IS reviews can be soooooooo upsetting......I swear sometimes it seems like they are out to get......ME.......!!          Lately I have been getting rejections for all sorts of things....... 
 
Keywords not relevant.....ok...I can deal with this one...they are right...to a point...I need to cut down on the implied keywords...but if you look at Dreamstime and check out the keywords that find a photo��many many times �people look up things with very general keywords�.yet IS does not want these�.they want only specific keywords.    I listed JAVA on a coffee bean picture and it was rejected for keywords not relevant��..come on�..it was JAVA coffee.   I had another picture of coffee beans rejected for the word Cappuccino.   True there was no Cappuccino there�..but coffee beans make cappuccino�to me that seems relevant.   I see the point on this�..to a degree�.but man sometimes I think they are way to picky

But here is a new one���   They rejected one with five model releases, because the witness signature looked different in a couple of the releases��then they noted to me that the �Model release is a legal document� so they are basically implying that I forged the signatures of the witness.  The witness on all of these is my wife��.ya her signature is slightly different on some of the releases�.but if you look at the handwriting closely you can tell that the letters are made the same way�..  So now I guess we are responsible for how our models and witness�s sign their names.   MAKE SURE YOU SIGN EXACTLY THE SAME�� give me a break�� I resend it in and sent a little nasty email with it�..I really upsets me that they insinuate that I am forging my model releases.
It makes me feel much better when I see other people complaining about IS�s reviews���at least I�m not alone. 

Are there any Exclusives out there that are having this same problem??

One other note:   Over the last 2 weeks�.IS sales have really slowed down�..all other sites are fine�..anybody else notice this?

   I had another picture of coffee beans rejected for the word Cappuccino.   True there was no Cappuccino there�..but coffee beans make cappuccino�to me that seems relevant. 

In all fairness you're missing the point, yes coffeee beans can be used to make cappuccino but by the sound of your image it doesn't portray that, most people use coffee to help them stay awake but you wouldn't put sleep in as a keyword would you.

It's a bit like putting the word 'sex' into every shot with a person in it, because sex is used to make people 

I agree iStock inspectors sometimes have some wierd habits regarding keywords but in this instance I don't think they're wrong.

Personally I'd wish they sort the best match fiasco out, my sales have taken a nosedive since their latest re-structure 

Hi Perkmeup,

I once received a comment from an IS reviewer that may shed some light for you.  From what I gather, after Getty acquired IS, IS inherited Getty's structured keywords system.  The comment I received was that, having acquired this system they feel fewer extremely relevant keywords are preferred, as the system itself is designed guide buyers towards finding the right keywords to fit what they are looking for.

This may explain why keywords attached to similar images that have been in IS for a while are being rejected as irrelevant.  I feel your pain, I've been hounded by the irrelevant keyword rejection a bit myself.  

Hope this is helpful,
-Brett

I resend it in and sent a little nasty email with it�..

I know rejections can be extremely annoying sometimes, but writing a note like that won't do you any favors.

The inspectors don't have anything against you personally, but when you think about just how many images they look through each day, it's important to stick to their rules.

Regarding keywords, if in doubt I leave it out - I'd rather get an image accepted with fewer keywords than rejected for unnecessary ones. I also upload sketches/scans/screengrabs & a note for every vector file to show my illustration from start to finish, which inspectors seem to really appreciate, again making it easier to approve the image.

It's definitely worth going the extra mile to ensure your files are up to scratch, as inspectors don't have the time to spend 'nannying' contributors (that's not aimed at anyone in particular, just a general observation) 

I'd appeal - if saving is unrelated to piggy bank - what else is related? Pig - for sure  not, bank - neither...

i find them the most frustrating of all the sites. The thing that gives me the pips is when you hit the last button and it says you need a word / category thing. what? You sit there and try to attach stuff and it obviously does not stick.

I just give up with them.

Same here, these keyword rejections are getting absurd.  What are they looking at?  Though I am constantly annoyed with them the sales remain good.  I just wish all of this made sense. 

I'm going to submit files with just the minimum keywords--5.  If it gets through then I'll go in later and add more. 

G~

I think these mistakes should be reported ([email protected]).  Someone is doing a big mess in IS - dirkr's post is a clear example.

I agree savings is ok for piggy bank (what are piggy banks for?). Wealth may be a kind of stretch, some will accept it, some won't.

Regards,
Adelaide

I shoot a lot of jewelry and gemstones.  Most of the names of rarer gemstones aren't in anybody's database and come back either omitted or with the infamous "incorrect keyword" or "incorrect spelling" rejection.  Uh, boys, just because you don't know what it is doesn't mean the jewelry trade doesn't, either.  sheesh!!  gimme a break, here!

lol, my problem is not with too many irrelevant keywords, it's with not enough keywords.
who is it? i think BigStock wants 10 keywords, and i always seem to have problems finding ten. luckily most of my images are isolateds, so i have copy, space, white, over, isolated... to add .
but yes, it is a problem . and IS can be a pain, even when you use the relevant keywords.
good to know we're not the only ones.

Because  coffee beans on a search for cappuccino fills up the search pages unnecessarily and makes the buyer page forward and forward looking, when they shouldn't have to.  Also, "cappuccino" is a noun.  "Coffee beans" is a noun.  It's not like that is a grey area.  Either it is there, or it isn't.

I've had over-the-top rejections, too.

You know, I probably wouldn't mind as much IF the resubmits didn't count as a new upload.

Well, time to upload my 15 so I can get another 2 online

Heh
If you see I am very upset, angry, .... (+50 very bad feelings and bad things about IS...)
Yes but why?
Maybe if I am buyer that is all OK but if you on the other side why that "superior, megaturbo super system" dont work for contributors in same way???
All complains about iStock are about that. Fck authors in all possible way for all kind of stupid triviality!?!
Why and for what? iStock in this way in quota protecting they newbee loosers as exclusive members??? Or programes have impotence or inability to solve that mutually simple thing???