MicrostockGroup

Anyone shares such view?

They have to learn from Veer or Can Stock. Just upload and hit another one or two buttons. No category. No 7 words description and tortuous routes to publish a file after FTP uploading. All microstock sites should think of making it easier for photographers to upload instead of making more works for us.

I'm thinking of stopping uploading to BS in view of the low returns from it. I can use the time saved creating new works instead.

We may think it's great to upload to 7 or 8 sites. But only the top 4 makes it worthwhile for our time. I am coming to the the view that less is more.

What do you think?

It's not the worst site regarding upload, but it could be better. Guessed categories are fine, working most of the time.

Furthermore, if they really want their bridge program to work, they must unify reviews: as long as good pictures with shallow dof or uneven (in their opinion) lighting are accepted at BS but not at SS, people will continue to upload SS rejects to BS, which is a waste of time both of us.

I agree that BigStock is kind of a low performer, but I disagree about their upload page...I find it fairly simple to use compared to istockphoto. And the uploading at Veer...the last "thank you" window, to me, seems unnecessary and a time waster.

I like their publishing page - yes a lot of writing but then you find more keywords in process of thinking

I agree. Uploading is just painful. Low perfoming sites should have an interest in making uplaoding for contributors as easy as it can be.

Yeah it's quick and easy unless you forget you have to check categories they assign. It use to be you would have to check those before you could submit. Now they just show a green light. I forgot to check categories on two last time I submitted and they got put back in the editing bin. Good thing I checked or I would have never known.