Posted Wed Nov 30, 2011 8:54AM
I have four scanned film files that I am currently trying to submit as editorial - 18106471, 18106379, 18302759 and 18503955. All have been rejected because The EXIF dates does not match the production date. The istock rule is that they do not need to match for scanned film. I even sent two of the to scout and got this reply.
This is a scanned film image submitted to editorial. It has been rejected twice because the EXIF data doesn\'t match the date the photo was taken. It is my understanding that because scanned film never has a correct date of production in the EXIF that the dates do not need (can not) match the date in the caption. Please put this back in the que with a note to the editorial inspectors that the dates do not need to match.
The file 18106471 was uploaded correctly via the film queue so exif information is not required. With that said, I have changed the status to 'needs release' so a property release granting you permission to upload this file as your original copyrighted work can be uploaded and the file re-evaluated.
I added the release (a second time as it was added to the original submission) and the files were rejected for EXIF data again!
What do I need to do to get these and future scanned film inspected as editorial?
Posted Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:37PM
I occasionally add, to the description of my scanned images, "Scan from Portra 160" (for example), just to ensure the available information is repeated.
Posted Sun Dec 18, 2011 9:01AM
Strange, I haven't had a problem with that (yet), having submitted a number of film scans as editorial through DeepMeta. I just select the scanned film option, though like marco, I do add in the description that it's a film scan with visible film grain, including type of film, mostly because I thought it might be of interest to the buyer.
Posted Tue Dec 27, 2011 10:43PM
Your "Date Created" is incorrect on those uploads, it should match your caption, manually change it to the correct date instead of letting it read from the EXIF and you should be OK.