Jump to content

Submitting Editorial Content, Part 1: Illustrative Editorial


Recommended Posts

To help you understand Editorial submissions better we are going to post a 3-part series on Editorial content on our blog. The first part concerns illustrative editorial, particularly the image quality and image content requirements.

 

You can read the blog here:

http://www.shutterstock.com/blog/submitting-editorial-content-part-1-illustrative-editorial

 

If you have a follow up question, feel free to post it here. Though I must warn that we can not always give a general answer because it often depends on the image in question.

 

vincent

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Vincent,

Hope you are well.

 

This post is not about Illustrative Editorial but Editorial

 

I see that SS is more into Editorial and I like that. I love Editorial content and I have a suggestion. Pls revise your inspection policies when it comes to editorial content. I have noticed that inspectors approve or reject Editorial content by the same rules of commercial one (or maybe is just an excuse which I would understand). The real editorial content can be imperfect as long as the captured image has value. In my opinion, you have ground for improvement in that area.

 

Kind Regards

Roberto

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pls revise your inspection policies when it comes to editorial content. I have noticed that inspectors approve or reject Editorial content by the same rules of commercial one (or maybe is just an excuse which I would understand). The real editorial content can be imperfect as long as the captured image has value.

 

Especially concerning night or High-ISO editorial imagery. By definition, editorial imagery shall remain unmodified and nude or raw by nature. If we would treat these images like commercial ones, they may be losing value forcing photographers to doctor things, or you may be throwing iconic images to the bucket.

 

I understand Shutterstock is making a point for his buyers by accepting only high technical quality content no matter what. It is a good thing most of times. But if there could be an exception for editorial content, even if the picture would bear a warning of high photographic noise or other note so a buyer could decide.

 

This would really help not us, photographers, but the company itself because it would be able to bite AP Images' and Getty's market share even more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting that it is a requirement to list the keywords "illustrative editorial" but the system currently will not accept multi word phrases such as this. This is a problem, not only with editorial images, but with all images submitted that are best described with multi-word phrases that buyers search by, but that SS refuses to correct their software to accept such. I know the words can be added as individual words, but that is only a band aid and not a fix such as you would expect from a professional organization.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I find it interesting that it is a requirement to list the keywords "illustrative editorial" but the system currently will not accept multi word phrases such as this.

 

That requirement was waived recently. "Until further notice."

 

But it is specifically mentioned in Vincent's link above. Plus the issue of normal submissions having this problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Vincent,

Hope you are well.

 

This post is not about Illustrative Editorial but Editorial

 

I see that SS is more into Editorial and I like that. I love Editorial content and I have a suggestion. Pls revise your inspection policies when it comes to editorial content. I have noticed that inspectors approve or reject Editorial content by the same rules of commercial one (or maybe is just an excuse which I would understand). The real editorial content can be imperfect as long as the captured image has value. In my opinion, you have ground for improvement in that area.

 

Kind Regards

Roberto

 

Roberto,

 

Documentary Editorial images are not reviewed by the same standards as commercial.

 

From the blog post:

"Documentary editorial content can contain some imperfections, because capturing an event doesn’t always happen in ideal shooting conditions. However, the image quality of illustrative editorial content must be superb since the content is shot in a controlled environment."

 

The imperfections mentioned are not unlimited of course, and to truly answer your question we would need to know which image(s) you are referring to.

 

vincent

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Vincent,

Hope you are well.

 

This post is not about Illustrative Editorial but Editorial

 

I see that SS is more into Editorial and I like that. I love Editorial content and I have a suggestion. Pls revise your inspection policies when it comes to editorial content. I have noticed that inspectors approve or reject Editorial content by the same rules of commercial one (or maybe is just an excuse which I would understand). The real editorial content can be imperfect as long as the captured image has value. In my opinion, you have ground for improvement in that area.

 

Kind Regards

Roberto

 

Roberto,

 

Documentary Editorial images are not reviewed by the same standards as commercial.

 

From the blog post:

"Documentary editorial content can contain some imperfections, because capturing an event doesn’t always happen in ideal shooting conditions. However, the image quality of illustrative editorial content must be superb since the content is shot in a controlled environment."

 

The imperfections mentioned are not unlimited of course, and to truly answer your question we would need to know which image(s) you are referring to.

 

vincent

 

Hi Vincent,

Your answer is enough...

I have no complaints about any process in SS much less specific images examples...maybe it is a wrong idea what I got...Thanks a lot..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Vincent

 

I have few questions ....

 

1 ) I see Shutterstock no longer accept pictures of tight logos on products , I have some of those kind of images in my portfolio .... should I wait for your department to remove them ?

 

2 ) What about isolated products , for example balls , bottles , sport equipment etc. on white or black background ? Is that still acceptable ?

 

Lately I was submitting lot of editorial images , and I see now some of those types are no longer acceptable under new guidelines .

I would remove them myself but now I'm not 100% clear what images are not acceptable anymore and what images are still ok .. should I just wait for your department to remove those that are not acceptable any more ?

 

for example : http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-211747894

is this image still acceptable now or not ?

 

I don't want to get in some trouble because of this new guidelines .

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Vincent

 

I have few questions ....

 

1 ) I see Shutterstock no longer accept pictures of tight logos on products , I have some of those kind of images in my portfolio .... should I wait for your department to remove them ?

 

2 ) What about isolated products , for example balls , bottles , sport equipment etc. on white or black background ? Is that still acceptable ?

 

Lately I was submitting lot of editorial images , and I see now some of those types are no longer acceptable under new guidelines .

I would remove them myself but now I'm not 100% clear what images are not acceptable anymore and what images are still ok .. should I just wait for your department to remove those that are not acceptable any more ?

 

for example : http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-211747894

is this image still acceptable now or not ?

 

I don't want to get in some trouble because of this new guidelines .

 

thanks

 

1) What has been approved in the past does not have to be removed by you. This goes for any change or new policy. If content has to be removed, we will do an site wide audit and we will do the removal.

 

2) There is not a complete ban on isolated products on white, only those mentioned in the blog post. That being said, we do prefer illustrative editorial that shows a concept.

 

You can always submit an image if you are not sure. The worse that can happen is that it gets rejected. You won't get a warning for trying (as long as you do not keep resubmitting the same unchanged image over and over again)

 

vincent

Link to post
Share on other sites
With photos, everything is clear. As illustration? Suppose I drew a well-known brand product. Or process photos into an artistic technique. Camel in the desert drinking a Pepsi, painting, for example.

Editorial Illustrations have slightly different policies, you can read more about them here: http://www.shutterstock.com/blog/now-accepting-editorial-illustrations-and-vectors

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

Please, be kind, I search in everywhere but i don't find it.. I am a newbie, so 2 photo su 3 are rejected cause property release ) or the editorial use is not accepeted :

 

To make an example, so I can understand:  I post a portico or a gallery... Shutetrstock tell me: no It'intelectually property.... ( really so vague because it could be everywhere, and in other site i have no problem )---- , I repost writing  Univesity of Venice : city of venice...Italy....like  editoria use... >>Not good again.,, Can you tell me please what have I to product together with this photo)

 

 

So, I'm a architecture- urban minimalist and if I don't can find post this photo, that everywhere more or less are accepted,  i have to learn food or still life for post here :)... Thanks in advice if you can answer me or give me alink clear..   

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 7 months later...

hello guys,

Can you say for these examples if they are suitable for editorial content?

Examples: 

- the photo of the face of a homeless person (i ask for permission to take the photo, but don't say it's going to be sold)
- the photo of the homeless but showing the street or buildings (don't asked for permission, it's from relatively far away)
- the photo of a kid playing in the park with a dangerous dog (i ask for permission to parents / i don't ask for permission)
- the photo of a kid playing in the park  (i ask for permission to parents / i don't ask for permission)
- the photo i took with my cellphone/compact camera inside the mall, where there are no signs of photography being prohibited
- the photo of a naked woman running during a soccer game
- the photo of a artwork but includes some nearby elements, like a person watching, a vase with a big flower next to it.
- the photo of police officers eating a big burger on the street, or giving directions to the traffic
- the photo of only the faces of casual visitors of an event, that are not in costume, or participating on the activities of the event.
- the photo of casual visitors of an event, that include some elements that show that they are indeed visiting an event.

thanks 

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

Hi,

Yesterday I uploaded two illustrations as editorial content. Marked in "Editorial use only" box; had keyword "illustrative editorial"; city, country and date in description.

First review was rejected because of "Reference Image -- A reference image is required or the attached reference image does not resemble the final image" reason.

I resend again as previously submitted content.

Both illustrations was approved, but for commercial use and the date is disappeared from description, and keyword "illustrative editorial" also disappeared from keywords. and illustrations was approved without any reference images! (I have reference images if needed)

How do I need to understand this? on both illustrations are recognisable architecture. as i understand it can not be used for commercial purpose. is it mistake of reviewer or the rules about illustrative editorial content have changed or I don't understand it correct..?

Here are these two illustrations:

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/traffic-road-front-coliseum-largest-amphitheatre-1012630372?src=W-ghzohW6ztrZPg700AxsA-1-0

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/piazza-della-rotonda-near-pantheon-rome-1012630237?src=W-ghzohW6ztrZPg700AxsA-1-1

Thank you,

Olga.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

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...