ShutterStock

[Digivaler]

LOL man they're tough...
My pictures all got rejected mainly because of noise and some of them were considered overshapened. Overshapened? For city shots I usually switch to landscape style on my camera. Should I use another style?

Any suggestions on shooting techiques and a workflow to better my chances in getting accepted?

[JWright]

Interesting that their site isn't working... Yeah, they are pretty picky for someone that only pays the photographer $0.25 for each image purchased.

[Eagle]

Yes they are picky. Hoping this doesn't turn in to a for and against microstock thread. Submitting pics to them and working with your rejections to get them accepted is a good learning experience.

[ericgtr]

It seems to me they maximize them and scrutinize every pixel probably because they want to sell high quality, large printable sizes. I too got rejected but wasn't too surprised the only bummer is taking all the time to upload and keyword them, there's 1.5 hours I will never get back lol.

[Eagle]

It seems to me they maximize them and scrutinize every pixel You'll want to look at them at 100% at the least. Look for noise and focus first.

[Digivaler]

I have a Canon Rebel XTI and shot all of those picture at the lowest ISO setting of 100. I thought at ISO 100 noise is very minimal. What can I do to take out the noise at ISO 100?

[Eagle]

If your exposure is off, especially under exposed you will have noise. Start by getting it right. If you have PS or PSElements you can download Noise Ninja. Or look for Neat Image or any other noise reduction software. Look through the Post Processing forums here and see what you can find, or ask for help there. The main thing is to hit it right out of the camera, exposure, lighting, focus, etc.

[ericgtr]

I have a Canon Rebel XTI and shot all of those picture at the lowest ISO setting of 100. I thought at ISO 100 noise is very minimal. What can I do to take out the noise at ISO 100?
I just had all 10 photos (on my second try) rejected, all citing noise. Many of the shots were shot using a tripod with MLU at ISO 100 some of them as big as 14 megs. So, they still aren't good enough and I will not waste anymore of my time uploading and keywording for nothing, it's a lengthy process for a stock site like that.

As for criticism, I have always welcomed it here and at other sites but it appeared as if my screener just batched out the same answer while not even looking.

[Digivaler]

Thanks everyone. If I don't get at least one picture accepted on my second try I'll probably won't waste anymore time on Shutterstock.

[Mcary]

Thanks everyone. If I don't get at least one picture accepted on my second try I'll probably won't waste anymore time on Shutterstock.

I've found that sharpening via the lab channel works very well and seems to give results that the reviewers at Shutter Stock like.

To prep the files for upload I export/ the files from LR as JPEGs Highest Level then run the Lab sharpening action on the open files in CS2. The action is set-up to stop at the USM step so I can tweak each image individually and final save them as level 11 or 12 JPEGS before submitting.

BTW since I've not had an image rejected because it wasn't sharp enough I've reduced the level of USM from 85% to 60/50% to reduce the changes of getting an image rejected for this reason.

Initial submittal 9/1 April 9th 2007
subsequent submittals
7/2
19/3
23/2
13/6
33/0

Note first number is the number of images accepted the second is the number rejected. Most rejections were do to noise/over sharpening

Mike