MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: Quasarphoto on September 08, 2017, 11:32
-
A topic which never runs out: image reviewers. Not sure how is the daily life of an image reviewer, but consistency has never been a proper word for it. Either they cut like they on a revenge path, either they let through all the junk. Sometimes I wonder if the photos are reviewed by humans at all, maybe there is an automated system in place already? The rejection reason sometimes sends my eyebrows on a rollercoaster.
-
A topic which never runs out: image reviewers. Not sure how is the daily life of an image reviewer, but consistency has never been a proper word for it. Either they cut like they on a revenge path, either they let through all the junk. Sometimes I wonder if the photos are reviewed by humans at all, maybe there is an automated system in place already? The rejection reason sometimes sends my eyebrows on a rollercoaster.
I think there might be a element of automated assistance and some simply "waved" through for some contributors. Considering SS must be reviewing about 1.5m images weekly I wonder how much time each pic gets to be reviewed?
-
A topic which never runs out: image reviewers. Not sure how is the daily life of an image reviewer, but consistency has never been a proper word for it. Either they cut like they on a revenge path, either they let through all the junk. Sometimes I wonder if the photos are reviewed by humans at all, maybe there is an automated system in place already? The rejection reason sometimes sends my eyebrows on a rollercoaster.
I think there might be a element of automated assistance and some simply "waved" through for some contributors. Considering SS must be reviewing about 1.5m images weekly I wonder how much time each pic gets to be reviewed?
Hybrid is easy. Size, standards like srgb, jpg, repeating keywords, and who knows what else the proprietary software can do. That is a precheck for automated fails, saves wasted human time. Then a reviewer opens with special software that shows measures, lighting, histogram, focus, does the image match the description, type, editorial or other. Then a bunch of buttons to click, one of them is accepted. I'd guess around 5 seconds an image.
That's where the faulty and ridiculous reviews come from. Make quick money, reject big batches while watching FA cup. It must be a burnout job, we can guess new reviewers are not as smart, some are just lazy. Means when in doubt or don't know, just reject. $36 an hour at 5 cents, 5 seconds a review, and a fired brain. :D
Accepting 1.2 million, I think you are right about the 1.5 reviewed.
Also Video, Illustration, Editorial, Etc, different areas, have different specialized review teams. Submit different types at the same time and the accepted review notices will be at different times.
-
Sometimes I think they're bots. Random rejections. Just got some images which I was 95% sure would be rejected for lack of property release...lucky me they got through:
-
Random is more likely a human rather than bot characteristic. I just don't think reviewers are well managed so some just hit keys at random to fulfill quotas.
-
We all know it: reviewers don't review our pictures, they drink beer.
-
Yup drunk button pushing, zombie button pushing or your typical bot doing the reviewing.
Got my share of a ridiculous rejection.
Vector excepted but not the jpg cause they did not like the name. ::)