Looks like i will be doing some research tomorrow to find out what is needed to be approved for Veer. 10 submitted, 10 rejections.
From the looks of the images approved from other contributors it is a whole new ball game to what i have been reading up on for the last few months. There's an artistic feel to the site. Less white backgrounds and pearly teeth staring out from the screen but darker images that wouldn't go amiss in a children's illustrated book of some kind.
Looks like i will have to change my approach to get in with Veer and will post back if (when) i am finally accepted along with what images they do like.
Showing posts with label rejections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rejections. Show all posts
Editorial on Shutterstock
I came up with an idea for an illustration based on the Olympic logo and thought after checking that it would be ok as an editorial on shutterstock.. I figured it would pass as i had found other images of the logo (which is copyright/tradmark protected) on SS.
Graphic Leftovers stated very quickly after i emailed them that such an image would be ok if it was very abstract (which mine wasn't.) So i just submitted it to SS and DT where i have previously found Olympic non-abstract images.
It was approved on DT but rejected at SS on the grounds that "Trademark--Contains potential trademark or copyright infringement--not editorial."
© Photographer: Devonsun | Agency: Dreamstime.com
I emailed Shutterstock support over a week ago to get clarification on the matter but i haven't had a reply from them yet:
"Need some clarification on a recent rejection reason please. File ID: *******
Understood copyright aspects so submitted for editorial after finding similar
images on SS:
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-44659942.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-40801201.html
But "Contains potential trademark or copyright infringement--not editorial." was the refusal reason.
Is there a difference between illustrations and photographs when it comes to
acceptance for editorial?
Thanks. David"
Based on the reply from SS i may make "Olympic Construction" exclusive to DT. In any event i think i will have to contact SS again to get an answer.
Graphic Leftovers stated very quickly after i emailed them that such an image would be ok if it was very abstract (which mine wasn't.) So i just submitted it to SS and DT where i have previously found Olympic non-abstract images.
It was approved on DT but rejected at SS on the grounds that "Trademark--Contains potential trademark or copyright infringement--not editorial."
© Photographer: Devonsun | Agency: Dreamstime.com
I emailed Shutterstock support over a week ago to get clarification on the matter but i haven't had a reply from them yet:
"Need some clarification on a recent rejection reason please. File ID: *******
Understood copyright aspects so submitted for editorial after finding similar
images on SS:
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-44659942.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-40801201.html
But "Contains potential trademark or copyright infringement--not editorial." was the refusal reason.
Is there a difference between illustrations and photographs when it comes to
acceptance for editorial?
Thanks. David"
Based on the reply from SS i may make "Olympic Construction" exclusive to DT. In any event i think i will have to contact SS again to get an answer.
Dreamstime Review Process
I hate to moan about rejections... we all get them. But when it's due to inconsistent reviewers at the same agency it's hard not to get slightly annoyed by the whole affair.
On Dreamstime they are very fussy these days about silhouettes and want extra confirmation during the submission process that you hold the copyright to the image. Personally, i think that the fact that we sign the agreement when we register should be good enough but you can't blame them for wanting to cover themselves.
It's fair enough (although the other agencies are not asking for added similar assurances, yet,) but after submitting silhouettes and putting a note in the editors box stating "i own the copyright" etc those images have been approved. So, i figured that was good enough for all future similar submissions. Apparently not though...
... after submitting a silhouette of a horse and carriage and having it rejected twice (after adding the note on copyright for reviewer) i have emailed Dreamstime to ask for an explanation (below):
On Dreamstime they are very fussy these days about silhouettes and want extra confirmation during the submission process that you hold the copyright to the image. Personally, i think that the fact that we sign the agreement when we register should be good enough but you can't blame them for wanting to cover themselves.
It's fair enough (although the other agencies are not asking for added similar assurances, yet,) but after submitting silhouettes and putting a note in the editors box stating "i own the copyright" etc those images have been approved. So, i figured that was good enough for all future similar submissions. Apparently not though...
... after submitting a silhouette of a horse and carriage and having it rejected twice (after adding the note on copyright for reviewer) i have emailed Dreamstime to ask for an explanation (below):
"I have previously submitted silhouettes and they were approved as i added a note in the 'comment for editors' box along the lines of "i confirm this is original artwork and i own all copyrights etc."
That was good enough before to get approved but now i have submitted the same image twice, and been rejected because: "This illustration appears to be traced from another source. etc".
I am quite happy to submit the original photo (taken while on holiday) but why does one reviewer accept written confirmation of originality and another not?!
Image ID: *******
It's a shame as, until now, i had 100% approval for Feb.
Also at what point do i submit the original photo in future (if required)? As 'additional format'?
Thanks,
David"
That was good enough before to get approved but now i have submitted the same image twice, and been rejected because: "This illustration appears to be traced from another source. etc".
I am quite happy to submit the original photo (taken while on holiday) but why does one reviewer accept written confirmation of originality and another not?!
Image ID: *******
It's a shame as, until now, i had 100% approval for Feb.
Also at what point do i submit the original photo in future (if required)? As 'additional format'?
Thanks,
David"
So, lets see what comes back. I had already read their statements about wanting the original photo along with silhouette submissions but i had read on the forums that placing a note stating originality was sufficient and that 'had' been my experience until now after previously receiving the "This illustration appears to be traced from another source" comment.
If they hadn't approved previous images without that photo i would have known better what the process was. So one reviewer is letting them through and the other isn't?!
What about the Tudor warship silhouette that i had approved recently? I made that up as i went along.. no photo exists for it so therefore a comment in the editors box is the only 'proof' i have of originality. Unless DT have a machine that can read the images in my head! ;-)
Be interesting to see what DT have to say.
Still better than the rejections of the medical infections signs i submitted a while back that were rejected because the reviewer didn't know that C.Diff and M.R.S.A were medical terms for hospital infections. Until i re-submitted them along with a link to a government website to prove they were real words and not "mis-spelt". ;-)
If they hadn't approved previous images without that photo i would have known better what the process was. So one reviewer is letting them through and the other isn't?!
What about the Tudor warship silhouette that i had approved recently? I made that up as i went along.. no photo exists for it so therefore a comment in the editors box is the only 'proof' i have of originality. Unless DT have a machine that can read the images in my head! ;-)
Be interesting to see what DT have to say.
Still better than the rejections of the medical infections signs i submitted a while back that were rejected because the reviewer didn't know that C.Diff and M.R.S.A were medical terms for hospital infections. Until i re-submitted them along with a link to a government website to prove they were real words and not "mis-spelt". ;-)
Mid month update
Not much has happened lately. I have come to a crawl as far as uploads and haven't added anything new to the sites during April as yet.
I think 3D is going to take me longer to master than i had thought and 2D via inkscape is slow and also never really gives me the images that are in my head as i would expect. Lack of experience there i suspect in graphic design perhaps.
More approvals on StockphotoPro although there site is down for maintenance for a few hours at the moment (21st April - 13.20pm GMT). No views last time i looked there tho.
More rejections at iStock but can't complain as the look and feel of their approved images are way off the simple designs i put together. I feel i am going to have to up my game and create nothing less than 'stunning' to get my approval rating looking more healthy there.
This month so far a little slow on sales and i don't see myself beating last months total if things continue at this rate. I am certainly re-thinking my approach and dusting off the Canan camera with a view to getting out there in this lovely sunshine. I just have to motivate myself to get up at 4am to get that perfect shot! ;-)
I think 3D is going to take me longer to master than i had thought and 2D via inkscape is slow and also never really gives me the images that are in my head as i would expect. Lack of experience there i suspect in graphic design perhaps.
More approvals on StockphotoPro although there site is down for maintenance for a few hours at the moment (21st April - 13.20pm GMT). No views last time i looked there tho.
More rejections at iStock but can't complain as the look and feel of their approved images are way off the simple designs i put together. I feel i am going to have to up my game and create nothing less than 'stunning' to get my approval rating looking more healthy there.
This month so far a little slow on sales and i don't see myself beating last months total if things continue at this rate. I am certainly re-thinking my approach and dusting off the Canan camera with a view to getting out there in this lovely sunshine. I just have to motivate myself to get up at 4am to get that perfect shot! ;-)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
