Shutterstock Photographer Forum :: View topic

franksap · Joined: 19 Mar 2008 Posts: 27 Location: The Netherlands

Nobody? ='(

edgelore · Joined: 05 Jan 2007 Posts: 331

i'm not an illustrator sorry. but you might get a much faster reply by posting your same question in a new thread. this is more of a general thread about rejections (not specific critiques).

franksap · Joined: 19 Mar 2008 Posts: 27 Location: The Netherlands

Ok, thank you :)

sandrao · Joined: 17 May 2008 Posts: 5

Hi folks
I'm new to the list and enjoying reading all the advice available for new starts.
I have just put forward my first 10 images and disappointingly had them all rejected. 5 had reasons given -

1 poor lighting casting shadows,
1 limited commercial value
1 focus not located where we feel it works best

- fair enough I am happy to accept these 3 reasons.

But the other 2 images had the comment 'keywords not directly related to the image please edit your keyword choice' as the reason, (I assume the images were fine) which seems a bit harsh for total rejection on a first attempt - (the remaining 5 images had no comments).

I was careful with my keywording - my background is librarianship and digital image resource libraries so I am very familiar with keywording concepts - and I checked what had gone before with other images on the site to be certain I was following correct procedures.

So... 3 out of 10 rejected for reasons above and other 7 images OK??

Just interested to hear your opinions on this. Do I assume the 2 images that need re-keyworded were OK or still not resubmit them in the future?

Thanks
Slightly confused,
Sandra

triceratops · Joined: 15 Nov 2006 Posts: 2260 Location: The other Nevada

chachaman · Joined: 24 Mar 2008 Posts: 171 Location: Denver, Colorado

It seems like none of my photos are good enough--they all have some sort of flaw. However, it makes me more I can improve

dchappell · Joined: 01 Apr 2008 Posts: 21

I seem to be realising that when I've thought 'right must take a photo for stock' the result inevitably gets rejected. But if I just see something at a random time and think 'oh I like that I'll take a photo' - voila it's accepted.

So I am trying to stop trying to find shots and let them come naturally! unfortunately I'm not very patient....

Btw - could someone explain to me... if an image is rejected with no comment at all - does that just mean that they didn't personally like it?

zrmedia · Joined: 05 Feb 2008 Posts: 5

Yes, it could mean that or any number of things. The reviewers here either don't like their jobs or they just don't give a shite. Don't waste your time; there are plenty of stock phototgraphy sites run by real professionals who know what the hell they're talking about and actually LOOK at every pic instead of blind-rejecting their last fifty of the day so they can go home early (like this site).

Any PROFESSIONALS considering contributing to shutterstock should read the following first:

I conducted an experiment: I created a new account and submitted the same photo three times with three different groups of ten. It was rejected the first time, accepted the second time, and rejected again the third time. Then just to re-enforce the point, I repeated the experiment under a different account with a different target photo and this time, it was accepted the first time and rejected the next two times. If that doesn't sum up the incompetence of these reviewers in a sentence, nothing does. I just dropped in today to see if shutterstock had gotten their shite together and were ready to work on my level of professionalism, but obviously they're not. Oh well, businesses rise and fall on a daily basis. In time no one will remember shutterstock and it's short existence.

P.S. You SS fanboys needn't respond to this post. My experiment results say it all and there's nothing left to debate.

710studio · Joined: 24 Jun 2008 Posts: 4

What would be helpful is more SPECIFIC reasons for rejections. I just failed my initial 10 photos. The reasons on some include:

"poor or uneven lighting or shadows. White balance may be incorrect" - Well? Which is it? Or is it all of the above?

How can I improve if the rejection reasons are so vague and general?

To me, my photos look great. Especially, when compared to some of the junk that I see that actually got on the shutterstock approved list. So, if my photos look good to me and I get some vague, canned rejection, how can I really improve?

Just a thought.

mg7 · Joined: 30 Apr 2007 Posts: 693 Location: GTA, Canada

Unfortunealty this is a business and not a school of photography.

I agree it would be nice if they said it was WB, or uneven lighting, but sadly they don't.

Calling other peoples work "Junk" is not a good way to start on here. How would you feel if we called your work junk?

As of ways to improve then shoot alot, read alot, If you want a better answer then the "Critique forum" is your best bet. Post some images there and other photographers will give you their comments. The people here are generally very friendly and very helpful.

Just my thoughts,

Michael

710studio · Joined: 24 Jun 2008 Posts: 4

Perhaps "junk" is too strong a word, but yes... my work was just called the next thing to "junk". My point is, I've seen several shots that appear that they were taken by a point-and-shoot camera with hardly any detail to composition and they were obviously approved, as they are on the shutterstock site. My 10 for approval were taken with careful detail to make sure I took a great (not just "good") shot and NONE of them were approved.

My point is that the reasons for rejection are entirely too vague. How am I to know what to improve if each rejection reason gives 3 or 4 general possibilities. It makes it hard to know what to improve on if the Ones Who Approve Photos don't give more specific reasons.

My hats off to Those Who Approve Photos, because they obviously have their work cut out for them. And I have no idea what they go through during the approval process. All I'm saying is that my hard work was for nothing if I don't have any concrete criticism handed to me as to why they were rejected.

I know Shutterstock isn't a photo school. And I don't NEED a photo school. I take great photos and have for years. Just a little specific direction as to what the hell they're looking for would go a LONG way.

mg7 · Joined: 30 Apr 2007 Posts: 693 Location: GTA, Canada

If you want a better answer then post some images in the "Critique forum" is your best bet.

710studio · Joined: 24 Jun 2008 Posts: 4

Actually, I've already had enough of this site. After reading the stories of other people who have had similar experiences, I don't have the time, nor the patience to deal with a site that plays guessing games.

Thanks, but no thanks.

Best of luck to those who have had a better experience with this site. As for this one, moving on is the better choice.

evaners · Joined: 04 Mar 2008 Posts: 496 Location: New Hampshire

Wow, some people give up easily.

sunny13 · Joined: 07 Jan 2007 Posts: 49

As I said in one of my posts that I got 3 rejections in a row an year back.. I was very disappointed at that time coz all my images were accepted on so many other sites. But to get an entry in SS I really studied my own images a lot and today I realize that I actually was applying with junk. Here it comes again...:)

No doubt I learned a lot from other sites as well but it was more to be a part of SS. I am looking forward to have a good time here. I am sooooooo happy that I didn't give up.