Jump to content
Moon Le

Rejected nearly 100 photos because of Tittles

Recommended Posts

On 22 April, I tried to submit nearly 100 photos with different concepts (flowers, food, destination, animals...). Some of them shares same concepts so I must share same titles for them. For example:

1. 1376691290 - Groups of Succulent plants (20 photos in different styles):

Description: Succulent plants are growing widely in highland areas, Dalat City. The nice atmosphere brings benefits for the plants to grow in bundle. There are many types such as burro tail, crown of thorns, hens and chicks.

Reject reason: Title: Title must be descriptive of the subject matter and must be in English. Titles cannot contain special characters, spelling/grammar errors, or repeat words/phrases in excess.

What is that the other language in my description? Dalat is a proper name of a travel destination, the same like Paris, New York or Kuala Lumpur, I have used such words for many of my approved photos. So why today it is rejected? Is Shutterstock reviewers new joiner?

 

image.thumb.png.e46ab7a44bb95d435a60bfe6dd29496f.png


2. 1376146865 - Groups of Puzzle numbers (35 photos in different styles)

Description: Number puzzle mat for children. Children can both play to fill right numbers to the blank (3,4,5,6,7) or can change the square shape into a mat to sit on. The colorful toy is safe for children to play

Reject reason: Title: Title must be descriptive of the subject matter and must be in English. Titles cannot contain special characters, spelling/grammar errors, or repeat words/phrases in excess.

Again, what is the wrong with this title - describe a group of puzzle number ? Previously I submitted some of them, and they were approved, but today all are rejected. I must count in details every single numbers in the 35 photos to meet the descriptive expectation?

 

image.thumb.png.1185113fde4f1aceae9e178a1e43fb9e.png

 

3. 1376677016 - Set of food photos (4 photos in different styles)

Description: Phnom-penh clear rice noodle soup in Vietnamese style (or Hu tieu Nam Vang): Vermicelli noodles is cooked with pork broth and added with topping such as shrimps, offal, cooked pork, squid, & vegetable

Reject reason: Title: Title must be descriptive of the subject matter and must be in English. Titles cannot contain special characters, spelling/grammar errors, or repeat words/phrases in excess.

Again, What is that the other language in my description? Pnom Penh is capital of Cambodia, should I use their special writing letters instead of Latin words? And the food has it own name - Hu tieu Nam Vang the same like Pho in Vietnamese, I did input in the parenthesis marks for explanation "&" mark to meet expected word length. What should I do here? Create a new translation for the food name so that the reviewers can totally understand without minding to cross check what are those words in case they dont understand? I have many hundred food photos were approved previously, then why are they rejected today?

image.thumb.png.dce4ff9346fa2ac20ae7b1830550771b.png

 

4. 1376888597 - Set of animal photos (16 photos in different styles)

Description: Wildlife animals at Vinpearl Phu Quoc Safari, Kien Giang Province, Vietnam. They are parrots, goats, lions, giraffes.. Visitors can walk through open areas or drive in bus to visit some endangered one.

Reject reason: Title: Title must be descriptive of the subject matter and must be in English. Titles cannot contain special characters, spelling/grammar errors, or repeat words/phrases in excess.

When I visited a Safari, I described where and what I saw, wrote down and listed some of the animals I see in the Safari. Is it not descriptive? And even if my 2 type of photos are different (lions sucking milk vs the parrot), why was either the parrot or lion rejected, instead both of them are rejected?

 

image.thumb.png.fb2bffea7bb69a7dad70a03a5c0234dc.png

 

There are more of my photos rejected among this ~100 photos. I dont have time to check all.

All contributors for Shutterstock spent a lot of time for creating photos, then describe all effortlessly. But today I feel disappointed with Shutterstock reviewers' reject reasons. It proves the reviewers' inability to smartly widen their knowledge on the contents of product they are qualifying except the look. I tried to introduce the food, the destination, the creativity; however, the reviewers prefer checking the technical end instead of the stories behind each photos. Contents that are so famous to others but strange to the reviewers' world are enough to make them switch "reject" automatically without any close checking why and how. We need a human reviewer, not a machine.

Thank you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Moon :).

I see you write some extra info about things that are not visible in the photo.

Description must describe what you see on the photo. Just as the rejection says.

You have image if lets say lion and you mention in description also hippo to tell that they also life close in the area of lion. Now when customer enter keyword hippo a lion appears. 

Just describe the lion and what he is doing. Done ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wildlife animals at Vinpearl Phu Quoc Safari, Kien Giang Province, Vietnam. They are parrots, goats, lions, giraffes.. Visitors can walk through open areas or drive in bus to visit some endangered one.

 

I don't see any Giraffes in your pictures, so why do you say there is in the description?  How would you feel as a customer looking for a Giraffe and this is what they bring you?

 

 

The soup description,  why are you using Non English words when is against SS policy? yes sometimes reviewers make mistakes and allows them for common stuff but how do they know what you wrote?  the rules are clear, only words in English dictionary.

 

all these rejections appear in line with guidelines you accepted by deciding to use SS 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I note that the rejection could also be partly due to grammar errors and I do see a few of those in your descriptions. Though I do realise these can be hard to avoid if English is not your first language. 

"...ermicelli noodles is cooked with pork broth"

'Noodles' is plural (referring to more than one) so we need to use 'are' instead of 'is.'

"Visitors can walk through open areas or drive in bus to visit some endangered one."

If we're talking about a single bus, the indefinite article 'a' is required before 'bus.' If you're referring to that particular mode of transport in a more general sense, you can use the plural word 'buses.' Similarly, you're describing animals generally so you can use 'endangered ones.'

I wouldn't use 'nice' as an adjective in describing the appropriate kind of atmosphere for optimal plant growth.

Also, are there really plants that are known as hens and chicks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THe one thing that I noticed is that the rejection is for the TITLE and not the description. If when you submitted them you used the title that you gave such as: 4. 1376888597 - Set of animal photos (16 photos in different styles) Then that could be the problem. You have numbers and not a title that gives a general description of the image. I just put in the same thing on each image such as: Image of tree monkey for all of the images.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Moon Le said:

Some of them shares same concepts so I must share same titles for them. 

They shouldn’t have the same title unless the contents of the photos are the same. Many of your descriptions contain information which doesn’t apply to the photos and the reviewers correctly rejected them. There are also numerous grammar mistakes so some descriptions are confusing and difficult to understand.

Shorter, simpler, clearer, more relevant descriptions would be good for both you and buyers, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Patrick Cooper said:

I note that the rejection could also be partly due to grammar errors and I do see a few of those in your descriptions. Though I do realise these can be hard to avoid if English is not your first language. 

"...ermicelli noodles is cooked with pork broth"

'Noodles' is plural (referring to more than one) so we need to use 'are' instead of 'is.'

"Visitors can walk through open areas or drive in bus to visit some endangered one."

If we're talking about a single bus, the indefinite article 'a' is required before 'bus.' If you're referring to that particular mode of transport in a more general sense, you can use the plural word 'buses.' Similarly, you're describing animals generally so you can use 'endangered ones.'

I wouldn't use 'nice' as an adjective in describing the appropriate kind of atmosphere for optimal plant growth.

Also, are there really plants that are known as hens and chicks?

Hen and chicks is a common term for the Sempervivum succulent plant - there is a main plant which forms little baby plants around the edge

Edited by photogal
clarification

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say the soup description might look better to them as:

Vietnamese Phnom Penh Soup made with Hu tieu (clear vermicelli rice noodles) in pork broth.
I've found the reviewers really get confused the more words you give them not in english. (Or simply using a European version of the word over American English.)

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, NTL Photography said:

I'd say the soup description might look better to them as:

Vietnamese Phnom Penh Soup made with Hu tieu (clear vermicelli rice noodles) in pork broth.
I've found the reviewers really get confused the more words you give them not in english. (Or simply using a European version of the word over American English.)

 

 

 

they don't get "confused " they apply the rule.   we have enough issues about reviewers not applying rules,  it's funny to have people complain when they do.. 

 

is the rule idiotic, yes in this day and age, but that's what SS an American company has decided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jean-francois.me said:

they don't get "confused " they apply the rule.   we have enough issues about reviewers not applying rules,  it's funny to have people complain when they do.. 

 

is the rule idiotic, yes in this day and age, but that's what SS an American company has decided.

Actually they have the rule that it is suppose to be translated. If I went to a vietnamese restaurant and ordered the soup even here in America it would be Pho (Or Hu Tieu) depending on the region. It is the soup with vermecilli rice noodles. Hence why I wrote that title that way.

There isn't a rule about the order of your description, so it is up to the creator to figure a way to make it understood. Because there are certain words in that title that will.make ot easier for the buyer to find what they want.

 

 

Share this post


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

Actually they have the rule that it is suppose to be translated. If I went to a vietnamese restaurant and ordered the soup even here in America it would be Pho (Or Hu Tieu) depending on the region. It is the soup with vermecilli rice noodles. Hence why I wrote that title that way.

There isn't a rule about the order of your description, so it is up to the creator to figure a way to make it understood. Because there are certain words in that title that will.make ot easier for the buyer to find what they want.

 

 

no the rule is if text appears in picture that must be translated.  

SS does not want any new foreign words in description, that's the rule. also no so called "special " characters, which means I must misspell places names on purpose (my name also)

 

regressive, yes.  and I agree it reduces chance of finding.

but the Reviewer are actually applying the rule, this time.

 

blame SS if you don't like the practice,  not the reviewers.  

 

 

Titles are not in English

  • All words must be in English and spelled correctly.
  • Acceptable non-English words that can be included in the title/description are the scientific Latin names of plants and animals and names of people, places, and locations.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well analyze the description and subtitles you use. I suppose you took a lot of time to process them and form a keyword as well as a description. I see you've been on SS long enough to know how it works. You may have accelerated a bit of the upload of so many photos and did not process the subtitles in sufficient detail. The hundred photos is a big deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/23/2019 at 6:32 PM, goran cakmazovic said:

Well analyze the description and subtitles you use. I suppose you took a lot of time to process them and form a keyword as well as a description. I see you've been on SS long enough to know how it works. You may have accelerated a bit of the upload of so many photos and did not process the subtitles in sufficient detail. The hundred photos is a big deal.

Thank you for your analysis. Yes, it took me a lot of time to form keyword format. I did think that it was because of failure in processing the bulk photos. However, today I faced the same issue. If you are interested what is going on, mind you to check my below reply for all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

Thank you very much for your comments. Please find the following replies.

1. No visible details in photo:

Agree with all of you. I did double check the photo description at Safari and yes, there were irrelevant information. I reedited & re-uploaded. Ridiculously, they rejected me with another reason: Missing Property Release. I will try again.

 

On 4/22/2019 at 9:00 PM, 1000 Words Images said:

Hello Moon :).

I see you write some extra info about things that are not visible in the photo.

Description must describe what you see on the photo. Just as the rejection says.

You have image if lets say lion and you mention in description also hippo to tell that they also life close in the area of lion. Now when customer enter keyword hippo a lion appears. 

Just describe the lion and what he is doing. Done ;)

 

On 4/22/2019 at 9:02 PM, Simone Hogan said:

I don't know why the soup pictures were rejected, but in the case of the succulents and the animals, the location is completely irrelevant to the image, and each image should be labeled with it's own description. If we are looking at a picture of a parrot, then the rest of the animals should not be mentioned. The description should be what it is we see in the picture. Bottle-feeding a lion cub is very different from a parrot. If you are not willing to take the time to do this, then don't upload 100 pictures at once.

 

On 4/22/2019 at 9:16 PM, jean-francois.me said:

Wildlife animals at Vinpearl Phu Quoc Safari, Kien Giang Province, Vietnam. They are parrots, goats, lions, giraffes.. Visitors can walk through open areas or drive in bus to visit some endangered one.

 

I don't see any Giraffes in your pictures, so why do you say there is in the description?  How would you feel as a customer looking for a Giraffe and this is what they bring you?

 

 

The soup description,  why are you using Non English words when is against SS policy? yes sometimes reviewers make mistakes and allows them for common stuff but how do they know what you wrote?  the rules are clear, only words in English dictionary.

 

all these rejections appear in line with guidelines you accepted by deciding to use SS 

 

 

On 4/23/2019 at 12:00 AM, Ricoh Mirai User Club said:

They shouldn’t have the same title unless the contents of the photos are the same. Many of your descriptions contain information which doesn’t apply to the photos and the reviewers correctly rejected them. There are also numerous grammar mistakes so some descriptions are confusing and difficult to understand.

Shorter, simpler, clearer, more relevant descriptions would be good for both you and buyers, I think.

 

2. Wrong Grammar:

Agree! I corrected some and resubmitted. Some are approved. Thank you all of you guys for correcting my bad grammar.

On 4/22/2019 at 9:48 PM, Patrick Cooper said:

I note that the rejection could also be partly due to grammar errors and I do see a few of those in your descriptions. Though I do realise these can be hard to avoid if English is not your first language. 

"...ermicelli noodles is cooked with pork broth"

'Noodles' is plural (referring to more than one) so we need to use 'are' instead of 'is.'

"Visitors can walk through open areas or drive in bus to visit some endangered one."

If we're talking about a single bus, the indefinite article 'a' is required before 'bus.' If you're referring to that particular mode of transport in a more general sense, you can use the plural word 'buses.' Similarly, you're describing animals generally so you can use 'endangered ones.'

I wouldn't use 'nice' as an adjective in describing the appropriate kind of atmosphere for optimal plant growth.

Also, are there really plants that are known as hens and chicks?

 

On 4/22/2019 at 11:22 PM, Seth Michael said:

Definitely would lean toward issues with the grammar and terms used that are not related to the actual contents of the image as called out by Patrick and Jean-Francois as being the cause of the rejections.

On 4/22/2019 at 9:01 PM, Lost Mountain Studio said:

Unfortunately human reviewers make errors or are sometimes lazy.  That can be extremely frustrating.  I suggest you report the batch numbers to contributor support so that the reviewer can be flagged for one of the above reasons and resubmit.  While I realize how frustrating that is, it’s about all we can do.  

While I can understand some of the title rejections, I think this was a case of the reviewer getting lazy and not dealing with the images individually.

 

On 4/22/2019 at 11:58 PM, David P. Smith said:

THe one thing that I noticed is that the rejection is for the TITLE and not the description. If when you submitted them you used the title that you gave such as: 4. 1376888597 - Set of animal photos (16 photos in different styles) Then that could be the problem. You have numbers and not a title that gives a general description of the image. I just put in the same thing on each image such as: Image of tree monkey for all of the images.

 

3. Translate strange names into English. I tried.

A. I googled the exact name of them in English: For example the succulent plants (Chick and hens). Thanks for Photogal's reply & explanation to Patrick Coooper's question. And yes, all of my succulent plant photos were rejected! Then I resubmitted new description (ref. text below). They were all approved. Apparently my previous submission (rejected under Tittle reason) was wrongly judged.

Succulent plants are growing widely in highland areas, Dalat City. 
The nice atmosphere brings benefits for the plants to grow in bundle. 
There are many types such as burro tail, crown of thorns, hens & chicks

 

B. I tried my best to translate the Vietnamese proper name of food into English. I even explained what it is with a hope that will make reviewers understand and ease their time for reviewing. Since there is no rule says that I can not use NON ENGLISH words. And I did clearly explained what is the food/plant in the description. You guys could understand what I wrote and correct me in spite of my wrong grammar. So how come the reviewer did not understand any thing at all and rejected from the plant to the food photos with only one shared simple reason: Tittle - Title must be descriptive of the subject matter and must be in English. Titles cannot contain special characters, spelling/grammar errors, or repeat words/phrases in excess. ?

On 4/23/2019 at 3:14 AM, photogal said:

Hen and chicks is a common term for the Sempervivum succulent plant - there is a main plant which forms little baby plants around the edge

 

On 4/23/2019 at 3:55 AM, NTL Photography said:

I'd say the soup description might look better to them as:

Vietnamese Phnom Penh Soup made with Hu tieu (clear vermicelli rice noodles) in pork broth.
I've found the reviewers really get confused the more words you give them not in english. (Or simply using a European version of the word over American English.)

 

 

 

 

On 4/23/2019 at 12:42 PM, NTL Photography said:

Actually they have the rule that it is suppose to be translated. If I went to a vietnamese restaurant and ordered the soup even here in America it would be Pho (Or Hu Tieu) depending on the region. It is the soup with vermecilli rice noodles. Hence why I wrote that title that way.

There isn't a rule about the order of your description, so it is up to the creator to figure a way to make it understood. Because there are certain words in that title that will.make ot easier for the buyer to find what they want.

 

 

 

 

On 4/23/2019 at 1:58 PM, jean-francois.me said:

no the rule is if text appears in picture that must be translated.  

SS does not want any new foreign words in description, that's the rule. also no so called "special " characters, which means I must misspell places names on purpose (my name also)

 

regressive, yes.  and I agree it reduces chance of finding.

but the Reviewer are actually applying the rule, this time.

 

blame SS if you don't like the practice,  not the reviewers.  

 

 

Titles are not in English

  • All words must be in English and spelled correctly.
  • Acceptable non-English words that can be included in the title/description are the scientific Latin names of plants and animals and names of people, places, and locations.

 

 

 

4. Rule is Rule:

Totally agree with you. But on 20 April, I submitted a set of photos, same concept, same style. They were approved. On the next day, I reedited some numbers in the description, and they all appear in my photos. But all of them are rejected (ref. photo below). Do you recognize that my photos are similiar, even the descriptions? The differences are: Photo IDs and the approved ones get technical issues: Dirty white background. That is why I wanted to resubmit and delete the approved ones later. But I got mad when the quick rejections come. Luckily, they leave me proof that Shutterstock Reviewers are neglectful.

I would rather get the other rejected reasons that are persuasive and prove that Shutterstock reviewers are really working hard on our cases, just the same like us - all Shutterstock contributors are working hard. Some of you may say that each reviewers have their own ways. But Shutterstock have ONLY SET OF RULES, I do not care who are the reviewers. I care if I do right or wrong and Shutterstock Reviewers must pay the same respect.

They can not say Yes then fluctuate dramatically, say No, without trying to make the company rule consistent. They approved my photos, I submitted more - the same ones, they rejected such with a non-sense reason: Tittles.

So who does not follow the rule here?

1013503790_Shutterstockbadreviewers.thumb.png.f2b3fdaf1dd948674d5a7401a0ff4f5a.png 

On 4/23/2019 at 11:26 AM, jean-francois.me said:

they don't get "confused " they apply the rule.   we have enough issues about reviewers not applying rules,  it's funny to have people complain when they do.. 

 

is the rule idiotic, yes in this day and age, but that's what SS an American company has decided.

 

5. Why did I make novel or a long description?

You guys can practice on Google how to maximize your earnings via the tactics you input in your novels. The more you do, the more you earn. Ref: https://www.shutterstock.com/contributorsupport/articles/kbat02/000011450

7 hours ago, joachim affeldt said:

Why do you write novels when you want to write photo captions ?

 

6. Resubmitting, Apologies, and Rejection again:

I did resubmit plant and numbers photos, they are all approved. I also made complaint to Shutterstock as one of you recommended me to open a ticket to feedback their reviewers. I got Shutterstock apologies for the inconvenience and I have not get time to reply to them until now.

However, today I submitted some new batches, and again, the same issue: Tittles - Title must be descriptive of the subject matter and must be in English. Titles cannot contain special characters, spelling/grammar errors, or repeat words/phrases in excess.

I fail to trust Shutterstock reviewers.

 

A. 11 photos of Dahlia flowers: Rejection reason: Tittles

I wrote a description of Dahlia flowers. At first, I did not know what is the name of the flowers and reached a gardener for the flowers' information. Hence, my description is as following. So what is wrong with the Tittles?

Beautiful dahlia flowers can range from dinnerplate size to petite pompoms. There are 42 species of dahlia, with hybrids commonly grown as garden plants.Dahlias are hungry plants and grow better when they are fertilized. 

 

image.thumb.png.61c6dee8fc772bb03009abfd020b50bd.png

 

 

B. 2 photos of Mi Quang (Quang noodles): Rejection reason: Tittles

Description:

Quang Noodles with pork and shrimp (Mi Quang, Vietnamese cuisine): In Danang, it's a lot easier to find a place to eat Mi Quang than to eat Pho. Danang people can eat Mi Quang anytime of the day. 

 

image.thumb.png.17c3cb7e4f5b04faffafc98846f4b184.png

 

C. 8 photos of Seoul Station, Korea:

My wrong is that I forget to select Editorial. Surprisingly that my description style is different from the usual one - Commercial. I wonder why the reviewers did not recognize it since there is nothing saying that I am wrongly selecting a wrong category? Again, I doubt that Shutterstock is using a rockie reviewer.

 

Description:

Seoul Station, Seoul - Korea: 12 Sep, 2016: Unknown passengers at Seoul station. It serves dozen daily routes from Seoul to other provinces in Korea. It's huge and has many floors led to KTX trains

image.thumb.png.d409a9fdc3d155769560671417ffab79.png

 

D. 9 photos of picking beetroots: Rejection reason: Tittles
This one is resubmitted. I reedited the description. Please do not say that the 90k VND is listed as special characters. I have used them a dozen times and they were approved.

Picking up beetroots at a farm in Dalat city. With a ticket of 90k VND, tourists can sightseeing and harvest beetroots or sweet potatoes... Each is supplied a basket or a dosser to carry their harvest

 

image.thumb.png.34be51916cb7b2a2926eb870ab397013.png

 

From my previous rejection to today's. I totally believe that we are treated unfairly by Shutterstock reviewer team. They keep saying rule but they never practice it well with lazy analytical minds. They abuse our time, money spending for the contribution. Let's say, will Shutterstock return us money (that they pay for freelance reviewers) for the photos which were previously rejected then approved again? Don't that cost Shutterstock Contributors' time + facilities + money just for resubmitting?

 

 

 

image.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Moon Le said:

From my previous rejection to today's. I totally believe that we are treated unfairly by Shutterstock reviewer team. They keep saying rule but they never practice it well with lazy analytical minds. They abuse our time, money spending for the contribution. Let's say, will Shutterstock return us money (that they pay for freelance reviewers) for the photos which were previously rejected then approved again? Don't that cost Shutterstock Contributors' time + facilities + money just for resubmitting?

No, you’re wasting reviewers time with your bizarre descriptions. You should be made to pay reviewers a bonus for making them wade through your long-winded, meandering sentences. Long descriptions may be fine if they’re well written. Yours are not, they contain numerous grammatical and lexical errors which make them difficult to understand. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Moon Le said:

 

They abuse our time, money spending for the contribution. Let's say, will Shutterstock return us money (that they pay for freelance reviewers) for the photos which were previously rejected then approved again? Don't that cost Shutterstock Contributors' time + facilities + money just for resubmitting?

 

It doesn't cost us any money to submit photos to SS. It's free. There may be occasions when contributors spend money in order to produce content but you make it sound like submitting images is an expensive exercise when clearly it's not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/22/2019 at 9:49 PM, Moon Le said:

 

There are more of my photos rejected among this ~100 photos. I dont have time to check all.

All contributors for Shutterstock spent a lot of time for creating photos, then describe all effortlessly. But today I feel disappointed with Shutterstock reviewers' reject reasons. It proves the reviewers' inability to smartly widen their knowledge on the contents of product they are qualifying except the look. I tried to introduce the food, the destination, the creativity; however, the reviewers prefer checking the technical end instead of the stories behind each photos. Contents that are so famous to others but strange to the reviewers' world are enough to make them switch "reject" automatically without any close checking why and how. We need a human reviewer, not a machine.

Thank you.

 

Hey Moon Le,

Understand it must have been very frustrating for you. Your time and effort spent on the rejected batch and also time having to re-edit /re-upload the whole batch again.

Having said that, I don't think it is right to include other contributors and put the blame on SS reviewers team based on your own files rejection and complaining that it wasted our time and then questioned them for compensation. SS never asked anybody to upload any of our images. I mean just try to put your feet in the reviewer's shoes for a minute, (either they are human beings or AI algorithms) they are far from perfect. Plus, they have to review a lot more files everyday. And don't we all make mistakes sometimes too?

In future, perhaps try incorporate a little tweak to your workflow, eg: to upload your files and submit them in smaller batches for approval. Either they get approved/disapproved, you can still improvise and upload/reupload from there on to be more time effective on your side?

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Moon Le said:

Hi all,

Thank you very much for your comments. Please find the following replies.

1. No visible details in photo:

Agree with all of you. I did double check the photo description at Safari and yes, there were irrelevant information. I reedited & re-uploaded. Ridiculously, they rejected me with another reason: Missing Property Release. I will try again.

 

 

 

 

 

2. Wrong Grammar:

Agree! I corrected some and resubmitted. Some are approved. Thank you all of you guys for correcting my bad grammar.

 

 

 

3. Translate strange names into English. I tried.

A. I googled the exact name of them in English: For example the succulent plants (Chick and hens). Thanks for Photogal's reply & explanation to Patrick Coooper's question. And yes, all of my succulent plant photos were rejected! Then I resubmitted new description (ref. text below). They were all approved. Apparently my previous submission (rejected under Tittle reason) was wrongly judged.


Succulent plants are growing widely in highland areas, Dalat City. 
The nice atmosphere brings benefits for the plants to grow in bundle. 
There are many types such as burro tail, crown of thorns, hens & chicks

 

B. I tried my best to translate the Vietnamese proper name of food into English. I even explained what it is with a hope that will make reviewers understand and ease their time for reviewing. Since there is no rule says that I can not use NON ENGLISH words. And I did clearly explained what is the food/plant in the description. You guys could understand what I wrote and correct me in spite of my wrong grammar. So how come the reviewer did not understand any thing at all and rejected from the plant to the food photos with only one shared simple reason: Tittle - Title must be descriptive of the subject matter and must be in English. Titles cannot contain special characters, spelling/grammar errors, or repeat words/phrases in excess. ?

 

 

 

 

4. Rule is Rule:

Totally agree with you. But on 20 April, I submitted a set of photos, same concept, same style. They were approved. On the next day, I reedited some numbers in the description, and they all appear in my photos. But all of them are rejected (ref. photo below). Do you recognize that my photos are similiar, even the descriptions? The differences are: Photo IDs and the approved ones get technical issues: Dirty white background. That is why I wanted to resubmit and delete the approved ones later. But I got mad when the quick rejections come. Luckily, they leave me proof that Shutterstock Reviewers are neglectful.

I would rather get the other rejected reasons that are persuasive and prove that Shutterstock reviewers are really working hard on our cases, just the same like us - all Shutterstock contributors are working hard. Some of you may say that each reviewers have their own ways. But Shutterstock have ONLY SET OF RULES, I do not care who are the reviewers. I care if I do right or wrong and Shutterstock Reviewers must pay the same respect.

They can not say Yes then fluctuate dramatically, say No, without trying to make the company rule consistent. They approved my photos, I submitted more - the same ones, they rejected such with a non-sense reason: Tittles.

So who does not follow the rule here?

1013503790_Shutterstockbadreviewers.thumb.png.f2b3fdaf1dd948674d5a7401a0ff4f5a.png 

 

5. Why did I make novel or a long description?

You guys can practice on Google how to maximize your earnings via the tactics you input in your novels. The more you do, the more you earn. Ref: https://www.shutterstock.com/contributorsupport/articles/kbat02/000011450

 

6. Resubmitting, Apologies, and Rejection again:

I did resubmit plant and numbers photos, they are all approved. I also made complaint to Shutterstock as one of you recommended me to open a ticket to feedback their reviewers. I got Shutterstock apologies for the inconvenience and I have not get time to reply to them until now.

However, today I submitted some new batches, and again, the same issue: Tittles - Title must be descriptive of the subject matter and must be in English. Titles cannot contain special characters, spelling/grammar errors, or repeat words/phrases in excess.

I fail to trust Shutterstock reviewers.

 

A. 11 photos of Dahlia flowers: Rejection reason: Tittles

I wrote a description of Dahlia flowers. At first, I did not know what is the name of the flowers and reached a gardener for the flowers' information. Hence, my description is as following. So what is wrong with the Tittles?


Beautiful dahlia flowers can range from dinnerplate size to petite pompoms. There are 42 species of dahlia, with hybrids commonly grown as garden plants.Dahlias are hungry plants and grow better when they are fertilized. 

 

image.thumb.png.61c6dee8fc772bb03009abfd020b50bd.png

 

 

B. 2 photos of Mi Quang (Quang noodles): Rejection reason: Tittles

Description:


Quang Noodles with pork and shrimp (Mi Quang, Vietnamese cuisine): In Danang, it's a lot easier to find a place to eat Mi Quang than to eat Pho. Danang people can eat Mi Quang anytime of the day. 

 

image.thumb.png.17c3cb7e4f5b04faffafc98846f4b184.png

 

C. 8 photos of Seoul Station, Korea:

My wrong is that I forget to select Editorial. Surprisingly that my description style is different from the usual one - Commercial. I wonder why the reviewers did not recognize it since there is nothing saying that I am wrongly selecting a wrong category? Again, I doubt that Shutterstock is using a rockie reviewer.

 

Description:


Seoul Station, Seoul - Korea: 12 Sep, 2016: Unknown passengers at Seoul station. It serves dozen daily routes from Seoul to other provinces in Korea. It's huge and has many floors led to KTX trains

image.thumb.png.d409a9fdc3d155769560671417ffab79.png

 

D. 9 photos of picking beetroots: Rejection reason: Tittles
This one is resubmitted. I reedited the description. Please do not say that the 90k VND is listed as special characters. I have used them a dozen times and they were approved.


Picking up beetroots at a farm in Dalat city. With a ticket of 90k VND, tourists can sightseeing and harvest beetroots or sweet potatoes... Each is supplied a basket or a dosser to carry their harvest

 

image.thumb.png.34be51916cb7b2a2926eb870ab397013.png

 

From my previous rejection to today's. I totally believe that we are treated unfairly by Shutterstock reviewer team. They keep saying rule but they never practice it well with lazy analytical minds. They abuse our time, money spending for the contribution. Let's say, will Shutterstock return us money (that they pay for freelance reviewers) for the photos which were previously rejected then approved again? Don't that cost Shutterstock Contributors' time + facilities + money just for resubmitting?

 

 

 

image.png

 i would never expect SS to compensate me for trying to not follow the rules 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/30/2019 at 1:30 PM, chyworks said:

Hey Moon Le,

Understand it must have been very frustrating for you. Your time and effort spent on the rejected batch and also time having to re-edit /re-upload the whole batch again.

Having said that, I don't think it is right to include other contributors and put the blame on SS reviewers team based on your own files rejection and complaining that it wasted our time and then questioned them for compensation. SS never asked anybody to upload any of our images. I mean just try to put your feet in the reviewer's shoes for a minute, (either they are human beings or AI algorithms) they are far from perfect. Plus, they have to review a lot more files everyday. And don't we all make mistakes sometimes too?

In future, perhaps try incorporate a little tweak to your workflow, eg: to upload your files and submit them in smaller batches for approval. Either they get approved/disapproved, you can still improvise and upload/reupload from there on to be more time effective on your side?

Cheers.

Yes, I did as you said before, submitted in smaller batches, divided my photos in multiple parts, but then it caused a problem that I resubmit duplicated photos. I found it take a lot of time for both sides. It was not effective at all.

I don't question for compensation. Just like you said, try my feet in the reviewers, so I did ask for the reviewers' turn. The reviewers work for money, so do I. But I don't see any of their responsibilities in reviewing my photos. That is why I raise my concerns.

If you read through all my photos that were rejected, you may understand what I mean.

On 4/30/2019 at 9:39 AM, Ricoh Mirai User Club said:

No, you’re wasting reviewers time with your bizarre descriptions. You should be made to pay reviewers a bonus for making them wade through your long-winded, meandering sentences. Long descriptions may be fine if they’re well written. Yours are not, they contain numerous grammatical and lexical errors which make them difficult to understand. 

So are you saying because they don't understand, they can freely make default Rejection Reason for all of my different batches: Tittles - Title must be descriptive of the subject matter and must be in English. Titles cannot contain special characters, spelling/grammar errors, or repeat words/phrases in excess.

Have you read through my sharing and have you read through Shutterstock rule for contributors?

On 4/30/2019 at 10:23 AM, Patrick Cooper said:

It doesn't cost us any money to submit photos to SS. It's free. There may be occasions when contributors spend money in order to produce content but you make it sound like submitting images is an expensive exercise when clearly it's not. 

I may use wrong English. No US. It costs me many things to submit photo for SS. SS is as other Image Agencies- sell and buy photos. They set the rule, I follow, but some of their reviewers do not follow it. That is why I raise this topic, at least SS will be aware of their reviewers and how hard they really are doing their work.

 

 

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

×
×
  • Create New...