MicrostockGroup

I agree and I reviewed for 3+ years. In all my time , I've never met anyone at anytime that knew what will sell and what won't. The sites know what subjects do best but individual Images? No way, No how. I looked at probably 400,000 Images in my time and I let through maybe 25%. What I did learn was what not to shoot.
I think most reviewers look for different things, I personally didn't look for noise, I looked primarily at Does this tell me a story or what it could be used for and did it do that in seconds. My thing was composition. Some pixel peep,others didn't. For what we get paid in commissions and the majority of uses The 100% rule was kinda silly in My book.. 75% OK but 100? I dunno. I saw all the so called top shooters at 100% and trust me it could have been better. What made it totally fun was every now and then along comes a kid with the most amazing fresh stuff you can Imagine, Thats what we lived for after a gazillion strawberries,Brick walls,pets,Kiwi,meercats [for some strange reason] ducks , horrible flowers,isolations and items around the house for the millionth time etc,etc,etc. LOL I enjoyed it actually.... at times. And other times Like going to the dentist.

Sorry man.

I'm always vexed by the occasional rejection for "Limited Commercial Value". I just got this from Shutterstock on a isolated photo of a wooden spoon. Well, I'm a buyer as well as an contributor, and I was contracted to put together an illustration of an ice tea pitcher with a wooden spoon. The reason I submitted my spoon (which was accepted by the other top eight) was because the other choices were limited, poor, or at the wrong angle.

What a lot of reviewers don't realize, is how many ad agencies are looking for isolated everyday objects to drop into their photo illustration. How can any well photographed object be of "Limited Commercial Value"?

I've never been a fan of the contributor as inspector or LCV rejections. The thing I really hate are the new images a week after my rejection that are approved, taken by someone else, but with the same concepts/lighting/poses to the ones that  I took. There was a big blow up in the forums about rejections a few years back but my posts on the subject were deleted. For the record I didn't start the thread, I just asked what the difference was between my images and the ones that were approved.

This have also happened to me a pile of times, and it's the most pissing off crap that you can came across in the MS agencies

Its as I said before,  can be a very tricky situation and can be open to abuse if not careful. Its NOT an ideal world and reviewers and contributors can have very close friendships, etc.

I used to be with one that continously rejected files that had sold thousands of times but accepted files with say 5 dls or even zero dls. It made me wonder so I left the site recently.

I have always maintained that picture editors should not even be photographers but graphically and creativly orientaded. In the trad RM world, theres an old saying "photographers are  the lousiest judges of pictures ever"  thats true! they cant keep an open nor objective mind. I cant do that myself.

In my own private RM library, I never ever judge my own shots, I actually pay a proper AD, to do it for me, in order to make sure no non commercial rubbish clogg up the files.