway, back to the topic, the rejections of my photos from the same batch, same edit, same light, same camera, same everything, they accept 5 and reject other 5 for stupid reasons like focus or noise, not to mention they have submission limits, i have this "You have reached your account's submission limit for images. Please wait 24 hours to submit more content." error for about 2-3 days, trying daily to submit some more and still got the same, in the end it's a daily limit or weekly one cause I don't get it.

Anyway, if we put everything together, money reduction, AI reviews plus this daily/weekly limits, basically they really want to get rid of us.........

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, DaLiu said:

Anyway, if we put everything together, money reduction, AI reviews plus this daily/weekly limits, basically they really want to get rid of us.........

Agreed. They certainly know the problem with rejections. If they are not taking steps to fix it, it means they want to decrease uploads.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...