Whiteaster

Do the reviewers read the description once in a while?

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, mandritoiu said:

In fact, what you are saying is that you agreed with the reviewer rejection reason. For once, the reviewer was right! :P:D

I don't understand this thing too. There are many defocused photos in the SS collection. Type "defocused" in a SS search form and you'll find so many blurry images...

However, reviewers reject my ones although I honestly say in the titles "blurry", "defocused", "background" or "abstract". I uploaded several times some quite interesting blurry backgrounds ... alas, all were rejected ... and I stopped doing that since they reject all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.shutterstock.com...search...defocused

For example, photos from the top:

TITLEdefocused bokeh background of garden with blossoming trees in sunny day, backdrop, summer time

stock-photo-defocused-bokeh-background-o

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/defocused-bokeh-background-garden-blossoming-trees-403034113

TITLEDefocused cityscape at night light background

stock-photo-defocused-cityscape-at-night

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/defocused-cityscape-night-light-background-519350362

If you check, guys, you'll see the photos, most probably, were sold many times.

Maybe rules have been changed since then... Or something else... It would be good to get some useful information about that instead of someone's bad jokes with no commercial value and out of focus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


It is not a big deal I just find it amusing that the rejection reason states the obvious.

I have some of these images approved a long time ago myself and they sell (as background). Maybe the rules have changed indeed.

About bad jokes, wise guys and trolls, I don't care any more.

Commercial value??? only the buyers decides that,  besides: De gustibus non est disputandum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Whiteaster said:


It is not a big deal I just find it amusing that the rejection reason states the obvious.

I have some of these images approved a long time ago myself and they sell (as background). Maybe the rules have changed indeed.

About bad jokes, wise guys and trolls, I don't care any more.

Commercial value??? only the buyers decides that,  besides: De gustibus non est disputandum.

Too bad you take it personally and you don't see the funny side of this story!

Bad joke? "De gustibus non est disputandum":D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mandritoiu said:

I know what you meant. ;)

But next time I'll make a bad photo, I'll create a title like "Bad photo with low commercial value, out of focus, tilted horizon, over saturated, noisy with wrong color balance"

I'll hope the reviewer will agree with me and let it pass :P

LOL LOL LOL :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add - one of my uploaded images few days ago had 'blurred background' and was accepted and also found this in keyword suggestion too! This was using the new SS interface. Have an idea that (maybe my own thoughts though) do they somehow 'sieve out' what is deemed saleable? Could they even subconsciously edit from their POV? best M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mandritoiu said:

I know what you meant. ;)

But next time I'll make a bad photo, I'll create a title like "Bad photo with low commercial value, out of focus, tilted horizon, over saturated, noisy with wrong color balance"

I'll hope the reviewer will agree with me and let it pass :P

Reviewer will reject yours with reason: Great photo with high commercial value :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎15‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 1:06 AM, Whiteaster said:

I had a rejection for a defocused, blurred street scene, the description contains both words "defocused, blurred". Rejection reason: "Focus, the main subject is not in focus."

Yes, you are quite correct - it should have been approved if we put it in the description.

For those who were around then, as I am sure Whiteaster was, a few years ago there was a very popular design trend called Background Blurs. I used to see them around quite a lot back then in advertising where designers used a blurred background in order to add their text over it. It was so popular that a lot of agencies, SS included,  put it on their annual list of popular design trends for content. But of course, it had to be done correctly and the subject matter needed to be something of use. Your idea of a street scene would be very acceptable.

I had several back then that became big sellers, and I still upload the occasional one or two nowadays that sell.

There were quite a lot of discussion about them on the forum back then, and I remember that we were told we had to put it in the description, such as: Background blur of ..... - or - Blurred background of ....

Hope this helps :-)

 

(Note: Other agencies accept them too - all except AS - however, from memory DT even has a separate category for them. AS accepts them as video but not for stills for some reason - and of course in video its a great way to use a street scene where there are a lot of people without having to upload as editorial. They are very popular, and very useable, for video buyers too.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Milleflore Images said:

Yes, you are quite correct - it should have been approved if we put it in the description.

For those who were around then, as I am sure Whiteaster was, a few years ago there was a very popular design trend called Background Blurs. I used to see them around quite a lot back then in advertising where designers used a blurred background in order to add their text over it. It was so popular that a lot of agencies, SS included,  put it on their annual list of popular design trends for content. But of course, it had to be done correctly and the subject matter needed to be something of use. Your idea of a street scene would be very acceptable.

I had several back then that became big sellers, and I still upload the occasional one or two nowadays that sell.

There were quite a lot of discussion about them on the forum back then, and I remember that we were told we had to put it in the description, such as: Background blur of ..... - or - Blurred background of ....

Hope this helps :-)

 

(Note: Other agencies accept them too - all except AS - however, from memory DT even has a category for them. AS accepts them as video but not for stills for some reason - and of course in video its a great way to use a street scene where there are a lot of people without having to upload as editorial. Video buyers like them too.)

Thanks for clarifying this, now I remember people talking about the term "background blur".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well update from my post about 'blurred backgrounds accepted -  uploaded 6 yesterday and all had some deliberate blurr with focus from my camera POV on chosen objects in street and cafe. Each keywording had blurred back ground, out of focus, conceptual image and only 1 was accepted. So as commented, not sure they actually read what we keyword or look at the 'art angle' wishing to be achieved and hopefully sold to a buyer seeking something more creative!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If defocusing is part of idea of image then it should be accepted (if there is not other reason like bad exposure, etc). But you should say it clear in description and keywords to let reviewer uderstand idea, because in other way he/she can think that blur is photographer's fault.

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