iStockphoto and their little rules for submissions. I'm kinda just doing this whole iStock thing for shits and giggles so that I can maybe make enough money to buy myself a 6 pack of Blue Moon every now and then instead of whatever other tasty beer is on sale, but it's really getting frustrating.
I would really like to know what defines "we found this file over filtered from its original appearance/quality," or if that's just their way of saying sorry, we really just don't like you or your pictures. This photo received that little mark. It's scanned Velvia. The preset I used for it added highlight recovery, brightened the scene, pulled some contrast, and changed the tone curve slightly. ooooooooh drastically over-filtered. This one is scanned Kodachrome that was just so damn good I didn't even do anything to it. Props to mom for the shot. Apparently, it's also over-filtered. -_- . Does iStock not even look at any metadata at all? I know LR writes all adjustments to exported jpegs (I don't know why), so its not like the information isn't right there in the open. Oh wait, it gets even better. Fuji Neopan 1600 is now an extreme Photoshop filter you put inside your analog camera to make it shoot Black & White film. Ironically, they accepted a shot that was ridiculously processed compared to the original. :{|.
I actually had another one rejected due to excessive purple fringing (chromatic aberration?). I understand, since that can really make or break a photo. You know, if your photo even has purple in it. Saturation levels for that particular shot:
-_-
I just want my beer. Seriously, iStock, how hard can it be.
1 comments:
they like my stuff
guess they just like pissing you off
i'm glad my smiley faces are rubbing off on you
got them from chloe
haha
Post a Comment