Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Filip Fuxa

Unhappy with reviews

Recommended Posts

Hi guys, I am really unhappy. I think I have good images. I have experience 7 years here. But Shutterstock refused 100% of my images 3 times in a row. My equipment is much better, my shots are better than they used to be. For the example this picture I attach was featured on one of the different sites. Here it was rejected for

 

Overuse--Image has excessive noise reduction and/or excessive sharpening effects applied.

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

 

No noise reduction or sharpening (my D810 is sharp by itself), just raw conversion and usage of neutral gray filters to blur the water. I think it is a perfect shot with good focus, perhaps you can tell me I am wrong?

post-52573-14368381768614_thumb.jpg

post-52573-14368381769104_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what I'm looking at. You mentioned blurred water, but I have no frame of reference to indicate as much. Sorry. Wish I could be more help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, sorry, I forgot to describe the shot. It is a granite boulder shaped by erosion in the sea of Seychelles. I took the photo with a very long exposure to blur the water to increase the contrast between the edges of the stone and the water. The small frame is a 100% crop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The stone looks sharp enough, but the blurred water doesn't look natural, or even like water. More like fog against a mountain, but where it meets the stone looks odd. Agree with Phil, hard to make out what I'm looking at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is technically correct but the way the water blurred makes the image look like a mistake or some weird filter was put on it. I believe you that you only used an ND filter but it looks like it was post processed to death. I would shorten the time of the exposure a little to get some of the water back.

And you said that another site has featured it so it can still get sales elsewhere.

Make an SS version and an "others" version :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You might be right. But Shutterstock used to promote creativity and I think this shot is out of the box without Photoshop filters. As of the other site. It pleased me, but due to not so many customers the benefit of "feature" was 3 downloads :-) I want to adapt on Shutterstock. I see my travel pictures are not liked by the reviewers anymore. This troubles me as Shutterstock sells well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the other guys, 5 mins is too long for the effect you were going after, and it does look more like mist, it just as easily could have been a mountain top poking out of clouds or mist. But, I also think you got hit by the over zealous reviewer that we all have been hit by lately.

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...