Author Topic: Bigstock is soooooo slow (Read 13322 times)

ichiro17 · « **on:** April 25, 2006, 19:47 »

Why is bigstock so slooooooow? I've had files in queue for 20 days now and its not getting any quicker. Despite the fact I've made 1 sale on 8 pictures, I would really like to have them speed up or at least tell me how long its going to take. This is pretty bad.

pixelbrat · « **Reply #1 on:** April 25, 2006, 20:45 »

Holy cow... 20 days?? That's horrible! I just finished submitting a ton to them so I guess I can just sit back and wait.... and wait.... and wait....

leaf · « **Reply #2 on:** April 26, 2006, 01:37 »

wow, that is pretty long. Are you sure you don't need to add more info or edit them more, or click on the submit button for them or something?

pixelbrat · « **Reply #3 on:** April 26, 2006, 05:21 »

Well, I just got a huge batch of rejections from them this morning and it only took a little over a week so like Leaf said, maybe there's something wrong.

On a side note... the majority of the rejections all said "General low interest subject, not enough demand / selling potential for this photo" or "We have enough of this subject already...sorry". Admittedly I'm quite bitter about this as all of these shots are selling like hotcakes on both SS and IS.

I know I shouldn't take this personally but it's hard knowing how well these are selling elsewhere. Oh well, their loss I guess.

Hallgerd · « **Reply #4 on:** April 26, 2006, 07:39 »

i had the same. My photos have waited about two weeks, and all have been rejected because of "low interest subject" and "we have enough" - these photos were accepted even on IS - where I have really many photos rejected.

leaf · « **Reply #5 on:** April 26, 2006, 08:55 »

wow.. that is surprising. Bigstock is usually very eager to take imges. I am the opposite of you. Everything seems to get rejected for me on istock the last little bit.

it sure is frustrating waiting two weeks just for a reject though

pixelbrat · « **Reply #6 on:** April 26, 2006, 14:57 »

Well, I guess I can't complain too much because late this afternoon I just got 15 approved by Bigstock. Go figure. I'm not gonna sweat it I guess.

Yes, iStock loves to reject my stuff as well. I'm always more surprised by getting approvals from IS than by getting rejected. No big deal to me since SS snatches all those up and sells them like crazy for me.

ichiro17 · « **Reply #7 on:** April 26, 2006, 22:11 »

Bigstock is weird. I got the same low interest/we have enough for a picture of a rabbit in the mist in the morning. I was shocked with that because no one else has rejected that one. I personally thought that it would be useable, but the funniest thing is that they never answer my e-mails asking why its taking forever to look at my stuff.

GeoPappas · « **Reply #8 on:** April 27, 2006, 05:42 »

I have also had the same "split personality" from BigStock. 8 out of my first 10 photos were accepted, but now 3 out of 4 were rejected. One of the rejections was for "We have enough of this subject already" and the other two rejections were for "Subject not evident enough - hard to tell what the subject of the photo is".

Here are the two photos that they thought had no subject:

Hot Green Jalapeno Pepper On Fire:

Holy Spirit Turning Bible Pages:

Maybe it's just me, but the subjects look pretty evident to me!

CJPhoto · « **Reply #9 on:** April 27, 2006, 05:49 »

You links aren't working from me but the subject looks pretty evident for the second one just from the title!!

I have a few in the que so hopefully I dont suffer the same fate.

Next time jsut say it is an abstract and therefore doesn't need a subject.

leaf · « **Reply #10 on:** April 27, 2006, 06:17 »

i think you are the only one who can see those files within bigstock.

ichiro17 · « **Reply #11 on:** April 27, 2006, 07:20 »

Bigstock has took a tumble for the worse. All my photos - most of which the same type were accepted before - have been rejected. By being accepted before I mean my last upload. What has changed? I don't know. And their excuse for everything is blurriness - Which my photos are not because if they were acceptable before and they were shot with the same camera I don't see how they suddenly became blurry.

fintastique · « **Reply #12 on:** April 27, 2006, 07:42 »

Not too impressed with Big Stock's "dirty tricks" they allow a huge backlog to build up then to clear it they just reject image after image. My latest batch of over 100 photos which was had a 50-70% acceptance rate with other agencies was less than 30% with Big Stock so then that dragged me down to below 50% so I could only have 30 photos pending.

Steve
www.fintastique.com/guide.htm

leaf · « **Reply #13 on:** April 27, 2006, 08:51 »

sounds like someone has a cactus in their underwear drawer over at bigstock.

ichiro17 · « **Reply #14 on:** April 27, 2006, 14:35 »

There's a huge cactus at Big Stock. They have no consistency and its turning into a farce. Its unfortunate because i will probably stop submitting to them. Not only do they not get consistent downloads, the general overall running of the site is bad.

In terms of structure, the photographers get the most from the sites that offer packages for pictures, which is why Shutterstock is the best of the best for downloads. I'm just hoping Fotolia picks up a bit because they like my pictures and they accept them (i have 24 pictures on there, only 5 were rejected) so thats a pretty good rate of acceptance.

Anyone think that Fotolia will pick up?

And I'm also hoping to get into Shutterstock soon. I hope. lol

I applied to iStock 2 days ago, still no word so it probably takes a while.

leaf · « **Reply #15 on:** April 27, 2006, 14:45 »

yeah i think istock takes a while. They are big sticklers on rejections though.

ichiro17 · « **Reply #16 on:** April 27, 2006, 14:49 »

Probably the wrong thread, but how's Shutterstock on rejections?

leaf · « **Reply #17 on:** April 27, 2006, 15:35 »

well i would genearlly say about like bigstock... but not how bigstock is recently.

They accept more than the average.

HOWEVER they are big sticklers on the noise... You can safely send everything through noise reduction. Don't be fooled by ISO 100 either... it isn't good enough, there is still noise, especially of landscapes with blue skies, or shadows anywhere in your image.

pixelbrat · « **Reply #18 on:** April 27, 2006, 16:00 »

I highly reccommend Shutterstock. I get twice as many downloads using them than I do with iStock and I've never had one rejection from them. They are a heck of a lot quicker on approvals too. Usually less than 24 hours.

GeoPappas · « **Reply #19 on:** April 27, 2006, 17:26 »

Sorry for the broken links on my images (on the first page of this thread). I have corrected them now. If you go back to the previous page, you should be able to see them now.

ichiro17 · « **Reply #20 on:** April 27, 2006, 18:27 »

I just got Noise Ninja Pro and it seems to be amazing and easy to work. I reduced the noise on all my pics with ease. Very happy about that.

Would it be alright if I posted my top 10 that I'm going to submit to Shutterstock and whoever is interested could give me an opinion on whether they think it will be accepted?

As well, do you apply ninja to every picture to be safe?

GeoPappas · « **Reply #21 on:** April 27, 2006, 18:44 »

I have Neat Image (because it was the first to offer a plug-in for PSP and PS), but they are very similar. I used to only apply noise reduction on photos where it was obvious, but lately I have started to apply it on every image (even ISO 100 images). When viewing images at 100-200% you really start to see things that you wouldn't if reduced to a full-screen size.

leaf · « **Reply #22 on:** April 28, 2006, 01:46 »

idon't think you SHOULD have to, in an ideal world. but since shutterstock is to noise picky, yes I apply noise reduction to every image. I use an automatic camera detection setting in noise ninja, so when the camera was at iso 100 only a small amount of noise reductino is applied.

ichiro17 · « **Reply #23 on:** April 28, 2006, 08:00 »

An update with Bigstock....

I had 20 out of 20 pictures rejected. Why? Because that cactus is growing. One 1 of those 20 pictures was rejected elsewhere. So I think they are just being incredibly dumb about it and if this keeps up I don't think it worth sending them pictures. I can't make sales if they don't accept my photos, which are fine for everyone else.

Freezingpictures · « **Reply #24 on:** April 28, 2006, 15:09 »

Hmm, thats weired. I noticed Bigstock got more picky, but still I got about 50% approved today and that with old 3MP pictures. Probably it depends wich reviewer you get. They in general seem to be really friendly. But I guess I will stop submitting there until the dls will increase. They also didn't accepted my bestseller, which was accepted @ss,is,dt.

CJPhoto · « **Reply #25 on:** May 02, 2006, 03:09 »

My reject ratio has definately gone up with the latest batch. I might see if they sell well at other sites and if so, sneak them back in amounst other submissions to do a "consistancy" test on them.

uploaderz · « **Reply #26 on:** May 02, 2006, 03:15 »

yeah, it would be interesting to see what they say the next time. As long as they don't have a method of making sure people don't resubmit (like shutterstock seems to have)

fintastique · « **Reply #27 on:** June 06, 2006, 04:36 »

Big stock seem to be trying to clear the backlog instead of an avalanche of e-mails I received just one e-mail

The batch of 167 files uploaded on 2006-05-26
have been processed by are moderation system, below you
will find the status of the files in this upload:

79% acceptance now if they could sell a few

Still a queue of 104. My backlog resulted from slipping below 50% acceptance so I could only have 30 photos in the review queue

phildate · « **Reply #28 on:** June 06, 2006, 11:17 »

Bigstock has been revamping their approval admin stuff and they had a big backlog of files to approve - I had over 200 in the queue at one point over the weekend and now they have all been approved. I still think BigStock is worth perservering with - my sales do seem to keep going up and up (mind you so does size of portfolio).

fintastique · « **Reply #29 on:** June 08, 2006, 14:08 »

They are starting to drive me crazy.

My first batch of London were mostly approved now they have got around to "reviewing" the second part, plus a bunch of old photos of American National parks that were accepted at StockXpert, assorted construction and industrial stuff and some model shots.

In all 158 shots a fair percentage of the non USA ones have been accepted and some even downloaded from other sites in the last week but what do Big Stock say

Quote

please resubmit only the best 10% of your images from
this batch. 90% were of subjects that are not marketable/low interest
that will not sell or shot on cloudy days so colors are washed out
looking. Please re-submit to Admin Approval Queue ONLY THE TOP 10% or so
from this batch. You do not reupload them... you just click to push them
back to Admin Queue.. just the top 10% best images though. Thank you.

So 16 shots I think we have another rogue reviewer there. I thought it was their job to review

fintastique · « **Reply #30 on:** June 08, 2006, 14:57 »

PS

I suppose quite a few of the London photos were a bit dark and they obviously have issues with tower bridge, not sure what their issue was with the national parks though.

Well if they had rejected 90% that would have dragged me down below 50% so i would have that stupid 30 photos in the queue rule.

and I didn't have to upload the best of the best though at some point i have to delete a bunch of files from file pending.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Bigstock is soooooo slow (Read 13322 times)

ichiro17

pixelbrat

leaf

pixelbrat

Hallgerd

leaf

pixelbrat

ichiro17

GeoPappas

CJPhoto

leaf

ichiro17

fintastique

leaf

ichiro17

leaf

ichiro17

leaf

pixelbrat

GeoPappas

ichiro17

GeoPappas

leaf

ichiro17

Freezingpictures

CJPhoto

uploaderz

fintastique

phildate

fintastique

fintastique

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors