MicrostockGroup

I would like your 2 cents 

In SS I don't know because rev. are a bit of hidden, but in Fotolia and Dreamstime, the most of them are also contributors with its images online. Do you think that they have preferential treatment in approvals and get their images rather approved than normal contributors?

I am not an never have been a reviewer..

However, how else will sites find people willing and able to conduct reviews for the return they get?

Probably the biggest  benefit for a reviewer is the education that comes with the job.

^^ That is the key in my opinion.  I know several big microstockers who claim this is a serious issue for them.  True or not, it sure gets suspicious at times when you know that they have a reviewer who is in direct competition with you...did they just review your batch? You will never know.  BTW the two specific people I know are reviewers for one of the top five agencies.  But they WON'T discuss much about their job due to their contract or I'd share more with you if I could.

It has puzzeled me for years! the big four, they are earning millions, so why cant they afford real picture-editords, a pro picture-editor would want to get a good salary, yes, but then again look at all the hassle it would save. In the long run it would also run a lot smother.

Just curious - how would you hire reviewers? From what pool of professionals (I assume you would want a reviewer with credentials or are amateurs ok?)

Are there many pros who don't sell their photos in some kind of stock pool? Would you hire fine art photogs that don't shoot stock? Would they know what might sell as stock? Would you hire successful stock photogs (conflict of interest)? If you agreed to pay them more how many hours would you ask them to work?

Would you hire photogs who are technical experts? If so should they team up with experienced stock shooters and collaborate on reviews? This would slow things down so are you prepared for longer reviews?

Would you hire a mix of international photogs and if so should they be assigned to reviewing only photos from specific countries as they might be more familiar with the subjects shot? Would you make all reviewers sign something saying they would never sell their photos at the site they work for or at any other stock site?

I'm not disagreeing on the original premise but would like to hear opinions on the ideal criteria for a reviewer.

In the early days of Getty, just after they aquired Stones and Image-Bank, they had special reviewers with knowledge in differant fields, one took care of medicine, surgery, another of say technical pictures, etc, etc.
That was in the days when they only worked with professionals and they paid them very good money. They even employed Art-buyers and real Art-directors from the advertising world. It was a differant ball game altogether.
Today,  they dont house anything like that, everything seems to be done on the cheapo and then you dont get very good people. Simple as that really.

I'm just curious how you know who the reviewers are.  I've been on Fotolia since the beginning and know members of the staff but I've never had contact with a reviewer.  Personally, I have no clue who they are.  I always thought it was a bunch of people crammed in a small windowless room in a third world country working 22 hour shifts and reviewing tens of thousands of pics at a time. 

Mat

I always thought it was some silly little girl, with legs up on the desk, filing her nails, chewing gum and the odd weed puff,  hence the weird inspections. Ten hours later she is so dizzy from all the garbage shes been watching that for the next ten hours, everything is accepted.

Are you sure that inspector are also contributors? On SS too? I don't like this idea, I think that it's not serious because there's a big conflict of interest. Who are the inspectors on Fotolia? I find them not so enlightened in their choices....

Might be closer to the truth then most would think : ))

What women have you met?  We can definitely be silly, with our legs anywhere we want, filing what we want , chewing puff, smoking gum AND do a serious job all at the same time

I think you need to direct your suspicions to another quarter.

Contributors always worry about their fellow contributors reviewing their images.  Really...there is no need to. 

I used to be a reviewer, and all of the reviewers I know who are contributors are very fair.  Where I worked, our boss regularly checked our work and always followed up with complaints about reviewing.  One of our reviewers even owned her own stock agency!  It wasn't a problem.  Trust me...by the time you've reviewed your 2000th image of the day with all the crap that is submitted, you want to approve good images...some days you're even begging for good images.  I could have cared less about my competition on those days!  Just please let me look at something pretty without any problems...please please please!!!  LOL 

What contributors need to worry about is what they submit, not that the reviewer might also be competing with them.  300 images of the same seagull will give anyone a headache.     

I agree. 

And it is a shame that most people will not talk about unfair rejections on some of the sites for fear of repercussions and because they are often lone voices; those that do are ignored or chalked up as novices.