Jump to content

Image Acceptance - getting ridiculous


Recommended Posts

  • 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

....and another whole batch rejection. Entire lot for "focus, noise, poor lighting". Shot on 6 different days with 3 different cameras of 4 different topics.

 

Weekend review. Im beginning to detect a trend.

 

The irritating thing is its using my expensive and limited internet credit (and time, each image takes 30 minutes to upload) to re-upload and submit them to get a non-imbecile to actually look at the things instead of a one click reject.

It does seem to be a case of some look at the first image and apply its success or failure to the whole batch.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is this REALLY poor lighting and out of focus?

 

I'm a returning contributor (after few years) please any help is welcomed.

 

thank you

 

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=144727

 

Dude, I don't see nothing wrong there - you just made an "instagram" looking photo which nowdays is in veey high demand. Thus, skin and even hair is visible on boys face!

 

Regarding light... It is counter-light photo and it can not be much better without specially designing light for that occasion. But, effect would be lost.

Focus was hard to maintain in this situation and I would not reject that image if I was reviewing it.

 

I don't know why, but in my rejections all have merit. Bad lighting - is bad. Also, focus is bad... When I get some crappy rejection reasons I write a note with asking that some content manager look at image again.

I may be lucky, but no disputable rejections since start of this year!

 

(EDIT) BTW, dude you can upload that on A****. If they reject it then it is crap photo. But, I doubt that you will get that rejected there! And it in some time might make you a little fortune ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

My first ten were all rejected. The second ten I uploaded were all award winning or had been published in books or magazines. All ten rejected again.

 

I realize I'm not the world's best photographer, only having been working professionally at it for thirty years or so. But there is something seriously wrong with this process.

 

I'm heading back to P5 with my photos. At least there I don't get insulted.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My first ten were all rejected. The second ten I uploaded were all award winning or had been published in books or magazines. All ten rejected again.

 

I realize I'm not the world's best photographer, only having been working professionally at it for thirty years or so. But there is something seriously wrong with this process.

 

I'm heading back to P5 with my photos. At least there I don't get insulted.

Standards here are high and all sites are different.

 

Also.

 

HOW TO POST

 

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=117778

 

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=42889&start=0

 

http://submit.shutterstock.com/newsletter/109/article1.html

 

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=122342

 

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=125897

 

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=125423&start=0

 

Where to post

 

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=4

 

So lets see what you have.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 10 months later...

I have had one image rejected for "Poor Lighting--Image has exposure issues, unfavorable lighting conditions, and/or incorrect white balance.

Overuse--Image has excessive noise reduction and/or excessive sharpening effects applied."
 
I took the image inside a lightbox, obviously using a tripod, I measured the white balance for the shot using an 18% grey card.
 
The image was accepted by all other sites I upload to.
 
I am starting to think that the reviewers simply like/dislike an image and if they think it is not going to sell or it is not needed they will find the most likely rejection button without much consideration for the real reason. They probably don't have time to fully consider why they want to reject it.
 
That's why using the rejections as a learning tool may not come to our advantage. I don't re-submit, simply move on. I don't feel insulted or rejected when rejections happen, but I wish there was a mechanism whereby I knew exactly why it was rejected so I don't do it again. But I understand this site is a professional site and not a photography course where I am taught what shutter stock wants. I will just figure it out eventually, or not.
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I have had one image rejected for "Poor Lighting--Image has exposure issues, unfavorable lighting conditions, and/or incorrect white balance.

Overuse--Image has excessive noise reduction and/or excessive sharpening effects applied."
 
I took the image inside a lightbox, obviously using a tripod, I measured the white balance for the shot using an 18% grey card.
 
The image was accepted by all other sites I upload to.
 
I am starting to think that the reviewers simply like/dislike an image and if they think it is not going to sell or it is not needed they will find the most likely rejection button without much consideration for the real reason. They probably don't have time to fully consider why they want to reject it.
 
That's why using the rejections as a learning tool may not come to our advantage. I don't re-submit, simply move on. I don't feel insulted or rejected when rejections happen, but I wish there was a mechanism whereby I knew exactly why it was rejected so I don't do it again. But I understand this site is a professional site and not a photography course where I am taught what shutter stock wants. I will just figure it out eventually, or not.

 

Light boxes or light tents can often create problems of flat light due to the light bouncing all around. Most light boxes are just something that camera shops love to sell to people and is something that is really not needed.

 

As far as the other sites accepting it that really doesn't come into play because different sites have different standards and many of them will take just about anything just to build their database. SS is pretty picky.

 

Now seeing that we cannot see the image we can't know whether we think the reviewer was right or wrong. If you would like to post it we would be happy to take a look and give our opinions.

 

I do agree that reviewing has had some issues over the past year of so but in most cases they are usually right.

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...