Shutterstock Photographer Forum :: View topic

photoshot44 · Joined: 26 Dec 2010 Posts: 22

I started in Shutterstock short ago. I have submitted several images, some approved and some refused. But what surprises me is the reasons for refusal they are giving me, e.g., In an image of a white car in an empty field they stated "copyright" reasons; in another image of a house in ruins in broad daylight and with a clear sky (file attached), they stated "noise artifacts". Is this common, or am I the only one with this problem? Thanks for your help.

peteklinger · Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 2:53 pm

Two things come to mind quickly.

I can't see the sky details at that size. Could be that you used sharpen and created artifacts? Also at that size I can't see if there are any "dust bunnies" on the sensor?

If it didn't have sky problems, you might get it refused for shadows. That wall on the left is kind of dark.

And yes, I know, we're dealing with Sunlight and real rays and there will be natural shadows. I'm not making the rules, just observing them. ;)

What is it & where? Nice.

photoshot44 · Joined: 26 Dec 2010 Posts: 22

Thank you for replying, peteklinger. Unfortunately, the maximun size permitted for an attachment is 256 KB, otherwise I could send you a large image. I could use your opinion.

It looks to me as if they are just trying to get rid of a backlog of pending images, and they just write any refusal reason they have in mind. Some of them are simply absurd.

photoshot44 · Joined: 26 Dec 2010 Posts: 22

Peteklinger, the image was taken in the Sierra de Montblanc. It looks like an huge abandoned rural house.

Mike Price · Joined: 06 Jun 2008 Posts: 2919 Location: South Wales

Shutterstock no longer accepts images with cars in, so that would be your copyright issue.

Mike

hhltdave5 · Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 3:39 pm

photoshot44 · Joined: 26 Dec 2010 Posts: 22

hhltdave5, thank you for your help. I am attaching four files. One of the darker part of the sky and one of the shadows area. the other two are the image of the car. One is a reduced size and another just the car. Your help will be appreciated.

Sorry, final attachment will be sent separately. Only three accepted.

photoshot44 · Joined: 26 Dec 2010 Posts: 22

Here is the other attachment. Let me know what you think. Thanks.

aynia · Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:45 am

As was said before... you won't get the car in. They are no longer accepting cars even if you clone out number plates and logos. The car manufacturer (and anyone who's interested in cars) can recognise the make.

They have been deleting cars from people's portfolios over the last couple of years. If you see a car in the database it is because they have not got round to deleting it.

photoshot44 · Joined: 26 Dec 2010 Posts: 22

Thank you, Aynia. This whole thing of copyright is going way out of proportion, I think. It's getting sort of paranoyd. Even though, I can't agree with their reasons for refusing many other images.

ruxpriencdiam · Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 5:48 am

The ruins is OOF with fringing and the sky is full of noise.

photoshot44 · Joined: 26 Dec 2010 Posts: 22

ruxpriencdiam, how about now?

ruxpriencdiam · Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 8:43 am

Same pics just smaller so which ones are the 100% crops because that's what matters?

photoshot44 · Joined: 26 Dec 2010 Posts: 22

These are 100% size portions of the same pics. The difference is that in these ones I removed the noise and the chromatic aberrations with Photomatix.