PHOTO: Resubmit to creative collection?

Displaying 1 to 8 of 8 matches.
JessGibbs
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Mon Sep 17, 2012 6:18PM
Hi,


I'm new to iStock and have done two batches of uploads so far and today got my first rejections. Some of the rejections have confused me quite a bit. I searched around for ages trying to find an answer but could find what I was looking for, maybe someone here can help.


One of my photos was submitted as editoral because it had a trademarked landmark in it, they said "This image would be more suitable for the Creative Collection. Please resubmit it there if you wish." And there is a resubmit option.


Two other photos were submitted as editorial because they had houses in them that I don't have releases for, in both cases the houses were very small and/or out of focus with the general landscape being the main subject of the photo. They said "This photograph would be more useful and better suited if uploaded to iStockphoto’s main RF creative collection. Please remove all logos and/or logotypes (if there are any) and submit as creative RF with model release(s) if there are recognizable people in the image." But there is no resubmit option.


Are these two types of rejection saying different things? Or saying the same thing in different words? Where/what is the 'Creative Collection' mentioned in the first rejection? And is the 'main RF creative collection' mentioned in the second just a normal upload without the 'editorial' box ticked? Why does it say I can resubmit but the 'can resubmit' button isn't there? And do they mean property relase when they say model release in the second one, or can I resumit it as it is without releases since there aren't any people or logos in it?


Sorry for all the questions and my extreme confusion. Any light shed on the subject would be hugely appreciated.


Thanks heaps


Jess

(Edited on 2012-09-18 10:08:37 by donald_gruener)
Willowpix
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Mon Sep 17, 2012 6:35PM
Better to ask questions like these in the CRITIQUE FORUM. I suspect someone with magic powers may be along shortly to move this thread over there. smile

But the short answer is "if there are identifiable labels/brands/logos/trademarks/etc. in a photo, you are (usually) perfectly okay cloning/removing the offending item. As long as you do it well, and it isn't obviously/sloppily/etc. removed. Houses and such that are shot from a public spot (meaning where you are standing) are almost always okay - so usually you don't need to worry about property releases for something like that. And property releases (given by someone or some entity that owns or controls a property of some sort) are definitely different than model releases - which are used (as noted in the inspector's note) as someone's permission to use their likeness in any image where even an UNrecognizable person (from a photographer's or other observer's perspective) can actually recognize themself. "Recognize themself" being the key.

Those inspector suggestions are well worth taking into account - because a well-done "main RF creative collection" image (which yes, is an "other than editorial" image) is usually MUCH more likely to sell more often than almost any similar editorial image. In this case - after a quick read of your post, I'd think both rejections are saying essentially the same thing.

Anyway, never a problem asking questions. There is always someone about who will be willing to try to help. smile

(Edited on 2012-09-17 18:43:21 by Willowpix)

(Edited on 2012-09-17 18:49:09 by Willowpix)
JessGibbs
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Mon Sep 17, 2012 11:04PM

Thanks for you fast reply, Willowpix. So just to clarify the language the inspector was using: for photography iStock has two basic categories and one is editorial, is the other known as creative? I think that confuses me because I usually think 'commercial' is the other side to 'editorial' and in my mind creative is not commercial. So if i upload and don't tick the editorial box, I'm sending it to the creative collection?


Also, since they recommended submitting these three to the creative collection not the editorial collection but two photos are listed as 'no resubmit', do you think I can just include those two in my next upload?


Thanks again.
Difydave
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Sep 18, 2012 4:07AM

Don't take everything that is written in the refusal(s) to apply in it's entirity to that particular image. It's there as a general explanation which goes out with all refusals of that type, and not all the reasons given there may apply in every case.


If it doesn't say you can resubmit in the email then you can't resubmit it.


You can send any rejections you don't agree with for an opinion from Scout, who has the power to overturn rejections or make a file resubmittable if he thinks it's good enough or can be corrected. The link for that is under "Contact Us" at the bottom of the page. Only three scout submissions a month though. (I think that's right) 
donald_gruener
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Sep 18, 2012 10:36AM
creative is not commercial. So if i upload and don't tick the editorial box, I'm sending it to the creative collection?


For the first 10 years of its existence, iStock didn't license editorial stock at all. Everything was for commercial use and the collection didn't have any name per se. When we began developing an editorial-only collection, we began calling that commercial-use material the "creative" or "main" collection. "Creative" is the term Getty Images uses to denote this type of stock, so it's not surprising to find it here. Think of "creative" in terms of the buyer: creative professionals such as graphic designers, ad agencies, filmmakers, etc. who need images they can license for a wide range of uses, can manipulate as needed, without need to credit the artist.

And yes, by default everything heads to the main or creative collection, unless you check the Editorial checkbox.

Also, since they recommended submitting these three to the creative collection not the editorial collection but two photos are listed as 'no resubmit', do you think I can just include those two in my next upload?


No. The text of virtually all rejection emails is prewritten boilerplate: the Inspector chooses the reason they are rejecting the file, which automatically dumps that prewritten text into the rejection email you receive, and then the Inspector indicates whether the file can be resubmitted or not.

That means a couple of things. One, you can't really take every word of every rejection email entirely at face value. The Inspector did not say those things specifically to you, he or she just sent you the rejection notice that most closely informs of you of why your image is being rejected. Two, the Can or Cannot Resubmit IS the thing the Inspector is very specifically telling you. We do take this pretty seriously and do not like to see Cannot Resubmit images coming back through the queue. The Can or Cannot Resubmit status is not necessarily set in stone, on rare occasion this may get overturned if it's found that the Inspector was in error, but I'd say that in 95% of the cases, the Inspector makes a call that is correctly in line with the standards iStock has set forth.

With all that answered, going back to your initial post...it sounds like you may be sending images towards the editorial collection that have no real need to be. The only images we want in editorial are those which for some reason absolutely cannot be licensed as commercial stock. That may mean scenes where releasing all the people would be impossible, that may mean something where removing the logos would be impossible, that may mean photos of specific products which we cannot license commercially but which can be licensed in an editorial capacity. A photo that includes some houses for which you do not have property releases generally would not need to be limited to editorial only. The vast majority of houses you see in the creative collection are not released.

It may be beneficial, if you are willing, to post the rejected images here for us to see. That way we can give you some feedback into the rejections, why the editorial inspector refused them, why some were set as Cannot Resubmit. The Read This First thread at the top of this (Critique Request) forum has detailed tips on how to do this, as well as other guidelines for using this particular forum. I realize your thread got moved here, but this is the right place for it: this is the only area of the forums where discussing specific rejections is permitted.

I hope some of that was helpful, and that you'll let us take a look at the images so we can help you further.
Willowpix
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Sep 18, 2012 2:16PM
You're welcome Jess. But I'm glad Dave (always a helpful contributor - and always a gentleman as far as I have been able to discern) and Donald (also a gentleman, and a man possessing no small measure of magic in this iStock arena ) stopped in to add their dollars of advice to my two cents.
JessGibbs
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:43PM

Thank you everybody, you've shed a lot of light on everything and I'm much less confused now. As was suggested, here are my images in case you can clear up the remaining confusion. I did ready the instructions at the top of this forum, hopefully I followed them properly.


This first one is the photo that I am able to resubmit. It was rejected because "This image would be more suitable for the Creative Collection. Please resubmit it there if you wish." However, I sumitted it as editoral because I did a quick iStock search before uploading it and noticed that a lot of the other photos of it were editorial and I discovered through google that Pebble Beach has tradmarked this tree. Therefore I thought editorial was my only option.


https://dl.dropbox.com/u/107130789/Through%20Cypress%20Branches%20to%20Famous%20Lone%20Cypress%20Tree%20on%20Rock.jpg


These next two were both rejected for the same reason and are not able to be resubmitted. The rejection reason was: "This photograph would be more useful and better suited if uploaded to iStockphoto’s main RF creative collection. Please remove all logos and/or logotypes (if there are any) and submit as creative RF with model release(s) if there are recognizable people in the image." I submitted them as editorial because they had private houses in them and I didn't have a release. From your explainations I now understand that a release wasn't necessary in this situation.


https://dl.dropbox.com/u/107130789/House%20Nestled%20in%20Foggy%20Hills%20with%20White%20Letter%20Box.jpg


https://dl.dropbox.com/u/107130789/House%20on%20Grass%20Hill%20Above%20Rocky%20Coastline%20with%20Fog.jpg


So this is my confusion: Why would I be able to sumbit something that is trademarked to the main collection? And since we've established that the other two didn't need a release, why wouldn't I be able to resumbit them to the main collection?


Thanks heaps to all of you for your patience and explainations.
Simplyphotos
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:36PM

The two that say no resubmit have some Chromatic Abberration (purple fringing, or red or green).  You see it along the hill in the house in the fog shot and on the house and around the mail box on the other shot.  The mail box is a bit over exposed, retained little detail, and there is areas in dark with no detail, and so I believe it was a lighting issues for the no resubmit.  If you feel they are fixable to istock standard then you should send to scout and ask him to over turn the no resubmit.  


The tree that allows a resubmit doesnt' seem to have the subject of the photo in focus and I would be surprised if it was accepted, so I'm as confused as you are after viewing it.  Someone else will have to address that issue.
This thread has been locked.
Displaying 1 to 8 of 8 matches.
Not a member?Join