What are well covered subjects.

Recently I got a refused image message, the reason: a well covered subjet in DT.

I am not complaining, at all, Is not the first, and for sure will not be the last.

But I'vee been wondering about the refusal reasons, specially the well covered subject one. I agree when there are technical or quality problems with the image, there are no subjective, are what they are. But what happens when the reason is less clear, when is more relative to the person who is reviewing or to a false perception based on numbers wich are subjet of interpretation...

Here is what I've been wondering:

is it more important the quantity of the images or the sales of an image?

what means a well covered subjet in th database? thousands of images with hardly any sale at all? or subjets with images selling a lot?

I wonder this because I see a lot of photographers with thousands of images, and thousands sales, but when you see the sales per image, then you realize there are thousands of no selling, 0 sales images in that accounts..

This takes me to the following questions: Are images being rejected becuase subjects are saturated of great quality images that for some reason are not selling. Leaving out other lesser quality images that could sell better?

Are DT team taking in consideration the sales that images in a saturated subject are reporting? Are the sales/image of a photographer being considered when refusing a file for such reasons?

example: the following image

Image removed by admin

If you search for wolrd map, and sort the results for relevancy descendin, there are many images covering the subject with no sales at all. nothing personal with these photographers, but I think as site improves the quality, also will be a good Idea to allow new images to proe their value in these subjects.

Will be a good Idea to let photographers bet on their hunches? for example letting the once rejected images go online for a probation time, say 1-2 months if there are no sales, the images go to free section automatically. I repeat I am not talking about images with technical issues or quality problems. I am talking about a human criteria about concept, About creativity, wich is no technically meassurable.

What do you think about this, have you wondered the same?

Sorry for mistakes in my English.

Have a great Day

Your article must be written in English



I would echo the comments. I get about 80% refused for being well covered even if they aren't when you do a search.

I just put them elsewhere and they sell well so no worries. The market is not well covered just DT. As people said just move on.


Yeah, I know what you mean ... we all do. I call it business practice, some things you just got to do.


I guess this is also a well covered subject too. I don't care my images being refused, really, it's just a tremendous server space wasted!!! Thanks.


Creativei you are right on! Move on.

Diego ... All unhappiness is caused by comparison.


Well if you search the blogs and message boards, you will find countless posts about this topic, my advice is just ignore the refused images and move on. Or try uploading to other stock sites, which is well covered here may be not in other sites ultimately you want to make money from your photos and the time you spent on post processing. So it doesn't matter from which site the revenue is coming in. There are many photographer who agree on this. And no matter what the site owners will not change these perspectives, if they don't need such well covered images, that means no they don't need. Just move on.

Related image searches
Image related image searches