Focused description ... ???

I have never thrown a rejection question in the forums before, but I'm stumped and don't know what more to do.  How much more description can I possibly add?  Please, help!


Here is the file.

I'd follow the directions and contact help@ ...

Weird, it looks like you have no categories.

/
/I was going to contact help if I couldn't figure out how to fix it before that. I have about 30 files pending and don't want all of them to end up rejected for the same reason!

(I guess the categories just don't show up in rejected files ... maybe it's still under the old system?)



(I sent an email to support ... I hope I can figure this out before all the rest of my files get rejected!) 

(Edited on 2007-07-28 21:02:17 by nicolesy)

I went over to see how this description differed from your other descriptions -- and the few of your "lady/beach" pics I looked have no description at all, just a link to "more photos of this model".

Maybe the old way is better.

This morning I had some rejections when I did it the "old way" (just putting the light-box link in the description) and the rejection reason was to add more detail to the description.  So, like a good iStocker I immediately added more detail to the description for all of my pending images to prevent further rejections, but still got the same rejection reason for some of those images.

Maybe the inspector already had downloaded the file onto their computer before you changed the description, and it's the old description they were seeing?

I thought that might have been the case ... but since I have no idea how the inspection process really works then I wasn't sure what to think.  (Plus the link they sent me had all the correct info on it ... I just assume that they see the same thing.)

Nicole, I'm quite certain that particular rejection notice was applied
by error since the subject is not one we'd use that rejection on. It's
likely a resubmit.

(BTW, I hope no one views this post as a complaint ... I always do my best to learn from my rejections -- and I have learned so much!! --, but for some reason I couldn't find the answer on my own and needed some "emergency" assistance.)

Ok, thanks Marilyn ... I am able to resubmit it I just wanted to create as little work for everyone as possible, both for myself and inspectors.

Take a good look at it before you resubmit as it may have another
issue--just not one I can point out without inspsecting the file.

I'm really getting tired of having to resubmit for this rejection. On some series I just include the links for my model searches, and most get through, and one or two get this rejection, so I have to waste time reuploading the image.

Can we drop this description rejection reason please? If your asking for more details because of copyright or something, fine - state that specifically in the reason, but don't just use it sporadically.

Ah Sean, you've brought up another possibility that I missed... there should always be a description for your file. Sean you've just probably happen to have had a few slip through.

/
/Correct Marilyn, a description is required for files, not only a link to a lightbox, this is why your images were rejected. In future please add a little text to go with your lightboxes for the clients.

ETA: Thank you. 

(Edited on 2007-07-29 11:37:10 by evilclown)

Maybe this rejection reason could be like the "missing model release", where we just have to go in and fix the problem and not have to go through the entire upload process again, since there was nothing wrong with the original file to begin with.


(BTW, I resubmitted and it was approved this morning ... must have been a weird glitch or something. ) 

Yes, and it's a pain to resubmit them again.

Ha!

Ok, this is really starting to tick me off. Just got two more.



I don't see the need to indicate the camera used. It wasn't scanned in. The subject is a girl. The location is a studio. As evidenced by looking at the image, and at the keywords, which include "girl" and "studio shot". The description is not searched or translated, and in this case is best used to visually link to the rest of the series.

If this was at a specific location, I can see listing that. But rejecting this generic studio shot for the description is ridiculous. It's a waste of time for me and the inspector.

And I just got another rejection while I was typing. Cut it out!

What is a waste of your time and the inspectors is to not include the description in the first place.  iStock has always required a description for all files, just providing links to other lightboxes or images doesn't cut it.  You may have had some images slip through in the past, we're looking to tighten up on that.


Also image descriptions are used in more ways than you may realise. For example check out the recent approved XML feed.  Who is to say what will be translated in 1, 5 or 10 years time.

Put simply add a description or get a rejection.

 

nicolesy - most of your recent images rejected for focused description have just had this:


Description:




The file you link to in your original post was rejected in error. I guess the inspectors got used to seeing no description and got carried away. Anyway I've approved it now.

Additionally I should add. If an inspector has already downloaded your
images in a batch, they will not see changes you make to the files data
on site. It's unavoidable, sorry.

(Edited on 2007-07-30 09:33:37 by Sirimo)