Author Topic: Don´t resubmit a pic (Read 11026 times)

RH · « **on:** October 09, 2008, 08:08 »

Hi there,

DT makes me sick! Harsh Words? Yes!
Why do they refuse pics for Poor Lighting and if you correct the problem and resubmit the image, they find another reason mostly Lack of Composition? Why can´t they say it first, LoC (then you know, you should not upload the pic again). Do they really want, that our acceptance ratio is going down?
It´s absolutely unsympathetic. There are false pretences. Please, don´t come with "reviewers are also humans". I know it very well and I know they doing a hard job (so we all do), but this sucks!
I´m hopping mad about this impolicy. DT punked us.
BTW: Don´t animadvert DT in its own Forums and if A... comes around and telling about bad mouthing, DT should better thinking about, that we contributors makes them cash. Arrogance und Ignorance isn´t all.
I´m not a troublemaker, but i´m really pissed of.
It´s the 1st time, i´ll not answer to any responses, not why i´m unfriendly, but this is my attitude and basta.
@leaf: If you think some words are too hard, please censore them and this thread can also be locked. Hope many people can read it.

RGebbiePhoto · « **Reply #1 on:** October 09, 2008, 09:41 »

@iStock it's COMMON to get a pic to resubmit, only to have it rejected again for a different reason. They VERY RARELY take my resubmits.

I've never had a problem resubmitting to DT, whenI fix the problem they specify.

At each agency, every reviewer has a different eye. If you get the same reviewer, and you fix the problem they said, then there is nothing to stop the approval.
You get a different reviewer, they look for something else, and you get a decline.

Sorry you had this experience, but I haven't really heard of this issue with DT before. Pardon me if I don't jump on your hysteria bandwagon

leaf · « **Reply #2 on:** October 09, 2008, 09:46 »

additionally the reviewers are often working on per pic basis. If they find one reason to reject a photo, they tick that reason and reject it, they don't go searching for more reasons - that would be a waste of time.

IE. if a reviewer looks at a photo and thinks it has bad cropping and rejects it, he isn't going to look at it 100% and check for noise, jpg artifacts, sharpness etc. etc. bad cropping was enough - rejected.
If then the photographer fixes the cropping and resubmits it, well - you know what is going to happen.

stormchaser · « **Reply #3 on:** October 09, 2008, 11:14 »

There are definitely some strange things going on at DT. A friend of mine has terrible problems with rejections. She is a pretty good shot, and her stuff is technically very good. Yet she gets the bizarre rejections. Then strangely, you'll find just a godawful pic of similar subject accepted, and the submitting photog just happens to be on the favorites list of one of the admins there. Have seen this on more than one occasion.

Personally I have a problem with the "too many of this" rejection - who is to say that your pic is not much better than some of the stale crap that is already in there? As in flowers, landscapes etc. There's always room for something good to give fresh inventory to the buyers..

Lee Torrens · « **Reply #4 on:** October 09, 2008, 12:02 »

Hey RH, I know what it's like when an agency does something to make you angry, so while I'm not on board with this particular complaint, I know the situation. But, think about this:

Quote from: RH on October 09, 2008, 08:08

DT should better thinking about, that we contributors makes them cash.

That's obviously true, but it's also true that as individuals we have no power. ZERO power! There are already tens of thousands of us and an infinite supply of people who will replace us. In light of that, not even grouping together will give us any more power.

Microstock is an open market, so you have to deal with being pushed around by the people with power. Agencies with lots of buyers have power. It's very limited power (they can't drop commissions by 50% or raise prices by 100% and expect nothing to happen) but it's a lot more power than you and I have as contributors.

From my personal perspective, Dreamstime values their contributors more than any other agency outside iStock's exclusives. I think Leaf's explanation gives a good insight into the process and helps show that it's not a personal vendetta against you, but a process to keep reviews efficient and fast, which is good for all of us.

sharpshot · « **Reply #5 on:** October 09, 2008, 12:26 »

I find the reviews with DT are good. My acceptance ratio is 84%. Is was much lower, so either I have improved or they are less fussy than they were in the past. Do we get anywhere complaining about the reviewers? I prefer to spend my time taking more photos. If some of mine are rejected, I try and improve my next submission.

Fred · « **Reply #6 on:** October 09, 2008, 12:30 »

Quote from: leaf on October 09, 2008, 09:46

additionally the reviewers are often working on per pic basis. If they find one reason to reject a photo, they tick that reason and reject it, they don't go searching for more reasons - that would be a waste of time.

IE. if a reviewer looks at a photo and thinks it has bad cropping and rejects it, he isn't going to look at it 100% and check for noise, jpg artifacts, sharpness etc. etc. bad cropping was enough - rejected.
If then the photographer fixes the cropping and resubmits it, well - you know what is going to happen.

I think this system makes sense and I'm all in favor of it. Reviewers should just review as quickly as possible with a minimum of comment on the problems with the images. If contributors want a critique they should go to the critique forum to get advice.

The more the reviewers fool around with critiquing images the more they cost - in both their time and mine (waiting to get my images online). Reviewing costs should be cut to the bone so the money can go towards more advertising or higher commissions. Let the critiquing be done for free by other contributors.

fred

cascoly · « **Reply #7 on:** October 09, 2008, 13:31 »

Quote from: stormchaser on October 09, 2008, 11:14

....
Personally I have a problem with the "too many of this" rejection - who is to say that your pic is not much better than some of the stale crap that is already in there? As in flowers, landscapes etc. There's always room for something good to give fresh inventory to the buyers..

any decent reviewer has already taken that into account when they make the rekection -- the full rejection should really say "we have an overabundance of this type and your submission doesnt add anything to our collection"

btw, this type of rection is probably the most common one i get at dt and ft

s

Xalanx · « **Reply #8 on:** October 09, 2008, 13:41 »

I agree with leaf. The reviewers have a lot to work on. They don't need to look up for all the possible reasons to reject your photo. If they found one, then you get a rejection. Simple as that.
I'll tell you what - keep improving the quality of your photos. I'm supremely confident that each of us here walked that path and improved. At this moment, my acceptance ratio at DT is over 90% as an average on the last 4 months let's say. I can assure you that I'm in no favor of any admin or something, in fact I just had a little clash with Achilles recently and I'm banned from their forums. The reviewers are correct, even though sometimes a bit too strict when it comes to copyright infringement. But about image quality they're good. I have nothing bad to say about that. Most of my rejections are for similarities.
On the other hand, I don't resubmit. Never. That's a choice of mine, I just move on and go shoot new and better photos. Maybe wouldn't be wrong to think of this

Chill down, take your time, take some new photos and don't give up on DT, you'll see steady sales there once it's start moving for you. Oh, and don't pay ANY attention to ETR values. As I said in some other place - it's a bug, not a feature

loop · « **Reply #9 on:** October 09, 2008, 14:22 »

Well, some photos I've resubmitted (not at FT, I'm not there), have ended being very big sellers. So, if the pic has a potential, I believe that is worth resubmitting.

fintastique · « **Reply #10 on:** October 09, 2008, 15:29 »

My rule is if I agree with the comment and it is a quick fix I will make adjustments and resubmit otherwise I just annoy them and move on.

melastmohican · « **Reply #11 on:** October 09, 2008, 15:36 »

It's waste of time for me and for reviewers so I never try to resubmit. Especially on sites with poor UI like DT where I already got huge backlog of pictures waiting to be submitted so I stopped uploading until it get resolved.

Sammy · « **Reply #12 on:** August 31, 2009, 05:48 »

Quote from: stormchaser on October 09, 2008, 11:14

Then strangely, you'll find just a godawful pic of similar subject accepted, and the submitting photog just happens to be on the favorites list of one of the admins there. Have seen this on more than one occasion.

Is this true?? can you provide examples?

shutterdrop · « **Reply #13 on:** August 31, 2009, 07:09 »

Lets reject this batch and go! It is five O clock somewhere! I am buying the first round! Lets go! Reject Reject Reject no commercial value. It is five O clock somewhere.

Sometimes that is the real reason and the review makes a quick 5 cents.

There should be accountability of the reviewers! Each reviewer should have an assigned number. It would not take longer the flush out the bad characters.

Fran · « **Reply #14 on:** August 31, 2009, 10:07 »

Quote from: sharpshot on October 09, 2008, 12:26

I find the reviews with DT are good. My acceptance ratio is 84%. Is was much lower, so either I have improved or they are less fussy than they were in the past. Do we get anywhere complaining about the reviewers? I prefer to spend my time taking more photos. If some of mine are rejected, I try and improve my next submission.

I'm finding DT reviews inconsistent, not good or bad, just inconsistent these days. I have about 70% AR (90+ in the last three months) and I had a batch of seven images rejected for ... poor lighting. On that kind of stuff I have a pretty straightforward workflow now, so I know lighting is not poor in this case. More so cause I'm being very selective lately (thus the better AR). Also, poor contrast on a silhouette just rings me a bell. The bell is that I met Attila the reviewer and this guy just totally didn't pay attention. I'll probably resubmit a couple of those.

If I get a completely illogical rejection, I can't improve cause I don't know what to fix and it's annoying.

On the other hand they surely got tighter in the last year, which is something I like cause it gave me a push to improve.

sharpshot · « **Reply #15 on:** August 31, 2009, 11:10 »

Quote from: Fran on August 31, 2009, 10:07

Quote from: sharpshot on October 09, 2008, 12:26
I find the reviews with DT are good. My acceptance ratio is 84%. Is was much lower, so either I have improved or they are less fussy than they were in the past. Do we get anywhere complaining about the reviewers? I prefer to spend my time taking more photos. If some of mine are rejected, I try and improve my next submission.

I'm finding DT reviews inconsistent, not good or bad, just inconsistent these days. I have about 70% AR (90+ in the last three months) and I had a batch of seven images rejected for ... poor lighting. On that kind of stuff I have a pretty straightforward workflow now, so I know lighting is not poor in this case. More so cause I'm being very selective lately (thus the better AR). Also, poor contrast on a silhouette just rings me a bell. The bell is that I met Attila the reviewer and this guy just totally didn't pay attention. I'll probably resubmit a couple of those.

If I get a completely illogical rejection, I can't improve cause I don't know what to fix and it's annoying.

On the other hand they surely got tighter in the last year, which is something I like cause it gave me a push to improve.

This is an old thread, I made that post in October last year but recently DT started rejecting more. I have stopped uploading for now, there are lots of other sites that are quicker to upload to that sell my photos, so if DT don't want them, I don't mind.

Fran · « **Reply #16 on:** August 31, 2009, 14:21 »

Quote from: sharpshot on August 31, 2009, 11:10

This is an old thread, I made that post in October last year but recently DT started rejecting more. I have stopped uploading for now, there are lots of other sites that are quicker to upload to that sell my photos, so if DT don't want them, I don't mind.

Sorry, I never look at the date

I don't know, I like DT, a lot. But I'm seriously considering exclusivity for the future (when I become at least decent at this) and DT is no more an option. Mainly cause of the inconsistencies and the recent royalty changes.
But I still like DT a lot.

a.k.a.-tom · « **Reply #17 on:** August 31, 2009, 19:12 »

One of my favorite topics... don't know how I missed this one last year... but since it's been reactivated.
I understand many folks will not resub and that's cool. This is no 'dis' to them. I respect their decision.
On the other side of that coin... I resub.
IF..... it is not a legit rejection. There are times when I look back, I have to agree that IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN REJECTED. I should have picked up on the tech problem myself, it should have never been submitted.
But.... too often, I get the "not stock material", "not commercially of value",
"focus is not where we think it should be", "poor cropping" and the like.
Well, those pix just sit a few weeks on the hard drive and.... get sent right back in again. And I can honestly tell you I'm batting 900 plus. Rarely is the pic rejected a second time.
It happened today. I have a pic that sells by the hundreds on several sites. One of the big three rejected it as 'not of any commercial value'. I resub'd it last week and ... low and behold, today in my email, "congratulations, your picture blah blah has been accepted"
Few weeks ago it was crap. Today I was congratulated on such a fine submission...
I laugh my behind off every time it happens.

soooooooooooo the point in MHO... if there are no techincal problems with the pic,........ wait a month and sub it again. Odds are it will sail thru.

=tom

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Don´t resubmit a pic (Read 11026 times)

RH

RGebbiePhoto

leaf

stormchaser

Lee Torrens

sharpshot

Fred

cascoly

Xalanx

loop

fintastique

melastmohican

Sammy

shutterdrop

Fran

sharpshot

Fran

a.k.a.-tom

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors