Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Tom Roche

Rejections seem to be getting more common.

Recommended Posts

I have been getting more rejections recently than ever before. A week ago I had 13 of 13 rejected and 5 were only for "Noise". I looked at those 5 and added noise reduction in Bridge and close inspection for and removal of artifacts. Resubmitted the 5 and noted to the reviewer that they were resubmitted with reduced noise. All 5 were rejected, all 5 due to noise and two also for poor lighting. This is frustrating as hell. What can you do???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have been getting more rejections recently than ever before. A week ago I had 13 of 13 rejected and 5 were only for "Noise". I looked at those 5 and added noise reduction in Bridge and close inspection for and removal of artifacts. Resubmitted the 5 and noted to the reviewer that they were resubmitted with reduced noise. All 5 were rejected, all 5 due to noise and two also for poor lighting. This is frustrating as hell. What can you do???

 

We cannot help you without seeing the images. Post them in the Critique forum and include 100% crops so we can check for the noise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had 22/22 rejected for noise (various topics, cameras, settings). Not had that for a while.

 

Others from the same session all accepted last week so i'll just resub with no note and chances are they'll get approved.

 

Its approaching the time of year where it's not worth uploading anything judging by the last few years - review time drops and rejection rate sky rockets until the first week of Jan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just had 22/22 rejected for noise (various topics, cameras, settings). Not had that for a while.

 

Others from the same session all accepted last week so i'll just resub with no note and chances are they'll get approved.

 

Its approaching the time of year where it's not worth uploading anything judging by the last few years - review time drops and rejection rate sky rockets until the first week of Jan.

 

Thank you for that. I've been having the same problem this week. I had set myself a goal of uploading a lot of images over Christmas and New Year's but I guess I will just prepare them and start submitting again mid-January...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally i would't bother. Sales drop off a lot in this 2 weeks period so any images that do get accepted drop off the map and popular before anyone really sees them.

 

If the review system is as comical as last year for the same period as well then personally id wait until after 1/1 to upload.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input. I was not aware of the "time of year" dependence of review and rejection. I will hold off till after the new year also. I will say though that I submitted 11 more after my message and had 8 accepted, all similar in subject to the ones that were rejected. It does seem to be "the luck of the draw" with respect to reviewers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for this information--I had no idea they had some sort of quota system by year. I just got rejected for 24/25 or so images for "Poor lighting" for things like thunderstorms, which by their nature are dramatic (I've had lots of other thunderstorm shots accepted). Interestingly, they accepted 100% of my editorial shots, several of which were multiple versions of the same scene.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have been getting more rejections recently than ever before. A week ago I had 13 of 13 rejected and 5 were only for "Noise". I looked at those 5 and added noise reduction in Bridge and close inspection for and removal of artifacts. Resubmitted the 5 and noted to the reviewer that they were resubmitted with reduced noise. All 5 were rejected, all 5 due to noise and two also for poor lighting. This is frustrating as hell. What can you do???

 

We cannot help you without seeing the images. Post them in the Critique forum and include 100% crops so we can check for the noise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last 2 weeks I have had ALL images rejected for same reasons-POOR lighting, INCORRECT white balance, POOR composition- and I am utterly at a loss after spending HOURS in RAW Bridge and PS ! What is the problem? I am thinking of not submitting any more.

PS-similar images accepted in recent past.Is it a BOT or WHAT???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have suffered the same injustice recently.

 

Out of a total of 27 images submitted in various batches over the past two days, only 4 were accepted, while 23 were rejected. Previously to this, I have had an acceptance rate of over 97%, with well over a thousand successful images in my portfolio.

 

Some of the recently rejected images are some of the most technically perfect images I have ever produced, yet they were rejected for reasons such as "improper lighting", "noise", "focus issues", and "white balance".

 

My goal is to add 800 images to my port within the next two months. If the review process is not extremely consistent, there is a huge risk that my goal will not be accomplished, despite an incredible work ethic on my part.

 

Hopefully any reviewers making mistakes and being inconsistent will be removed from service, so that we can all start getting the high acceptance rates we have grown accustomed to over the years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to figure "WHY?" can drive you nuts. It makes absolutely no sense, especially since the images are being accepted by other, equally strict, sites.

Actually, that may be a good thing. They are selling at much higher RPD.

:-)

BTW TomReicher ... really enjoyed browsing your portfolio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am new here with only about 90 images accepted since early December 2013. I am at a loss to understand the random and questionable review process. There have been about 40 downloads of my images scattered around the world (which I think is not bad for the low number of images accepted and the short time I have been here). I submitted 16 images on 1/6/14 and all were accepted. I submitted 10 images on 1/7/14 and 7 on 1/9/14 and all were rejected. It appeared that the reviewer hit the "poor lighting " button and held it down on the first 10 and the noise and focus button for the last 7.

There seems to be no consistency in the review process which makes me feel like I am wasting a huge amount of time processing and submitting here. I have spent countless hours preparing images and have made a grand total of $12.51.

My stuff is not junk (ask Tom Reichner above). If their goal is to discourage people from submitting images it is working. I only beat my head against the wall for so long before I discover that wall id hard.

Discouraged!

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am new also and was very discouraged recently but now my birds are getting accepted very well so my advice is just hang in there and improve your images as best you can and things will change. Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rejections are everyday more inconsistent.

And the problem is getting really serious.

For example there are a lot of rejections for "Poor Lighting--Image has exposure issues and/or incorrect white balance", when the images are in fact correct.

Most of the time after a second review these images get accepted.

So why have they been rejected in a first time? Error of valuation? Hurry? Incompetence?

It is a lose of time and money for the contributors and for Shutterstock too.

 

Or is it only a way for Shutterstock to limit the number of photos on their site?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for this information--I had no idea they had some sort of quota system by year. I just got rejected for 24/25 or so images for "Poor lighting" for things like thunderstorms, which by their nature are dramatic (I've had lots of other thunderstorm shots accepted). Interestingly, they accepted 100% of my editorial shots, several of which were multiple versions of the same scene.

 

I took most of the images that were rejected late last year, and resubmitted them in several different batches, and they accepted every single one of them.

 

I wish Shuterstock would just instead say, "We have too many of this kind of image right now" or something rather than reject for technical/composition reasons that aren't really true.

 

And again they accepted every single new editorial shot, even some I thought were marginal.

 

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have suffered the same injustice recently.

 

Out of a total of 27 images submitted in various batches over the past two days, only 4 were accepted, while 23 were rejected. Previously to this, I have had an acceptance rate of over 97%, with well over a thousand successful images in my portfolio.

 

Some of the recently rejected images are some of the most technically perfect images I have ever produced, yet they were rejected for reasons such as "improper lighting", "noise", "focus issues", and "white balance".

 

 

My goal is to add 800 images to my port within the next two months. If the review process is not extremely consistent, there is a huge risk that my goal will not be accomplished, despite an incredible work ethic on my part.

 

Hopefully any reviewers making mistakes and being inconsistent will be removed from service, so that we can all start getting the high acceptance rates we have grown accustomed to over the years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is getting very hard to have pictures accepted. I have been in SS for 5 years and I had more than 50% of pictures accepted but all of sudden my pictures have undergone an high percentage of rejection and I am thinking to give it up and retire from SS. I think they are slowing down the number of pictures uploaded. If I experience high rejection rate for long time, I will retire from SS, maybe they have changed their acceptance politics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

edited for brevity:

 

I have suffered the same injustice recently.

Previously to this, I have had an acceptance rate of over 97%, with well over a thousand successful images in my portfolio.

they were rejected for reasons such as "improper lighting", "noise", "focus issues", and "white balance".

==========================================================================================================

I read all these comments from this thread and the other thread with great interest.

I have to admit I am quite astonished that long term members like so many here are all getting the same rampant rejections with the same repeated reasons.

 

A long time ago, my colleague used to complain that IStock reviewers (many exclusives there review newbies) give this sort of :absurd: rejection patterns.

 

With so much noise (bad pun) going on these days about Getty, *(Istock)... I wonder if Shutterstock made the awful error of hiring ex-Istock reviewers who also used to be exclusives there.

 

If so, this could explain the sudden insults/insurge

of these new pattern of rejections . It would be enlightening to have perharps an internal audit to see if majority of these rejections comes from a certain reveiwer, or a new reviewer who is trigger happy in pushing the rejection button. Or worse, is this being done by some computer program.

 

Just my tuppence worth of input here. I am more or less exclusively Shutterstock (ie. I have not submitted any new work to any other sites since ... well, a long time ago).

But reading what is happening to my long-term colleagues here, it may make me re-think that perharps I should not put all my eggs in one basket, ...

just in case the bottom should fall out... due to the act of a certain RENEGADE reviewer(s)...parachuted from Istock (scream here =:o)

 

Hope something gets done to look into this matter, as I feel it can fester.

Cheers. Have a good weekend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

edited for brevity:

 

I have suffered the same injustice recently.

Previously to this, I have had an acceptance rate of over 97%, with well over a thousand successful images in my portfolio.

they were rejected for reasons such as "improper lighting", "noise", "focus issues", and "white balance".

==========================================================================================================

I read all these comments from this thread and the other thread with great interest.

I have to admit I am quite astonished that long term members like so many here are all getting the same rampant rejections with the same repeated reasons.

 

A long time ago, my colleague used to complain that IStock reviewers (many exclusives there review newbies) give this sort of :absurd: rejection patterns.

 

With so much noise (bad pun) going on these days about Getty, *(Istock)... I wonder if Shutterstock made the awful error of hiring ex-Istock reviewers who also used to be exclusives there.

 

If so, this could explain the sudden insults/insurge

of these new pattern of rejections . It would be enlightening to have perharps an internal audit to see if majority of these rejections comes from a certain reveiwer, or a new reviewer who is trigger happy in pushing the rejection button. Or worse, is this being done by some computer program.

 

Just my tuppence worth of input here. I am more or less exclusively Shutterstock (ie. I have not submitted any new work to any other sites since ... well, a long time ago).

But reading what is happening to my long-term colleagues here, it may make me re-think that perharps I should not put all my eggs in one basket, ...

just in case the bottom should fall out... due to the act of a certain RENEGADE reviewer(s)...parachuted from Istock (scream here =:o)

 

Hope something gets done to look into this matter, as I feel it can fester.

Cheers. Have a good weekend.

 

I read your comments about rejection : I also have suffered the same injustice. A lot of my pictures were rejected for any reasons as light white balance focus and most of all they found another stupid reason as : poorly edit which I really don't know what they mean about it.

About iStock... if any of the new reviewer is from iStock, so than GOOD. Maybee our images will be accepted or not rejected for any stupid reasons. Most of my images rejected by Shutter are accepted in iStock . I should be very annoyed if I will have to cancel my Shutter subscription as I am with them for 10 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

edited for brevity:

About iStock... if any of the new reviewer is from iStock, so than GOOD. Maybee our images will be accepted or not rejected for any stupid reasons. Most of my images rejected by Shutter are accepted in iStock . I should be very annoyed if I will have to cancel my Shutter subscription as I am with them for 10 years.

 

i think you misunderstood me. what i meant was an old colleague (she was an exclusive in the hey days of IS), tells me that these patterns of rejections that you are all getting here from the reviewer, sounds familiar during her days in Istock.

thus i ask, perharps this reviewer has joined SS because the style of mass rejections is similar.

 

as for IS today, ... i wouldn't know. i don't submit to anyone else for a long time since i started with SS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I am really really struggling with rejections. In general I would probably have a 80% rejection rate for noise, focus, white balance, lighting mainly. I do mostly landscapes, here in Ireland.

 

My problem is I shoot ISO 100 daytime, Raw, Mirror lockup, tripod, on a full frame 20Meg pix camera with 28mm prime lens. In processing I reduce the image size to about 75% to help it pass and use what in think are ridiculous levels of noise reduction and they are still being rejected.

 

I use NIK colour efex for most image processing.

 

I am finding that my pass rate has not improved in the last 3 years despite a significant improvement in equipment and my standard of photography.

 

When I first joined I was using a 10Mp cam with a standard zoom lens and now I'm still getting a similar rejection rate.

 

Typical rejection is as follows:

 

Poor Lighting--Image has exposure issues, unfavorable lighting conditions, and/or incorrect white balance.

Noise--Image contains excessive noise, grain, artifacts and/or is poorly rasterized.

Focus--Subject is blurry, too soft, or out of focus when viewed at full resolution.

 

What am I doing wrong or is it that landscapes are just really subjective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi

 

I am really really struggling with rejections. In general I would probably have a 80% rejection rate for noise, focus, white balance, lighting mainly. I do mostly landscapes, here in Ireland.

 

My problem is I shoot ISO 100 daytime, Raw, Mirror lockup, tripod, on a full frame 20Meg pix camera with 28mm prime lens. In processing I reduce the image size to about 75% to help it pass and use what in think are ridiculous levels of noise reduction and they are still being rejected.

 

I use NIK colour efex for most image processing.

 

I am finding that my pass rate has not improved in the last 3 years despite a significant improvement in equipment and my standard of photography.

 

When I first joined I was using a 10Mp cam with a standard zoom lens and now I'm still getting a similar rejection rate.

 

Typical rejection is as follows:

 

Poor Lighting--Image has exposure issues, unfavorable lighting conditions, and/or incorrect white balance.

Noise--Image contains excessive noise, grain, artifacts and/or is poorly rasterized.

Focus--Subject is blurry, too soft, or out of focus when viewed at full resolution.

 

What am I doing wrong or is it that landscapes are just really subjective.

 

We can't really help unless we see the images that were rejected and 100% crops so we can check for the focus and noise.

 

As far as the noise goes what camera are you using? Some are known for being noise machines. Noise is mainly caused by high ISO, improper exposure, and the size of the sensor.

 

One question I have is why are you using noise reduction? Do you see noise in the image to begin with or are just doing it because you have had rejections for noise? Overuse of noise reduction can give an image a plastic look to them.

 

I suggest posting the images in the Critique Forum according to the instructions found in the first thread there.

Share this post


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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...