I have been a contributor for a while now, and I have had some success so far. I understand that sometimes I shoot photos with a bit of an artistic style that may not lend itself well to stock photography, but I am very confused this time.
The photo labeled "rejected" was obviously rejected, but the one labeled "accepted" was accepted and is in my public portfolio. The reason given was "technical issues". Initially I thought they rejected it because I got a little to creative, shooting during the blue hour using daylight white-balance. I figured I would color correct the WB since I shoot raw files, no big deal. Then I saw that the other was accepted, and now I am really confused, since the only difference in the two files is the orientation. One was landscape, and the other in portrait.
What are the technical issues with the rejected files that are not present in the accepted file?
*Accepted photo is portrait orientation. Rejected photo is landscape orientation.*
Sometimes they only want one of the two images that are similar in nature. A lot of companies will do this as well. It's up to the reviewer to decide which one to take.
I get that, and often when shooting landscapes I will shoot one in portrait orientation, and one in landscape orientation. Sometimes they take both, other times they will reject one for "similar image already submitted".
It's the "technical issues" as the reason for rejection that has me confused.
I don't see a technical issue with the wide shot, that wouldn't also be present in the tall shot. Know what I mean?
Of the two, I think the portrait one is framed better.
Landscape has nothing of interest in the wide portion to justify it being submitted as landscape.
That could be a possibility, but two additional versions of this photo were also submitted in both portrait and landscape orientations, although they were not long exposures. The standard 1/250th exposure versions were accepted and rejected in the opposite fashion, meaning they accepted the landscape oriented one, and rejected the portrait version. The reason given for those was "similar images submitted already".
This was rejected for technical issues. It's not a big deal, really, but there is quite a lot of inconsistency when it comes to submissions being accepted and rejected.
Once the landscape version was rejected for technical issues, I fully expected the portait version to be rejected as well, but two days later, it was accepted. I think different photo editors have different opinions as to what constitutes a technical issue maybe?
I did a 3-frame panorama of a motor grader. I submitted the stitched unit and each of the 3 frames. The front of the unit was rejected for similar. There was not a second of that unit front uploaded either in that batch or before. The guideline to upload is that up to 6 similar is accepted as long as each provides something different for the customer. In that 6 orientation is included. There is no way 1/3 of an equipment can be similar to a whole equipment in that context, but I got rejection for similar. I uploaded all the shots to other platforms with the same guideline definition for similar and all 4 files were accepted. I have several other puzzling experiences regarding my submitted files including blocked uploads of photo file size larger than 6MB and 100% rejection of smaller files.
Maybe different moderators? These are are well done from a quick glance, but I could see the argument of a white balance technical issue from a stock perspective.
Maybe so. I kind of thought they were going to reject both for white balance, even though I shot them this way intentionally. Should I correct WB and re-submit the landscape oriented photo? Or, once it is rejected, is it a one-and-done thing? I have never attempted to correct, and resubmit an image.
How much do you want to dilute your portfolio with the same image?
That's like going to an auction and outbidding yourself.
Well, I thought It could be useful to have one available for mobile use, and one for desktop use. Like I said, I am not heartbroken over this, just curious that's all.
You can resubmit an image after correcting I believe, I've heard there is a rejection percentage to stay above. 10% or 20% I think, although I could be wrong about that.
Thanks. I didn't know there was a rejection % to stay above, but if it is 10-20% I am in good shape. I am not going to worry about it. I like the photo, and I am glad at least one variation got in.
I don't believe I've ever read about a particular rejection percentage that we need to stay under. However, here's another data point to consider. A few years ago a Stock Contributor Annual Bonus was in place to provide us with a free annual subscription to Creative Cloud Photography Plan if we had submitted and had accepted a minimum of 300 images that calendar year; but our overall acceptance rate had to exceed 50%. This leads me to believe that the 10-20% estimate cited above is rather low. I think we have more leeway than that.
I remember that, and I did qualify. That was about the time I switched from Getty Images to Adobe Stock. Honestly I sold more through Getty, via editorial images, but the commissions are better with Adobe.
I've heard there is a rejection percentage to stay above. 10% or 20% I think, although I could be wrong about that.
You are wrong about that. Years ago, to become eligible for a free plan you needed to have a rejection rate below 50%. But that was one of the conditions to be eligible for the reward. However, if you are a seasoned contributor and your rejection rate is very high, you should ask yourself if this is worth the work put into the submission process. New contributors have probably a high rejection rate.
Should I correct WB and re-submit the landscape oriented photo? Or, once it is rejected, is it a one-and-done thing?
By @Deleted User
You can correct and resubmit.
IMHO, both should have got a refusal because of the white balance.
I agree, but I intended to shoot them this way for artistic purposes. And when the landscape shot was rejected, I thought the portrait one would be as well, but a day or so later, the portrait one was accepted.
Just weird that's all. I have NO problems fixing white balance and I do not get offended when a shot is rejected. I just REALLY liked these two "as shot" and in the end, I am glad one of the made the collection in it's intended form. 😁
I stop doing portraits of the same image a while back. I figure the buyer can crop my landscape format to portait if they want.
Rember that "technical issues" include composition. Perhaps they consider one of the images to have composition less than perfect.
But the non-long exposure version of the same composition was accepted. The exact same shot, but at 1/250th instead of 30 seconds.
@Deleted User , the portrait shot is sharp and well focused. The landscape is not as sharp.
I can't confirm that finding.
Hi @Deleted User ,
Your shots are nice. It is advisable to shoot in both landscape and portrait. You do not get rejection for that. Some customers prefer to license portrait while others prefer landscape. You did not get a similar rejection, therefore, the rejection had nothing to do with orientation. You got a technical issue rejection. I've inspected both. This is my findings.
The portrait displays more noise in the top right corner and it is less exposed than the landscape.
In my opinion both are equally sharp and the compositions are good. Both have equally soft edges at the far end of the log.
A possibility is that two different moderators reviewed your files or the moderator had preference for the less exposed file, or the acceptance or rejection had to do with the state of mind at the time.
Photographer and Nutrition Author
Seems reasonable. I think you are probably correct.
Hello @Deleted User , to me it seams a focus issue. The log in the portrait photo is real sharp and the landscape is soft and not very crisp.