Author Topic: ridiculous rejections at IS.... (Read 7879 times)

Peter · « **on:** April 04, 2008, 09:36 »

Quote

This file contains legible information such as names, signatures, license plates, phone numbers, identification numbers, etc. Due to concerns relating to privacy and related property rights, we cannot accept this file unless this information is removed, or a release is obtained.

HAHAHAHA!!! Serial number. This image was accepted at FT, SS, DT, StockXpert, 123rf...

rene · « **Reply #1 on:** April 04, 2008, 10:03 »

IS reviewer was right. BTW IS has the best reviewers in my opinion.
We are living in ridiculous word and we have to follow ridiculous rules.

vphoto · « **Reply #2 on:** April 04, 2008, 10:07 »

IS reviews are seems to be as tuned to detect serial numbers on dvds or cds as hounds on narcotics. My image of dvd stack was also rejected for the same reason.

Peter · « **Reply #3 on:** April 04, 2008, 10:08 »

how can you recognize some product by serial number? please.....

also another ridiculous rejection at IS:

Quote

+We regret to inform you we cannot accept this image on the basis of counterfeiting statues and legal issues that this may cause.

LOL!

tdoes · « **Reply #4 on:** April 04, 2008, 11:12 »

Quote from: Chode on April 04, 2008, 10:08

how can you recognize some product by serial number? please.....

also another ridiculous rejection at IS:

Quote
+We regret to inform you we cannot accept this image on the basis of counterfeiting statues and legal issues that this may cause.

LOL!

Yep, there's alot of clothes hanger counterfeiters in the world I'm afraid!

jcphoto · « **Reply #5 on:** April 04, 2008, 11:51 »

Quote from: Chode on April 04, 2008, 10:08

how can you recognize some product by serial number? please.....

If you type any serial number into Google it will return results. For exapmple I typed the file number for the clothes line money shot into google and the photo turned up on thethe fourth page of results. So i guess they are afraid that some one will be able to id the manufacturer

stokfoto · « **Reply #6 on:** April 04, 2008, 12:10 »

first of all very nice images .well done.
a few times I too had similar rejections in the past but I agreed with their decision,also as mentioned above I agree among all micros IS has the most consistent reviews.

hatman12 · « **Reply #7 on:** April 04, 2008, 14:16 »

Reproducing US dollar bills is against the law in America - it is caught by the money laundering and conterfeiting laws. This means that you can photograph or scan PART of a bill, but you cannot show the entire bill 'face on'.

Chode, under US law your photograph is illegal and that is why IS has rejected it.

w7lwi · « **Reply #8 on:** April 04, 2008, 19:01 »

Reproduction of Currency

Authority: The Counterfeit Detection Act of 1992, Public Law 102-550

Color Reproductions
Section 411 of Title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations permits the printing, publishing or importation, or the making or importation of the necessary plates or items for such printing or publication, of color illustrations of U.S. currency provided that:

1. The illustration must be of a size less than three-fourths or more than one and one-half, in linear dimension, of each part of any matter so illustrated;

2. The illustration must be one sided; and

3. All negatives, plates, digitized storage medium, graphic files, magnetic medium, optical storage devices, and any other thing used in the making of the illustration that contain an image of the illustration or any part thereof shall be destroyed and or deleted or erased after their final use in accordance with this section.

Black and White Reproductions
Title 18, United States Code, Section 504 permits black and white reproductions of currency and other obligations, provided such reproductions meet the size requirement.

madelaide · « **Reply #9 on:** April 04, 2008, 19:56 »

Quote from: w7lwi on April 04, 2008, 19:01

3. All negatives, plates, digitized storage medium, graphic files, magnetic medium, optical storage devices, and any other thing used in the making of the illustration that contain an image of the illustration or any part thereof shall be destroyed and or deleted or erased after their final use in accordance with this section.

So Chode's image would be ok for the first 2 rules. What exactly is the 3rd rule about?

Regards,
Adelaide

w7lwi · « **Reply #10 on:** April 05, 2008, 09:52 »

I'm neither a lawyer nor versed in Federal law so cannot make any statements as such. My personal opinion, and it's only that, is that section 3 means that once you're done with an image, all files associated with it must be destroyed. As photographers, this would mean any digital file containing the image. If it's still for sale or you have other uses (apart from counterfeiting LOL), you may keep the digital file for as long as it's active. But once it's use is done, the files must be deleted. Same rules would apply to whomever purchased the image. There's a lot of other stuff in section 3, but they apply to other means of duplication. For us, it's just the digital files. I assume this would also apply to any prints and/or negatives you may have in your files or in the purchaser's files.

Again, this is only my personal opinion, not any legal interpretation. I'm not aware of any case law that would address this situation, so until such is adjudicated we need to rely on our own caution and common sense.

Peter · « **Reply #11 on:** April 05, 2008, 10:10 »

so, if I submit black-white version it shoud get accepted, or?

Peter · « **Reply #12 on:** April 05, 2008, 10:27 »

then how did those passed:

http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup/object/5131280_hard_earned_cash_100_bills_xl.php?id=5131280

http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup/object/5496675_money_down_the_drain.php?id=5496675

etc.....

madelaide · « **Reply #13 on:** April 05, 2008, 12:16 »

Chode,

I think both examples fit into the usage restrictions shown in w7lwi's post.

I have many images with currencies, they're always uner those limits too (and I often use money partially cropped and/or with shallow DOF blurring parts of it).
This is what I have with dollar in DT, for instance.

Regards,
Adelaide

Peter · « **Reply #14 on:** April 05, 2008, 12:36 »

my front dollar bill is also partialy covered by this yellow thing (I dont know the name of it, english is not my native language, hehe). It is very little covered, but it technicaly it is not whole dollar bill shown.

should I try with bw version?

like this:

yingyang0 · « **Reply #15 on:** April 05, 2008, 13:03 »

Quote from: Chode on April 05, 2008, 10:27

then how did those passed:

The first one is shot at an angle and couldn't be used to create fake currency. The second one had 1/3 of the bills cut off and couldn't be used to create fake currency.

Your photo only has a little of the fringe covered by the clothes pin, and is is a flat/head-on photo of a $100 bill. The clothes pin doesn't cover enough, obviously, to satisfy them.

Black and White won't help you because you don't meet the size requirements.

I don't make the laws, I just follow them. If I were you I'd shoot it again. This time at an angle and with a much larger clothes pin.

Peter · « **Reply #16 on:** April 05, 2008, 13:17 »

I dont get this "size" rule? It can be big or small what ever you want? this is 10MP image, so real size is a lot biger than original

w7lwi · « **Reply #17 on:** April 05, 2008, 16:21 »

If you go the the U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing web site where the excerpt came from, they show examples of the size rule. I see nothing in the excerpt or the actual rule that says you cannot show the entire face of the bill or any portion thereof, so long as the size rule is maintained. If correct, you needn't worry about blocking off any particular part or percentage of the bill's face. What you cannot do is to show both front and back ... only one side. And the image cannot be between 3/4 and 1-1/2 times the original size of the bill. The size rule says the image must be less than 3/4 size or larger than 1-1/2 size. Your original image of the bill itself (not the total image size), at 100%, must meet those limitations. Then the end user, who purchases your images, must also abide by the rules. They can change the size to suit their needs, but they must also maintain the greater than/lesser than restriction.

Here's a link to the Federal Regulation noted. http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=9c14677d75ec94136e79302e029e0d9d&rgn=div5&view=text&node=31:2.1.2.3.9&idno=31#31:2.1.2.3.9.0.24.1

Peter · « **Reply #18 on:** April 05, 2008, 17:11 »

ok than. my image is much larger than original bill. no problem there. and also only 1 side is visible. I'll reupload bw version.

graficallyminded · « **Reply #19 on:** April 05, 2008, 17:48 »

MY approval rating just went down to 13.15%

I love it. I just got my last 20 or so submissions rejected. Most for "We're sorry, but we did not find this file suitable as stock. With the rapid growth of the iStock collection, we give valuable consideration to each file but unfortunately cannot accept all submissions."

I'm a silver cannister, with 43 images and over 3000 downloads - the images I somehow managed to slip in sell great, but yet that means nothing to istock. If only I could get more approvals there, I'd be tripling and quadrupling my sales. I try not to get discouraged, because the money is great over there. I just only wish I could somehow someday break the 100 images approved mark.

In total, I've got about 900 images, both photos and illustrations. They hate my photoshopped illustrations. Maybe I should start doing more vectors. I try being very choosy even, with what I submit - it still doesn't seem to help.

yingyang0 · « **Reply #20 on:** April 05, 2008, 18:02 »

Quote from: Chode on April 05, 2008, 17:11

ok than. my image is much larger than original bill. no problem there. and also only 1 side is visible. I'll reupload bw version.

I still think it will be rejected. IS rejects all flat shoots of currency no matter what. Why not just reshoot the photograph so that the money is at a slight angle. That way it will pass inspection, and more importantly you won't be visited by Secret Service agents.

w7lwi · « **Reply #21 on:** April 06, 2008, 09:23 »

I agree with yingyang0 that a simple resubmittal, whether in B&W or color, will be rejected again. A better course of action would be to send a request to Scout, along with a link to the Federal regulation, requesting a review of their policy and acceptance of the original images. If after seeing the rules for themselves they still decide to take a safe approach and reject the images, then there's nothing further you can do and you should just move on. They're good images. Submit them elsewhere and see what happens.

Peter · « **Reply #22 on:** April 06, 2008, 10:55 »

Ok, tnx all.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: ridiculous rejections at IS.... (Read 7879 times)

Peter

rene

vphoto

Peter

tdoes

jcphoto

stokfoto

hatman12

w7lwi

madelaide

w7lwi

Peter

Peter

madelaide

Peter

yingyang0

Peter

w7lwi

Peter

graficallyminded

yingyang0

w7lwi

Peter

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors