Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Starsphinx said:

Makes you wonder if someones screen is out of focus.......

 

All resubmitted and as per usual something magic happens during that upload. The FTP server must be magic because its fixed the focus issues and all accepted.
The same magic-ftp also fixes noise/grain/model release/similar content and other issues simply by uploading a 2nd time...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Richard Whitcombe said:

This week they dont seem to do noise any more - gone back to mass focus rejections instead.

DSLRs, Drones and Mobile phones.  Turns out none of them can focus even in bright sunlight this week.

Yeah, amazing. You'd think that with 100 years of development the camera manufacturers would at least have got their focus right. Although it could be the manufacturers of the reviewers glasses that haven't got their focus right. Or it could be the layers of peanut butter and jam on the glasses that's the problem. 😛

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like everything is out of focus. :blink: (I agree with one photo, but the rest... It's like every reviewer has set "reject as out of focus" as their auto-reply.)

Share this post


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

Seems like everything is out of focus. :blink: (I agree with one photo, but the rest... It's like every reviewer has set "reject as out of focus" as their auto-reply.)

+1

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I finally got it too.
Until now I only knew the creative rejections from my videos. 
But now SS has sent a (nearly) whole batch of photos to Nirvana, 15 of 16 submissions were rejected. 
Some for "noise", some for "focus" and the rest for "noise" and "focus". 
The pictures were taken with 3 different cameras during the last 4 weeks. Pictures from the same series, in exactly the same quality, SS has already accepted .   

I would like to apologize formally and from the bottom of my heart to the reviewers who had to expose themselves to the agony of these pictures.
I'm really sorry to have submitted such pixel junk. I promise to make amends. 
But at least SS can enjoy a bit of schadenfreude. 
The incompetent reviewers from AS etc. let the pictures through. 
Now they have to deal with the justified complaints of the buyers. 
So, from my side again a big compliment for the excellent good work and a thank you to the reviewers of SS. 
Please, keep up the good work, you are on the right track. 

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can (still) cope with search engine tweaks and other means to up their revenue while lowering ours but what I can no longer cope with is corrupted reviewers and support (which seems to stand behind these kind of practices)

They have finally succeeded in forcing me to completely stop uploading to SS and continue with the competition. I highly doubt it is SS intentions to chase away their contributors but it seems their reviewers and support can pretty do much whatever they want to us so it is what it is and it looks like we are the ones that have to adapt to the situation. Now I'm not going into much detail about the image and rejection but let me just say that I asked for proof for rejection and they could not even provide it. I will also say that after 10 years in the business and removing even dust spots from my images I know when an image is sharp or not.

I've actually had issues with them since day one and had to contact admins many times to rectify their mistakes so yes they were good in the first place. To this day I still get the same bs but since most admins seem to have left the building they all get free play.

I might leave my portfolio up or might decide to delete a few hundred images like I did in the past but what I will definitely do is stop uploading to this place thanks to their reviewers and support team! I hope no one had to go trough the same experience I've had with these people!

My apologies though to their customers for the lack of new material because all we want to do is continue to create imagery and footage they can use in their projects and in return make us proud of our hard work.

My portfolio would be more then double if it wasn't for them, not because of rejected material because they all get online eventually but because I lost motivation to continue uploading. For them it's just a click of button, for us it's very demotivating and a lot of extra work because we have to re-upload, add metadata( and note) again before submitting images that should have been approved in the first place. Add to that the frustration we get for these random unjustified rejections. To me this is unprofessional behaviour and does not belong in this business but I guess that is to be expected with pennystock.

I can no longer convince myself to upload to Shutterstock. I'm tired playing their silly games!

Good luck and take care peeps!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I invariably have timelapse videos rejected for "Noise / Grain".

These are shot in RAW on a Fuji X-T3 at base ISO, color corrected in Lightroom, checked at 200% for noise or grain, exported full-size as TIFF then imported into FCPX where they're downsampled from the original 26 Megapixel image to fit in an 8 Megapixels 3840x2160 timeline before being exported as ProRes 422. Not a smidgeon of noise, grain, or compression artifacts anywhere, yet they are rejected 80% of the time.

I often submit a single still from the timelapse as an image, if I consider it particularly visually appealing, which is always accepted, but not the video.

Rejected.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Barry Paterson said:

I invariably have timelapse videos rejected for "Noise / Grain".

These are shot in RAW on a Fuji X-T3 at base ISO, color corrected in Lightroom, checked at 200% for noise or grain, exported full-size as TIFF then imported into FCPX where they're downsampled from the original 26 Megapixel image to fit in an 8 Megapixels 3840x2160 timeline before being exported as ProRes 422. Not a smidgeon of noise, grain, or compression artifacts anywhere, yet they are rejected 80% of the time.

I often submit a single still from the timelapse as an image, if I consider it particularly visually appealing, which is always accepted, but not the video.

Rejected.png

I've had rejected a clip of my brother cathing a fish at dusk more than 20 times here in SS for noise. During that time the clip has already sold in P5 and AS.

fisherman-standing-seashore-hooks-fish-6

It is the same scenery of the image, and not, there is not that much noise. 


Seems like impossible to get accepted anything shot at "low-light hours"

Their lost I guess...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Submission of 20 images all rejected off the bat for titles.... I thought maybe I had made a mistake at submission and maybe overwritten al with one, but no.

Exactly same format I have used for THOUSANDS of wildlife submissions, describing what it is, what it's doing and where, all:

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

 

WTF????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, this rejection stuff is getting really weird and frustrating. I had an image rejected yesterday that was rejected because "This image has already been accepted into our collection." Does that mean that someone else has a similar image and so they won't accept mine? I don't have this image in my SS portfolio so I have no idea what they are talking about. The full name of the image is "Pima Point viewed from South Rim of the Grand Canyon at dusk" and my SS portfolio is at www.shutterstock.com/g/kallen1979 in case anyone doesn't believe me. I'm at a loss on this one. I think that I will stop submitting to SS and just submit to AS and iS only. SS is just getting too weird.

Weird SS rejection.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not exactly a rejection excuse, but tonight a reviewer simply did not feel like reviewing some of my photos. Had a small batch with all commercial photos waiting to be reviewed, all were reviewed this morning expect for two. Ironically photos of the same subject with the property release I had trouble getting approved before because the reviwer would not look at the property release. This one did not seem to know what to do with them so just left them untouched.
But I guess it's still better than having them rejected because the reviewer was overstrained with the task of deciding whether he should approve or reject them and just rolled a dice. I just hope these will be reviewed eventually and not sit there forever now.

 

I don't submit photos with property releases all that often. Is it always such a hassle to get them approved?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, oleschwander said:

It’s a mystery if SS don’t demand property release for the clothing of your (cute) dogs ...!?

Would not be a problem if they did, as I sewed most of them myself. 😊

But Shutterstock usually does not require property releases for clothing, unless they are one-of a kind designer clothes. But everything that is mass produced usually does not require any release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took with f:11 and had reject but other micro stock sites approved all serie and publish my images.I am really confused about viewer of SS.I think They even want the powdered sugar "focus" on the ground !Although they clearly say they don't want an image, I don't waste my time here 😞

IMG_9487.jpg

Share this post


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

Not exactly a rejection excuse, but tonight a reviewer simply did not feel like reviewing some of my photos. Had a small batch with all commercial photos waiting to be reviewed, all were reviewed this morning expect for two. Ironically photos of the same subject with the property release I had trouble getting approved before because the reviewer would not look at the property release. This one did not seem to know what to do with them so just left them untouched.
But I guess it's still better than having them rejected because the reviewer was overstrained with the task of deciding whether he should approve or reject them and just rolled a dice. I just hope these will be reviewed eventually and not sit there forever now.

 

I don't submit photos with property releases all that often. Is it always such a hassle to get them approved?

Hmmm... another batch reviewed and these two images were left behind again. 😞 Guess I'll have to re-submit them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I don't really know what to do here?
After these two images have been skipped the reviewing process twice, I submitted them again (just in case it was a technical error of some sort and not reveiwers not feeling like reviewing them...twice) and now another batch has been reviewed and they have been skipped for the third time? How do I get these to be reviewed? Anyone any ideas? Contacted support, but we all already know that will lead to nothing and I will just get a copy & paste snipped for the FAQ that does not answer my question from an 'expert contributor' or no reply at all.

Edit: Aaaaaand I got an instant "reply", as expected just copy & paste text about how reviewing is taking longer than usual right now and how sometimes images might be stuck and in that case I would need to re-submit (which, as said,  I already have done, with the same result). When I click on the "No, I still need help" button, that only leads me to the FAQ page. Looks like the function to actually contact anyone from Shutterstock has been removed for contributors. Awesome, Shutterstock. 🤨

Edit 2: Oh, and I tried to contact the technical support about the link in the mail not working. Got a reply I can't read, because the link that says "read answer" in that mail leads me to....the FAQ page.
 

 

 

Share this post


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

 🤨

Edit 2: Oh, and I tried to contact the technical support about the link in the mail not working. Got a reply I can't read, because the link that says "read answer" in that mail leads me to....the FAQ page.
 

Sstock 'support' is a misnomer. They have made themselves as unavailable as possible to contributors. Absolutely no interaction at all. 

I think you have done everything you can 😐

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...