Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Firn said:

I don't know what DP is, but is it possible that they are handling things like Alamy does

DepositPhoto. And no, as far as I know, they do not handle it like A...y (which I like). Bt maybe I am wrong?

BTT:

I don't think it's much fun beating up the TO here. 
It's like an NBA team playing basketball against a bunch of dwarves. Somehow embarrassing.  

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

I've submitted about 150 unique images in the past 3 weeks since I joined. Over 130 have been accepted. Vast majority of the ones that were rejected were due to them being copies of the originals as they were taken many years ago, so weren't sharp or had lost too much quality. Also had to re-submit a small batch as editorial - all of which were then accepted.

Was a decent enough experience for me personally.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Shawn Eastman Photography said:

I've submitted about 150 unique images in the past 3 weeks since I joined. Over 130 have been accepted. Vast majority of the ones that were rejected were due to them being copies of the originals as they were taken many years ago, so weren't sharp or had lost too much quality. Also had to re-submit a small batch as editorial - all of which were then accepted.

Was a decent enough experience for me personally.

Looks like you've made a great start. Good luck. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2019 at 4:20 PM, Adam Horton said:

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

A few things. First the AS reviewer should be fired. Second, even after a week of flying, shooting, drinking and various other activities, this is the best news I’ve seen in a while. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Adam, 

Given the responses you've gotten already, I'm sure you won't even read this far but. . . 

You obviously got sucked in by one of Shutterstock's Ads implying you can make big bucks by uploading the photos on your hard drive.  It's not that easy!  Most of the individuals that have responded to your post are experienced photographers (check out their portfolios) with investments in equipment that could be ten times the price of your extreme zoom point and shoot camera. 

The acceptance process is only the first step, the real test is whether your accepted images are something a buyer is willing to download and pay for.  The competition for those downloads is tremendous with over 1.5 million new photos added every week. The real question is, "are your images better or at least competitive here at Shutterstock" (no matter how good you think they are).

While admittedly not overly kind, the consensus of the responders (and the reviewer for that matter), felt your images were not "good enough".  You can either swallow your pride and assume your images need improvement and then strive to learn what it takes to "be competitive" or you can continue to blame Shutterstock.  It's your choice, but only one will make you any real money here, or at AS. 

As Firn mentioned, there are people here willing to help you learn and understand what it takes to make money in the Microstock industry but it will take an attitude adjustment on your part.  That's is the first step and whether you take that is entirely up to you.  Hope to see you around!     

 

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

Just hope he won’t further misinterpret into buying expensive gears would eliminate his rejection or to becoming better photographer by having a professional camera. 😅

I agree.  It seems like an interesting camera, but in looking at the customer photos from the link below, it seems as though the pictures are just not that sharp.  

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1127274-REG/nikon_26499_coolpix_p900_digital_camera.html?gclid=Cj0KCQjwjrvpBRC0ARIsAFrFuV9ssOVanpdbGPSP72heddkkNIskWPVIThCH71SrFsrWUG7Egw9EZwQaAgzQEALw_wcB

I don't know if the optics are bad, or if people are shooting this thing at the 35mm equivalent of 2000mm without any kind of camera support that's rendering such soft images.

I noticed the same thing in the OP's images, too.  Most look soft to me.  It seems that the first question the OP should ask is, "What am I doing wrong to get so many rejections?"  Then, the second question should be, "What do I need to do to get better results from my camera?"  I do think better results can be had, but it's going to take more introspection than simply blaming SS for what are, ostensibly, the photographer's problems.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, fotomak said:

Thanks. I would really like to know your opinion of What makes it so good that you posted it here as an example of mk4. It is an exceptional camera and this doesn't show it.

The details in the sky and beach, the contrast of warm colors from the sunset on the right to the cool colors of the storm clouds on the left and above. It is sharp, colorful, and well-composed with a lot of rich detail.  I think it shows off what the camera can do very well, but if it's not to your liking - just say so.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Adam, 

you have three problems
1. Nikon COOLPIX P900 Digital Camera is a bad camera. This is a digital compact, it has a small matrix and even no RAW
I'm sure your photos are rejected at least because of the big noise.
2. You are bad at shooting. For example, the American flag. Flag in the gray sky. Why gray sky? Where is the blue, attractive sky? A Beautiful Rain Storm in Florida. What is it?
3. Your photos have no commercial value.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe its sharp. If the subject are the Palm trees, they are lost with all the light in the back, it looks overexposed. The transition between tones is bad, you are missing smooth transition, there are no colors in the photo, drab blues and what looks like smear of dirt behind the trees.

Mk4 is a phenomenal camera with amazing dynamic range, I am absolutely sure the scene was amazing, but you missed it. There are hundreds of different ways to make the scene amazing.

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...