Signed up with 123RF a few months ago and have an appalling approval ratio. 26 files submitted and 18 rejected. Reason? None given. Just 'rejected' in bold red letters.
These are the same images approved on Dreamstime, Shutterstock and several other places.
And after this mornings rejections i feel there is something odd going on at 123RF. We all have rejections i know but the reason for the latest (the first time they have given feedback on a rejection) were no property release on an illustration with a made-up city horizon?! They want a model release for a city that doesn't exist then?
With that in mind i wrote to them this morning and will post their reply:
"After getting a lot of rejections since signing up i need some clarification please after the latest rejections reasons given as 'property release required.'
It's good if 123 have high criteria to meet but i need more than 'rejected' as feedback to enable improvement on my side to meet that criteria.
After 26 files uploaded 18 are rejected with one pending (and i suspect that will be rejected also.)
The latest reason for rejection are in part unrealistic and frankly absurd: (filenumber***) Search lights pointing into a night sky above a silhouette city horizon (illustration). You guys want a property release for a city? An obviously fabricated horizon created from imagination?! That doesn't make sense neither is it possible to fulfill.
I understand the model release question for the 'girl in dress' (filenumber***) but can confirm this is original artwork and i retain all copyright to it.
On a last note i see a lot of the preview thumbnail images in the 'history' section are not showing up. Is that a reason for rejection also?
Thanks in advance for answering these points so i can improve matters."
The reply from 123RF:
"A quick check on your account showed that the files that you mentioned above were rejected because they had appeared to be corrupted. If you were to log in to your account, at the History page-- Rejection, you will see that the image thumbnail does not show and instead a square box with a red X is shown. This is because the file wasn't fully uploaded. Hence, only the word "Rejected" in red is shown."
OK.. that doesn't really explain why the files are being corrupted or why they didn't bother to add a note to the rejection page stating this problem or why they need a property release for a fictitious skyline. And, perhaps because i am using firefox i don't know, there was no 'red x' shown to alert me to the issues at hand.
I have just uploaded (or should i say re-uploaded) some files via their web form instead of via FTP. The thumbnails appear now although i will wait and see what the review process brings up this time. Any more rubbish about inappropriate property releases and i doubt if i will bother with them in future.
Showing posts with label submission. Show all posts
Showing posts with label submission. Show all posts
StockExpert
By sharp comparison to the above http://www.stockxpert.com has been a dream to use. The upload process seems a little odd to start with as the file goes into a 'briefcase' folder but now feels natural and i fly through the process. There has been a good approval ratio (so far) and only a couple of rejections.
1. Too many of the same file type already (not surprising as it was a picture of a seagull)
2. Resubmit after removing text. (Which i did and it was subsequently approved.)
The review time has been amazing. Maybe I've been lucky but a batch i uploaded once had already started to be approved before i had finished double checking/categorising the remainder. Super fast (in my experience.) I've had 3 sales there in December.. nothing for Jan but plenty of views and that's OK. I can live with that as we are talking about portfolio of 30 odd images.. not hundreds. Hopefully the sales will increase the more my portfolio grows over time.
1. Too many of the same file type already (not surprising as it was a picture of a seagull)
2. Resubmit after removing text. (Which i did and it was subsequently approved.)
The review time has been amazing. Maybe I've been lucky but a batch i uploaded once had already started to be approved before i had finished double checking/categorising the remainder. Super fast (in my experience.) I've had 3 sales there in December.. nothing for Jan but plenty of views and that's OK. I can live with that as we are talking about portfolio of 30 odd images.. not hundreds. Hopefully the sales will increase the more my portfolio grows over time.
BigStockPhoto submission
26th Jan 2010: Just signed up today with www.bigstockphoto.com and am awaiting the first approvals.
I was only allowed 15 to go for submission (as a new user). The FTP upload was ok and although i read that ShutterStock have bought BigStock i figured i might as well see where it takes me. I'll update this post when i get the results of the submission process...
I was only allowed 15 to go for submission (as a new user). The FTP upload was ok and although i read that ShutterStock have bought BigStock i figured i might as well see where it takes me. I'll update this post when i get the results of the submission process...
Earnings Report Jan 2010
First month of the year over already and these are the updates along with earnings chart for the month:
Bigstock accepted further 15 images. Still 100% AR.
PictureNation back up and running after several months offline. I have uploaded all the illustrations i have for approval.
For the third month in a row Shutterstock seems to give me a consistent 10 sales a month with about 20+ images online. Uploaded and had approved further images towards the end of Jan (currently 30 images live and for sale) so fingers crossed Feb will see even further downloads.
---------
I thought i would post up earnings for Jan 2010 (told you they were small!).
Certainly better than each preceding month and growing slowly.
4 things to note.
1. Income is in £ (not dollars)
2. Portfolio size is based on what images were approved by the last day of the month. So those files could well have been added in the last remaining days of that month and may not always have been responsible for any increase in sales.
3. Although i have portfolios on many sites these listed are the ones where i have achieved at least one sale or more.
4. It is accurate but remember most sites have sales in dollars and as the exchange rate changes from one week to the next who knows what these amounts will look like a week after reporting or, eventually, when a payout is requested.
Bigstock accepted further 15 images. Still 100% AR.
PictureNation back up and running after several months offline. I have uploaded all the illustrations i have for approval.
For the third month in a row Shutterstock seems to give me a consistent 10 sales a month with about 20+ images online. Uploaded and had approved further images towards the end of Jan (currently 30 images live and for sale) so fingers crossed Feb will see even further downloads.
---------
I thought i would post up earnings for Jan 2010 (told you they were small!).
Certainly better than each preceding month and growing slowly.
4 things to note.
1. Income is in £ (not dollars)
2. Portfolio size is based on what images were approved by the last day of the month. So those files could well have been added in the last remaining days of that month and may not always have been responsible for any increase in sales.
3. Although i have portfolios on many sites these listed are the ones where i have achieved at least one sale or more.
4. It is accurate but remember most sites have sales in dollars and as the exchange rate changes from one week to the next who knows what these amounts will look like a week after reporting or, eventually, when a payout is requested.
Alamy QC and CTR
So far Alamy has been ok to upload to. Until the other day i hadn't had a rejection although i also haven't had any sales.
The other day i uploaded a few illustrations of stage curtains along with an image of a cigarette at the end of a medical syringe which i like to think is my best quality creation to date. The curtains were not sharp but slightly diffused (as they were meant to be.)
The whole batch however was rejected due to just the curtains not being to their liking. I can live with that although i just don't understand Alamy's quality control procedure for rejecting ALL images in a batch even if only one fails. It seems a strange business model to me and a waste of time for reviewer as well as contributor. The syringe was later approved once it was uploaded (again) on it's own which seems to only confirm to me that Alamy like to cut their noses off to spite their face?!
Can you imagine Dreamstime rejecting 20 of your images because one failed/not required? Different site, different kind of market/buyers maybe but it still doesn't make much sense to me.
Anyone with a more insightful view of how Alamy's way of dealing with rejections (and binning anything else that was submitted at the same time) do please let me know as i would like to think i am merely missing something that means it's actually a good system. Not a bad one.
CTR:
I would also like someone to explain to me the rather odd (to me) statistics method they use. CTR (Click Through Rate) is still, after some reading, a mystery to me. Currently Alamy's "Average CTR" is 0.79. Whereas mine is 2.99. Is that good or bad? Who knows. I guess all you can do is submit saleable images and keyword properly at the end of the day ..
The other day i uploaded a few illustrations of stage curtains along with an image of a cigarette at the end of a medical syringe which i like to think is my best quality creation to date. The curtains were not sharp but slightly diffused (as they were meant to be.)
The whole batch however was rejected due to just the curtains not being to their liking. I can live with that although i just don't understand Alamy's quality control procedure for rejecting ALL images in a batch even if only one fails. It seems a strange business model to me and a waste of time for reviewer as well as contributor. The syringe was later approved once it was uploaded (again) on it's own which seems to only confirm to me that Alamy like to cut their noses off to spite their face?!
Can you imagine Dreamstime rejecting 20 of your images because one failed/not required? Different site, different kind of market/buyers maybe but it still doesn't make much sense to me.
Anyone with a more insightful view of how Alamy's way of dealing with rejections (and binning anything else that was submitted at the same time) do please let me know as i would like to think i am merely missing something that means it's actually a good system. Not a bad one.
CTR:
I would also like someone to explain to me the rather odd (to me) statistics method they use. CTR (Click Through Rate) is still, after some reading, a mystery to me. Currently Alamy's "Average CTR" is 0.79. Whereas mine is 2.99. Is that good or bad? Who knows. I guess all you can do is submit saleable images and keyword properly at the end of the day ..
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". ;-)
Reply from Shutterstock
Well it took them a while to get back to me regarding my question about the Olympic Rings illustration and why it was rejected.
Seems my initial thoughts were correct and well, read for yourself in their reply:
Seems my initial thoughts were correct and well, read for yourself in their reply:
"Hello David,
Yes there is a difference. The Olympic Rings you cited in the images below are actual newsworthy editorial shots of the Olympic Rings taken by submitters.
Your Olympic Ring illustration you submitted would not be considered true editorial as you created them yourself and it is certainly prohibited from being licensed for royalty free commercial use.
For more information you may see the following forum post:
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=76361"
Yes there is a difference. The Olympic Rings you cited in the images below are actual newsworthy editorial shots of the Olympic Rings taken by submitters.
Your Olympic Ring illustration you submitted would not be considered true editorial as you created them yourself and it is certainly prohibited from being licensed for royalty free commercial use.
For more information you may see the following forum post:
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=76361"
Actually, after reading (again) that post they mention, it doesn't really give a clear indication of their policy on such matters. All it says is "All Olympic logos and torches are trademarked designs. Unacceptable for commercial use."
It doesn't say "it's ok if you take a photo for editorial but not if you make it up from scratch" which would have been more helpful. But hey ho.. never mind. Dreamstime approved that image and now have it exclusively.
It doesn't say "it's ok if you take a photo for editorial but not if you make it up from scratch" which would have been more helpful. But hey ho.. never mind. Dreamstime approved that image and now have it exclusively.
Quick reply from Dreamstime
Speedy reply from DT this morning:
"Hello,
Thank you for contacting us.
As you can see in the refusal reason, the requirements for silhouettes and illustrations have changed. You are asked to upload as property release the image from which you traced it. If the illustration is not traced please confirm that you have created it from scratch.
We have introduced this requirement recently due to large number of frauds and, unfortunately, all users have to comply.
Sincerely yours, DT"
hmm That doesn't really explain why other silhouettes were passed without the extra upload. Oh well. I have better things to do and these communications with the sites are detracting from being creative so looks like i'll have to dig out the photo and re-submit (again).
Onwards and upwards!
By the way, this months earnings have beaten last months and Feb isn't over yet! My Earnings report for this month will probably be the next post unless another site annoys me and i want to rant a little on here first! ;-)
"Hello,
Thank you for contacting us.
As you can see in the refusal reason, the requirements for silhouettes and illustrations have changed. You are asked to upload as property release the image from which you traced it. If the illustration is not traced please confirm that you have created it from scratch.
We have introduced this requirement recently due to large number of frauds and, unfortunately, all users have to comply.
Sincerely yours, DT"
hmm That doesn't really explain why other silhouettes were passed without the extra upload. Oh well. I have better things to do and these communications with the sites are detracting from being creative so looks like i'll have to dig out the photo and re-submit (again).
Onwards and upwards!
By the way, this months earnings have beaten last months and Feb isn't over yet! My Earnings report for this month will probably be the next post unless another site annoys me and i want to rant a little on here first! ;-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
