Author Topic: least picky micro agencies (Read 7259 times)

ed3727 · « **on:** November 27, 2008, 17:51 »

I am getting tired of being continually frustrated. Which are the least picky micro agencies?

Thanks

madelaide · « **Reply #1 on:** November 27, 2008, 18:37 »

Do you prefer to be frustrated by NOT selling on sites that accept everything but don't sell?

Regards,
Adelaide

stormchaser · « **Reply #2 on:** November 27, 2008, 18:49 »

To answer the question flat out, out of the big 6 I find 123RF the least picky. Have never had a rejection there. It's not that I upload trash, but some stuff I load there will never see Shutterstock or iStock.

However as Madelaide pointed out, lower standards mean lower or non existent sales. I do ok on 123 in that it is not a complete waste of time to upload, but not nearly as well as SS - not even close.

As micro continues to improve in quality across the board, a strategy of "less picky" will be detrimental in the long run in many ways.

mantonino · « **Reply #3 on:** November 27, 2008, 19:03 »

FotoMind, 123RF, Bigstock and ImageCatalog for us right now. Don't forget MostPhotos too.

eppic · « **Reply #4 on:** November 27, 2008, 20:26 »

I don't think MostPhotos even reviews the images as they are immediately made live, but I've seen alot of junk get submitted as a result too.
StockXpert seems to accept almost everything I submit, but I find they're very picky about model releases even if it's an unrecognizable person.

jsnover · « **Reply #5 on:** November 27, 2008, 21:25 »

It's hard to deal with the frustration, but you'll really hurt yourself long run if you don't deal with getting images accepted at IS, SS and DT. Assuming you can do that, you've learned what you need to.

takestock · « **Reply #6 on:** November 28, 2008, 04:22 »

For me StockXpert is the least fussy at the moment.
Having said that - you still have to keep a pretty high standard on work submitted.

Peter · « **Reply #7 on:** November 28, 2008, 05:00 »

I have most rejections at 123RF! They reject about 40% of my images, that are ALL accepted at SS, FT, DT, StockXpert....

mostly because bizare "copyright problems", which are none present. Ridiculous.

Talanis · « **Reply #8 on:** November 28, 2008, 07:12 »

The least picky is Yay Micro but like Adelaide said, do you want to sell photo or get them accepted?
Rejection is part of microstock, deal with it or do something else.

michealo · « **Reply #9 on:** November 28, 2008, 10:01 »

I find IS consistent, and generally agree with their rejection reasons

goldenangel · « **Reply #10 on:** November 28, 2008, 13:20 »

I have also had images being rejected on 123rf for copyright reasons, and they were accepted everywhere else.
StockXpert accepts almost everything, while I usually agree the most with DT rejections.

Bateleur · « **Reply #11 on:** November 28, 2008, 13:47 »

Wouldn't be a better personal strategy to consider why you're getting rejected, and work to overcome that?

goldenangel · « **Reply #12 on:** November 28, 2008, 14:13 »

Yes, some rejections can be very educational for me.

ed3727 · « **Reply #13 on:** November 28, 2008, 14:58 »

Part of the frustration at istock is that they keep changing the rules. I have had several photos rejected with the right to resubmit them. When I resubmitted them (after having corrected the fault), they were rejected for an entirely new reason.

Dreamframer · « **Reply #14 on:** November 28, 2008, 15:33 »

When some reviewer rejects your photo, and you correct the problem and upload image again, another reviewer is free to reject it again for another reason that maybe first reviewer didn't notice. Just don't spend your time thinking about rejections. See what you can correct on your image. If you think you can correct it easily, do it, if you think you can't do it, than don't. Also, it depends on how important may be your image.

jsnover · « **Reply #15 on:** November 28, 2008, 17:56 »

Quote from: ed3727 on November 28, 2008, 14:58

Part of the frustration at istock is that they keep changing the rules. I have had several photos rejected with the right to resubmit them. When I resubmitted them (after having corrected the fault), they were rejected for an entirely new reason.

This hits just about every new contributor and it can be very hard to deal with as it feels entirely unfair. It would be ideal, especially when dealing with contributors who are new (<100 uploads <500 downloads) if reviewers would tell you everything that was wrong with your image the first time. Unfortunately, they are generally swamped and don't have the time to do this.

What it means when you get a rejection for a different reason is that your image was very close to the borderline in the first place with a number of elements that could easily be reason for a rejection. One reviewer went one side of the line, a different reviewer the other.

The key thing is to get further away from that line.

And if the reviewers really do mess up, you have Scout to ask for a reinspection. I'd ask in the critique forum before you go sending rejections to scout though, especially at the beginning.

The rules stay the same, but inevitably there is some element of judgment on the part of the inspector as it's not an automated process.

Tim Markley · « **Reply #16 on:** November 28, 2008, 18:18 »

Rejections are part of the game, the more established sites reject at a higher rate. 123rf is the least restrictive of the big six. Bigstock is generally good. Crestock is the pickiest of the middle range sites. New sites trying to get established will take more than anyother sites but the trade off is will they be there in a year.

This is not a business or hobby for the thin skinned. I have found my work getting better but also have found increasing standards.

anaire · « **Reply #17 on:** November 28, 2008, 19:51 »

Agree Goldenangel,
StockXpert accepts almost all my images and I almost always agree when DT rejects some of them.
Don't give up on micro, even if you get frustrated.
Try those 2 first!
They're open, friendly, looking for new content and most important - they SELL.
Best,
Anna

ed3727 · « **Reply #18 on:** November 29, 2008, 06:32 »

First I want to thank everyone for his/her answer. I will keep trying the micro agencies and try not to let it bother me. (Fat Chance)

Several things make this particularly galling. I have over 1100 images at Alamy and have never had a rejection there. I am attempting to cross over from the art field which is difficult, and I get rejections for things like composition.

But, so goes life.

stormchaser · « **Reply #19 on:** November 29, 2008, 11:23 »

Quote from: ed3727 on November 29, 2008, 06:32

First I want to thank everyone for his/her answer. I will keep trying the micro agencies and try not to let it bother me. (Fat Chance)

Several things make this particularly galling. I have over 1100 images at Alamy and have never had a rejection there. I am attempting to cross over from the art field which is difficult, and I get rejections for things like composition.

But, so goes life.

Ed, really, with the iSTock thing you have to get passed it or you'll just make yourself crazy and waste time. Hit yourself in the head with a long telephoto lens if you have to

The energy is really better spent elsewhere, such as in a little better market research for micro. I say this in all sincerity.

When I first started iStock my acceptance rate was dismal. Now I only send what I think will "fit". Acceptance rate way up, and even with a much smaller port there, sales are ok and the RPI is good. I went through a few of the "double rejects" as you have. Take a break from there and rethink some strategy.

Alamy - not an edited collection. They base review on technical merit only, not on aesthetics or content. Congrats on your success there with acceptance - for a lot of people the game at Alamy is the other way around.

Good luck in the future

hali · « **Reply #20 on:** November 29, 2008, 17:07 »

I agree with those who asked do you want acceptance and no sales? Which neither does any good.
But I think the best advice was from (Geopappas, I think) to Whitechild in Whitechild's thread somewhere else, when he told Whitechild, " some sites do not work for you, then go to the sites that work."
It's not really because you are better or worse than another photographer,
as mentioned by stormchaser re Alamy, " - for a lot of people the game at Alamy is the other way around.", and Peter "get the most rejections from 123rf".

It's just something we accept. We don't all shoot the same images,
so naturally, some sites like some, some don't. Just send the images to the ones who accept them, and is selling them consistently.
I stop worrying about being with SS, IS, DT, or any specific one, even if it meant being the majority says they make the most sales there.
I go where I make the most sales.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: least picky micro agencies (Read 7259 times)

ed3727

madelaide

stormchaser

mantonino

eppic

jsnover

takestock

Peter

Talanis

michealo

goldenangel

Bateleur

goldenangel

ed3727

Dreamframer

jsnover

Tim Markley

anaire

ed3727

stormchaser

hali

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors