| Author |
Message |
GeneralE
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 375
Location: Oakland, California
|
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2004 3:05 pm
|  |
| mantonino wrote: | Those four mushrooms were rejected - they are all different varieties, and in most cases colors. They were uploaded with, I believe, very detailed descriptions so people could find exactly the type of mushroom they are looking for.
M |
Mushrooms are a tricky subject to photograph (I keep trying occasionally) and especially for stock. One of the reasons they are so hard to find is that they are good at blending in with their surroundings.
I notice that with all four of these, several of the mushrooms are shown in their natural environment. This makes these suitable for mycological "texts," but for little else. I think people who are looking for "mushroom" on a stock site are looking for either a pile of cooking mushrooms or a gaudy (think Amanita muscaria) Lewis Carroll-type mushroom to adorn a flyer or newsletter.
For stock shots, I think close-up/macro shots, perhaps even isolated with a clipping path, might sell better. If it were up to me I'd take all of your examples anyway, because I know there are a lot of mycological societies and schools and such who might want images of fungi in situ, but I think more detailed close-ups of the mushrooms with less background might be more attractive.
If I can track down the original, I was thinking of submitting this shot my son took a few years ago (when he was four):
Orange Fungus #16
 |
|
shutterstock
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 1881
Location: New York, NY
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:25 pm
| |
Those were hiding in the picture without a clear subject.. so even though they may look good in a scientific paper - they aren't stock quality shrooms
Jon |
|
mantonino
Joined: 27 Oct 2004
Posts: 1090
Location: Syracuse, NY
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2004 10:43 pm
| |
*shrug* They sell on Istock just fine.
It's all well and good to come up with a reason post-partum for these shots to be rejected, but it doesn't answer "too many on the site like it." If you're going to reject for content, as in "that shot leaves too much room for text around it like a good stock picture should" then fine. I'll submit things that I think should be accepted here. *shrug* Just trying to figure out the direction we're taking. At least it's more clear. |
|
dougrhess
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 156
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:45 am
| |
| mantonino wrote: | *shrug* They sell on Istock just fine.
It's all well and good to come up with a reason post-partum for these shots to be rejected, but it doesn't answer "too many on the site like it." If you're going to reject for content, as in "that shot leaves too much room for text around it like a good stock picture should" then fine. I'll submit things that I think should be accepted here. *shrug* Just trying to figure out the direction we're taking. At least it's more clear. |
It is subjective and that comes with the territory. I think it would be rare for a person seeking mushroom stock photos, not to mention photo editors here, to know the different kinds. It is possible that a larger catalog would have more of that detail. So far, this is a small company (which is nice for me). |
|
jsnover
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 253
Location: Western Washington, USA
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 12:43 pm
| |
| Quote: | | *shrug* They sell on Istock just fine. |
I have my photos up on multiple sites, and one of the things that's helped me deal with rejections that I don't understand is that I don't think I've ever had an image rejected everywhere, and things will sometimes sell well one place and not on another.
I do still get miffed when I think a rejection makes no sense, but as long as the image is accepted somewhere, I figure it does have a market, so it's OK. And Shutterstock does make uploading very easy and automated, so the "investment" of time to try out some uploads is pretty minimal.
Shutterstock has kindly accepted most of my uploads, but the ones they rejected had all been accepted somewhere else. I've had every site tell me at some point they have "too many like this" when I couldn't find any or only one or two. It can be a little tricky trying to get the hang of each site's preferences and criteria. |
|
andream
Admin
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 412
Location: New York, NY
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 4:47 pm
| |
Having to go through hundreds/thousands of images a day -- one thing that I almost involuntarily look for, regardless of subject or topic, is a visually striking image. Simple.
If I react to an image, if I don't have to think about "do we need this?" or "how many of these do we have already?" then I know that other people are most likely going to have that reaction as well.
I see hundreds of images of trees and nature a day -- even if you have a perfectly nice image of a sunset etc. -- I am not going to automatically accept the photo on that basis.
Also...I find that many of the photos submitted lack focus: if I want a photo of a penny on a desk, I don't want to see a sandwich or a cricket on the desk or a poster in the background unless those things somehow evoke a certain feeling or specific meaning. (That was not the best example but it is the end of the day.)
Also...don't submit an entire series on one subject. Pick a few of the best and submit those. I trust you.
And... also, be careful with keywording, categories and descriptions. I've been fixing a lot of them but it does start to get frustrating after a while.
-Don't add extra keywords.
-Do add keywords that are descriptive of the content and emotion of the image.
-Don't write personal descriptions: "This photograph was taken during my summer vacation of 2001 after I had a nervous breakdown and started taking pictures of strawberries.."
-Do write what is seen in the photogaph: "Bowl of strawberries on deck of summer house..." Or whatever. That was another sort of lame example but I think clear enough.
-Don't use Art/Travel section if you took the photo on a trip or if is an artistic photo.
-Do use Art/Travel section if submitting a photo of some kind of exotic statue or ancient ceramic or cultural ritual etc...
I know this can seem very subjective and that's because it is. I don't expect you not to make mistakes, but I do expect you to try.
Hope this was of help and thanks for all the wonderful submissions so far...
Best,
Andrea |
|
GeneralE
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 375
Location: Oakland, California
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 5:26 pm
| |
A "sticky" page with a list of these Dos/Don'ts to which you can add examples as they occur to you would be very helpful.
A page listing a description of the types of photos you want/don't want in each category would be likewise helpful; your description of the Art/Travel section is a great example -- I previously had no idea why those two topics would be grouped together. |
|
mk
Joined: 02 Nov 2004
Posts: 13
Location: Minneapolis
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 4:50 pm
| |
Would you be open to considering adding image categories? There were a number of times that I felt like I was putting an image in a category that it didn't really belong just because I couldn't find another place to put it. I can't list any off the top of my head but I can keep track in future uploads if that's helpful. |
|
shutterstock
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 1881
Location: New York, NY
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 4:53 pm
| |
yea- I've been thinking this also..
i can add some cats
Jon |
|
marksimms
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 21
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 6:19 pm
| |
Out of every 100 photos, how many (on average) get rejected.. Just out of curiousity..
| andrea wrote: | Having to go through hundreds/thousands of images a day -- one thing that I almost involuntarily look for, regardless of subject or topic, is a visually striking image. Simple.
If I react to an image, if I don't have to think about "do we need this?" or "how many of these do we have already?" then I know that other people are most likely going to have that reaction as well.
I see hundreds of images of trees and nature a day -- even if you have a perfectly nice image of a sunset etc. -- I am not going to automatically accept the photo on that basis.
Also...I find that many of the photos submitted lack focus: if I want a photo of a penny on a desk, I don't want to see a sandwich or a cricket on the desk or a poster in the background unless those things somehow evoke a certain feeling or specific meaning. (That was not the best example but it is the end of the day.)
Also...don't submit an entire series on one subject. Pick a few of the best and submit those. I trust you.
And... also, be careful with keywording, categories and descriptions. I've been fixing a lot of them but it does start to get frustrating after a while.
-Don't add extra keywords.
-Do add keywords that are descriptive of the content and emotion of the image.
-Don't write personal descriptions: "This photograph was taken during my summer vacation of 2001 after I had a nervous breakdown and started taking pictures of strawberries.."
-Do write what is seen in the photogaph: "Bowl of strawberries on deck of summer house..." Or whatever. That was another sort of lame example but I think clear enough.
-Don't use Art/Travel section if you took the photo on a trip or if is an artistic photo.
-Do use Art/Travel section if submitting a photo of some kind of exotic statue or ancient ceramic or cultural ritual etc...
I know this can seem very subjective and that's because it is. I don't expect you not to make mistakes, but I do expect you to try.
Hope this was of help and thanks for all the wonderful submissions so far...
Best,
Andrea |
|
|
andream
Admin
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 412
Location: New York, NY
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:52 pm
| |
A) I just want to point out that it does not serve anyone to send rude, reactionary e mails about image rejection. I observe who is sending good work -- regardless of rating/score -- and I also observe who is sending polite, inquistive emails.
B) Many image rejection problems could be solved if people bothered to read the guidelines on the shutterstock submission website or bothered to do their homework (check out the shutterstock website/go to forum etc.)...I think I'm actually pretty nice about fixing keywording and categorizing mistakes and such, but I don't have to be...
C) We're working on a keywording system, so that you can go back and add without having to delete and redo. I know how much that would help!
D) I'm not sure about the average - I'll look into it!
Over and out,
Andrea |
|
fncdigital
Joined: 05 Nov 2004
Posts: 2159
Location: If there are any questions, direct them to that brick wall over there.
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2004 4:19 pm
| |
how about the model release issue that happened with me?
See my post on it in the general forum below this thread, "model releases and QR"
thanks. |
|
| |
|
Log in
