Jump to content

Image Acceptance - getting ridiculous


Recommended Posts

I am finding it more and more difficult to get images accepted, despite having been a contributor for 4 years. More and more are coming back rejected because of 'white balance incorrect' and I am getting so frustrated I am seriously thinking of withdrawing from SS. I think as the photographer (shooting in RAW so can be precise) that I know when the white balance is correct for my image, not whoever happens to be reviewing it. Unless it is crazily off (and I have seen some images with skies coloured impossible colours) they should trust our judgement on what is correct. What with that and other issues with releases getting more and more complicated, editorials on images of aeroplanes, etc., it is getting to the point where I can't be bothered when the return is so small for the effort involved.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 636
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Yes I agree, sometimes the reasons are absurd. I have been complimented all my life on my composition and eye ... So when I get images rejected for comp, it really pisses me off, especially if I have

Posted Images

I used to get a lot of rejections for that reason when I first started on SS, but haven't had one lately. I always assumed that was the button the reviewer pushed when he wanted an easy way to reject images without doing the hard work of actually reviewing them. If it's only happened once, I'd resubmit them knowing you'll probably get a different reviewer who will actually spend time doing a proper review.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this the exact wording of the rejection?

 

Poor Lighting--Poor or uneven lighting, or shadows. White balance may be incorrect.

 

There are two other things besides white balance that "could" be the problem.

 

Lighting or Shadows.

 

I personally don't like this rejection because it's vague. Your white balance could be perfect as you say, kaywelsh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is this the exact wording of the rejection?

 

Poor Lighting--Poor or uneven lighting, or shadows. White balance may be incorrect.

 

There are two other things besides white balance that "could" be the problem.

 

Lighting or Shadows.

 

I personally don't like this rejection because it's vague. Your white balance could be perfect as you say, kaywelsh.

There's also this one!

 

Lighting Problems--Purple fringe, blown highlights or lenses flare.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Same here, things have been going pretty well lately and suddenly everything I have in queue (about 25 images) except for two, are rejected.

 

I happened to be messing with uploads at the time so noticed that the entire bunch were put through all at once, despite being in several batches posted on different days.

 

Seems someone's possibly clearing a backlog. Can only be philosophical about it though, it's typical stock randomness and they were accepted elsewhere. Across the board it's completely random who accepts what, when and why.

 

Best to just shrug and carry on regardless.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Same here, things have been going pretty well lately and suddenly everything I have in queue (about 25 images) except for two, are rejected.

 

I happened to be messing with uploads at the time so noticed that the entire bunch were put through all at once, despite being in several batches posted on different days.

 

Seems someone's possibly clearing a backlog. Can only be philosophical about it though, it's typical stock randomness and they were accepted elsewhere. Across the board it's completely random who accepts what, when and why.

 

Best to just shrug and carry on regardless.

 

Ditto 20 plus images.

 

One batch of 18 then a second batch of 7.

 

I wouldn't mind but it seems very arbitary. I could understand if the comps were bad but gee whiz to get 100% failure sounds off.

 

And then it precludes you from ever posting the same images ever again.

 

You can wait a few weeks and then try uploading them again but not all at once.

Just because they have been refused once does not mean that you cannot upload them again.You may get a different reviewer.

Also have a look and see if there isn't some way that you can improve them

Link to post
Share on other sites
You can wait a few weeks and then try uploading them again but not all at once.

Just because they have been refused once does not mean that you cannot upload them again.You may get a different reviewer.

Also have a look and see if there isn't some way that you can improve them

 

But I see on the SS forums photographers had been warned for re-posting images.

 

I'll go post them elsewhere :)

 

If you make a correction to the images to fix the problem the reviewer thought it had you can re post them no problem

Link to post
Share on other sites
You can wait a few weeks and then try uploading them again but not all at once.

Just because they have been refused once does not mean that you cannot upload them again.You may get a different reviewer.

Also have a look and see if there isn't some way that you can improve them

 

 

 

To be honest, there has to be a time limit a person can spend trying to get images accepted. The majority of images don't bring in a massive return and when the same images will most likely be accepted at 8 out of 10 other sites, it's really not worth the time invested.

 

The problem is that you really can't focus on improving or even correct your images, when the next reviewer will probably reject them for a completely different reason. Quite a few rejection reasons can be vague or subjective too, such as lighting or composition. IMO it's simply better to move on and not waste too much of your time,(which could be spent shooting), trying to push images through.

 

If an image gets rejected by two sites for the same reason (which is pretty rare), that's the point I accept it has justifiable issues rather than something subjective or petty that one reviewer has taken exception to.

 

Maybe if no other site rejects an image that has been rejected here, that's the time to resubmit, if you feel inclined to do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a potential new contributor, I submitted 10 images a month ago, of which 5 were rejected. I reviewed the images and accepted the reasons (3 focus, 2 lighting) so I looked for another 5 images where there would be little or no grounds for rejection.

 

I resubmitted, including the previous 5 'good' images, but I now get rejection for all 10 images, purely on 'Composition'!

 

I was careful to ensure the new images had at least as good focus as the original accepted images & (at least to me) as close to perfect lighting as I have ever produced.

 

Seems to me SS are playing games, or at least the reviewers need a better review process.

 

Don't get me wrong, I know I'm not a perfect photographer, but when images get accepted once, then rejected the next time, something must be wrong!

Link to post
Share on other sites
As a potential new contributor, I submitted 10 images a month ago, of which 5 were rejected. I reviewed the images and accepted the reasons (3 focus, 2 lighting) so I looked for another 5 images where there would be little or no grounds for rejection.

 

I resubmitted, including the previous 5 'good' images, but I now get rejection for all 10 images, purely on 'Composition'!

 

I was careful to ensure the new images had at least as good focus as the original accepted images & (at least to me) as close to perfect lighting as I have ever produced.

 

Seems to me SS are playing games, or at least the reviewers need a better review process.

 

Don't get me wrong, I know I'm not a perfect photographer, but when images get accepted once, then rejected the next time, something must be wrong!

Nope you made the common mistake of resubmitting what was approved by one reviewer but another reviewer will see and reject them for something else.

 

If one reviewer rejects for noise another may see improper lighting they dont tell you all of the rejection reasons except for one and sometimes if you are lucky they will hit you with two.

 

If you spend any time on the forums you would have known this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No,I hadn't.

 

As I'm completely new to SS I had (naively) assumed that as some of my initial 10 images had been 'passed' they would be ok for a second attempt to become accepted.

 

Also, this thread notes that others are experiencing increased rejection rates, so just seems that there is a reviewer out there who has had a bad day? Or has the review policy been tightened up? Or is it simply that the SS process is inconsistent?

 

It would be so much better if the reviewer could give a brief outline for rejections. It would help contributors improve their submissions and prevent wasting reviewers time by filtering out unacceptable images.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No,I hadn't.

 

As I'm completely new to SS I had (naively) assumed that as some of my initial 10 images had been 'passed' they would be ok for a second attempt to become accepted.

 

Also, this thread notes that others are experiencing increased rejection rates, so just seems that there is a reviewer out there who has had a bad day? Or has the review policy been tightened up? Or is it simply that the SS process is inconsistent?

 

It would be so much better if the reviewer could give a brief outline for rejections. It would help contributors improve their submissions and prevent wasting reviewers time by filtering out unacceptable images.

 

There have been many threads about the review process. For over half a year there has been a reviewer(s) that we refer to as "Attila." Very little seems to get by them.

 

Many sites will accept just about anything that is sent in. Shutterstock does not do that and they raise the bar to make sure that only the best get in. We who have been here for a long time often scratch our heads when we see good shots get rejected and lesser shots get in.

 

Why does this happen? Simple, humans review the images and no matter the training or policies that are in place each person sees things differently. This will continue to happen no matter what is done.

 

Usually in time if enough people complain about what are obvious bad reviews those reviewers are removed or get more training. But you must remember that often people fall in love with their work and think it is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Many times it is not and that is why we suggest posting the images that were rejected in the Critique forum according to the instructions found in the first thread. We can then take a look and give some suggestions.

 

As far as giving more information in the rejection that is an idea we have all had but when you consider the number of images that are submitted it is impossible to do. Each day over 100,000 images are received and if they took time to write things out we would be screaming that the reviews are taking way to long.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've sent images for approval 3 times, different images every time.

First time 9 of them got rejected, 2nd - 4, 3rd - 5.

 

So, on the 4th time I collected all the images that "would have been approved" and sent them again. 5 of them got rejected.

 

There is no consistency - it's a moving target. They keep changing rules during the game.

 

Not worth the effort.

I give up on Shutterstock.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've sent images for approval 3 times, different images every time.

First time 9 of them got rejected, 2nd - 4, 3rd - 5.

 

So, on the 4th time I collected all the images that "would have been approved" and sent them again. 5 of them got rejected.

 

There is no consistency - it's a moving target. They keep changing rules during the game.

 

Not worth the effort.

I give up on Shutterstock.

You needed to put them up in the critique forum to get help with them but you say by so later.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. I submitted 28 images and all but one were rejected for the same reasons.

 

I've not ever had such a problem. I felt like it was a giant laziness on the part of the reviewer.

 

Highest batch rejection ever and all but one of the same images were accepted by both of the other major sites where I contribute.

 

There was a broad range of lighting conditions (sunny, cloudy, etc.) and locations (beach, gardens, mountains ) so no problem there.

 

Very frustrating. I've never resubmitted before but some of these were expensive shoots with models and so I might just do that. I just have to figure out how it's done.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So to resubmit do you just re-upload and start over from scratch?

 

Thanks.

 

Don't get in the habit of just resubmitting images because you do not like the results. Doing that will cause problems. If images are rejected you should first look at them with a critical eye to see if the reviewer is correct. If necessary fix what could be wrong. Not all reviews with rejections are done by Attila.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that and I am very critical about that as you can see with 499 clips and images here and 1000 at my other top level site I've never resubmitted here and only twice with my other one. Usually I just accept and move on.

 

But these images were accepted at my two other sites, one being another top level site and the other a top secondary site so I am pretty confident in their quality.

 

Thanks :)

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...