Jump to content

Horrible! Don't waste your time submitting photos to Shutterstock!


Recommended Posts

Shutterstock rejected all but 2 out of 101 photos I submitted to Shutterstock, yet Adobe Stock accepted 60 photos of the same 101 photos I submitted to Shutterstock. I am using a Nikon P900 camera so there is no way that all but 2 of the 101 photos I submitted to Shutterstock should be rejected. Such 101 photos I submitted to Shutterstock are clear and gorgeous and I worked so hard in the heat to obtain them. Adobe Stock only rejected photos of the same 101 photos I sumbitted to Shutterstock that had trade marks, logos etc and a few photos that had noise issues. And although some of such photos had noise issues they were clear and gorgeous. I'm sorry but, I think Shutterstock is rejecting photos on purpose to keep payouts down or to prevent new contributors from making more sales than current top Shutterstock contributors. Whatever the reason is for Shutterstock wrongfully rejecting so many gorgeous photos, it seems very shady that Shutterstock would do such a thing. I also noticed that other Shutterstock contributors are saying that they are getting their accounts hacked and their money from their sales on Shutterstock stolen on another Shutterstock forum. Could Shutterstock be doing that? Unless you voluntarily give someone your password or download a virus, there is no way that anyone but a Shutterstock administrator can hack into your Shutterstock contributor account and steal money from your sales. Administrators can steal from their users easily, because they see everything that their users enter and do on their website, but they aren't supposed to do that because them doing so is illegal and they are supposed to be trustworthy. Shutterstock contributors beware! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 306
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Actually, as a hobbyist myself, I am glad to get some rejections lately. It forces me to critically take another look at my photos that were rejected. I learn from it and avoid mistakes in the future.

Is there a reason why you bring the President of the United States into this forum? Stick to your Brexit and Royals - you have enough on your plate. Work on your photography to. 

As far back as I can remember, and I've been here since October, 2013, I don't recall anyone - newbie or veteran - telling others that everyone else should stop uploading because they got a bunch of r

Posted Images

On 7/13/2019 at 9:20 AM, Adam Horton said:

Whatever the reason is for Shutterstock wrongfully rejecting so many gorgeous photos, it seems very shady that Shutterstock would do such a thing.

Or maybe your photos are really bad and reviewers took their job seriously for a change. Seriously, have you looked at the garbage that gets accepted these days on Shutterstock?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe there are a few decent reviewers left?  Threads like these let me think theres hope.

 

Getting 60 out of 100 on AS is a really bad ratio as well.

If you're THAT interested in why things got rejected post some images and the rejection reasons so people can take an impartial look at it.

Unless you voluntarily give someone your password or download a virus, there is no way that anyone but a Shutterstock administrator can hack into your Shutterstock contributor account and steal money from your sales. 

Simply isnt true as anyone that knows the basics of IT security can testify to.

So show us some images (100% size) and rejection reasons then people can give constructive criticism.  But given the 40% rejections on AS im suspecting the images themselves might be the problem - thats a really bad acceptance rate there too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Check your photos and pay attention to what they are rejecting them for. The first few batches of photos should be your training period in figuring out what is accepted at Shutterstock.

Yes, Shutterstock does have other issues. But really, it is probably better to focus on the photo issue if you want something solved and actually use Shutterstock.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you telling us not to waste our time submitting photos to Shutterstock when you are the one who had 99 out of 101 photos rejected, not us?
For most of us it is rather the opposite. We might get 2 images rejected on a weekend from time to time, but most of our work gets accepted. That's the normal case, you are the exception, otherwise the millions of contriibutors here would have stopped submitting years ago.
It leads to the not so unreasonable conclusion that the problem might not be the Shutterstuck reviewers, but possibly you? At least that would have been the conclusion I would have drawn if I was in your shoes and had such a drastic rejection rate with an agency known for having very low quality standards.

There are many really nice contributors here who are willing to help out other contributors - new and old, give them advice how to fix rejected image and improve their photos, but you do not seem to even consider that the rejection reason might have something to do with the quality of your photos, so helping you will be tough. Most of all because you are not asking for help but want us to stay away from Shutterstock because it did not work out for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2019 at 8:20 PM, Adam Horton said:

although some of such photos had noise issues they were clear and gorgeous.

If the rest were anything like this, they should've been rejected.  Glad someone finally got a reviewer who was doing their job.

Really, it takes so little effort to shoot a straight horizon.  

waves-atlantic-ocean-washing-ashore-600w

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Phil Lowe said:

And, strangely enough, I just had several batches totaling 81 images approved over the last three weeks without a single rejection.  Why should I stop submitting?

no rejections,  you're not trying hard enough! I 😉.  all mine were random press release, and one night event where i knew noise was a bit high, but since even if rejected SS encourages you to "try again" i gave it a shot,  because it could easily be used 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Phil Lowe said:

You can't just upload snapshots here without some consideration for providing accurate titles, descriptions, and keywords!  

Phil, not only is it not a mourning dove, what difference does it make what beach it is on?   And there only 7 or 8 keywords, of which "bird", "mourning dove", "dove", "ibis", etc. are not even included.  And then people wonder why they aren't making any sales.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have to agree with you on that, Adam Horton.

Looking at your portfolio... i am speechless too why SS rejected your “gorgeous” photographs.

After all, those photos are taken by not just any cameras but the NIKON p900.

Sincerely wish all those who take photos as clear and gorgeous as yours will feel the same horribleness as you and stop submitting to SS from now on. You are really doing a favour for SS. Trust me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to defend the TO, his photos are really not the roar, but also not worse than those of some newcomers from the Indian subcontinent. But I want to contribute to this thread with a little anecdote about the relationship of newcomers to MS agencies:

When I had already been with SS and several other agencies for some time and had uploaded more than 2000 pictures, I applied to DP for unknown reasons. The application process (I don't remember exactly, I think 5 or 10 photos) went smoothly. Then I wanted to upload, and to speed things up, I batched and uploaded 500 pictures. My first batch at this agency. You can calculate the acceptance rate without a calculator in your head. There were exactly 0 pictures. The agency actually rejected all 500 pictures. Had they rejected 100 or 200, I wouldn't have been happy either, but I might have thought "Ok, strict, good agency with high quality standard". But all 500, that was a bit too heavy and I felt stupid. Account of course deleted.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, geogif said:

 

When I had already been with SS and several other agencies for some time and had uploaded more than 2000 pictures, I applied to DP for unknown reasons. The application process (I don't remember exactly, I think 5 or 10 photos) went smoothly. Then I wanted to upload, and to speed things up, I batched and uploaded 500 pictures. My first batch at this agency. You can calculate the acceptance rate without a calculator in your head. There were exactly 0 pictures. The agency actually rejected all 500 pictures. Had they rejected 100 or 200, I wouldn't have been happy either, but I might have thought "Ok, strict, good agency with high quality standard". But all 500, that was a bit too heavy and I felt stupid. Account of course deleted.

 

I don't know what DP is, but is it possible that they are handling things like Alamy does and if there is one single image in a batch that gets rejected, the whole batch gets rejected? It's either all or nothing over there.

(And you are right, his photos don't seem to be worse than some other stuff I have seen being accepted, but I think the offputting part here is his attitude and how he seems to think his images are brilliant masterpieces and Shutterstock is just being mean, without even considereing the possibility that his images might need some improvement)

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...