pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: "Attila the Reviewer" did not rest on the 7th day  (Read 11880 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: March 27, 2008, 23:29 »
0
All,

A heads up to everyone it appears that "Attila the Reviewer" has surfaced at BigStockPhoto (BigStock). It has been seven days since my last approval (1) and 29 rejections since then. Hell ... even God rested on the 7th day.

Mark




 

« Last Edit: March 28, 2008, 02:43 by leaf »


« Reply #1 on: March 27, 2008, 23:40 »
0
Come on Mark relax a bit BigStock is one of the most forgiving sites around. Least rejections for me. In almost 2 years in June, 233 submitted 33 rejections.
Just a bad week I guess. It will get better.

« Reply #2 on: March 27, 2008, 23:45 »
0
Come on Mark relax a bit BigStock is one of the most forgiving sites around. Least rejections for me. In almost 2 years in June, 233 submitted 33 rejections.
Just a bad week I guess. It will get better.

No worries jorge ... I do understand that. My post is just a little fun supported by that fact. We've all had a brush with "Attila" at various sites ... and life will go on.

Attila is like "Kilroy was here"

Spotted Everywhere.

Mark

« Reply #3 on: March 27, 2008, 23:49 »
0
It's just that as MP has a special place for you BigStock has it for me. first accepted images since I got into this nutty thing called stock, and always the rejections are fair and on target. and say hi to stacey for me ;)

« Reply #4 on: March 28, 2008, 00:07 »
0
Jorge,

BigStock was my very first stock site and I have a very special place for them as well :)
Stacey says hi ;)

Mark

suwanneeredhead

  • O.I.D. Sufferer (Obsessive Illustration Disorder)
« Reply #5 on: March 28, 2008, 00:51 »
0
My very first stock site as well...

hi Jorge  ;D

DanP68

« Reply #6 on: March 28, 2008, 02:53 »
0
19 of 20 approved over last few weeks.

« Reply #7 on: March 28, 2008, 06:19 »
0
BigStock is the easiest to get shots accepted. Attila the Reviewer isn't there often since he doesn't like their coffee machine, and he got tenure at SS. If you got a massive reject, it might be a glitch and you'd better mail support about it. They are very responsive. Dawn & Tim care very much about their site. I got 98.5 accept and it was my first site in 2005. A weak spot for them perhaps?
« Last Edit: March 28, 2008, 07:06 by FlemishDreams »

michealo

« Reply #8 on: March 28, 2008, 06:21 »
0
I thought Attila signed an exclusive deal with CS !?

« Reply #9 on: March 28, 2008, 06:23 »
0
All,

A heads up to everyone it appears that "Attila the Reviewer" has surfaced at BigStockPhoto (BigStock). It has been seven days since my last approval (1) and 29 rejections since then. Hell ... even God rested on the 7th day.

Mark


Not wishing to sound rude but maybe the photos were crap and just not good enough. There is always a reason why something is rejected and it's not always the reviewer.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #10 on: March 28, 2008, 06:56 »
0
I've found BigStock to be pretty lenient. They normally only reject stuff that is pretty poor technically.

DanP68

« Reply #11 on: March 28, 2008, 07:04 »
0
They are big on sharpness, and sometimes grain.  They are absolutely the only agency I will consider running some sharpening for, if I really think an image will do well there and it has been rejected for being "sorry...a little blurry."   8)  They don't seem to have a problem with a little sharpening.

I concur with what everyone else has said.  BigStock is pretty lenient, and overall a real fun company to have a relationship with.  Dawn and Tim are always on the message boards answering what needs to be answered.  And by the way, they are typically one of my best "earnings per DL" sites due to the favorable commission rates and the lack of sub.


lisafx

« Reply #12 on: March 28, 2008, 09:32 »
0
If you got a massive reject, it might be a glitch and you'd better mail support about it. They are very responsive. Dawn & Tim care very much about their site. I got 98.5 accept and it was my first site in 2005. A weak spot for them perhaps?

I agree with this 100%.  According to their notices on the site they have been hiring and training new reviewers.  Most likely someone hit the wrong button or didn't understand what they were doing. 

I am certain if you contact Dawn or Tim it will be taken care of.  At the very least, on the unlikely chance the reviews were legit, you will get some kind of decent explanation...

« Reply #13 on: March 28, 2008, 11:33 »
0
I agree with all !

Especially with KiwiRob ! They must have just been 29 crap photos. I just better give up on stock ... hmmmmmm

5 straight consecutive BME's across all sites for both #of sales and revenue since the first day I started to educate myself as to what it takes to be a stock photographer.

nawwwwwwwwwww

I think I'll stick around a little while longer. Better look in your review cause this freight train isn't stopping as it continues to gain steam :)

My thanks to all that had realistic comments as to why this might have changed suddenly for me at BigStock.

Once again BigStock is near and dear to me at heart as it was my first stock site. I do not mean to offend anyone there with my sense of humor.

Best Regards to All,

Mark


« Reply #14 on: March 28, 2008, 12:42 »
0
Congratulations on your terrific progress Mark.   You are about 3 months ahead of me in this business so I keep up with your portfolio.  Continue to inspire me, I need it :)

« Reply #15 on: March 28, 2008, 14:34 »
0
HELLO PPL
if it's any consolation or credit to you all, i 've just joined bsc.
i 've been reading and following this website to read all the threads regarding the different good and evil stock photo site.
i know there are some incredibly devious ones out there. several of my direct contacts with whom i conferred have been hit with one of which he was partially able to get out, although his photos are still being featured but the denial of rights are also written on the page of his portfolio.
not sure if it truly solved anything but power to them.

still i am convinced bsc is a good one. so i've joined.
uploading is in abeyance due to traffic. but hey, i 'm in no hurry.

thanks once again to all here. unbeknowst to you, you've all been a great help and motivation.
cheers. ;)

« Reply #16 on: March 28, 2008, 15:29 »
0
Hi Mark,

Don't feel too alone .. I have hit a buzz saw at BigStock a couple times recently ..  granted I still feel pretty new to this world .. so it is most probably all my own issues but still .. you are not alone out there.

take care,

John
 ..

fotoKmyst

« Reply #17 on: March 28, 2008, 15:57 »
0
curious. i visited their site, and there is a menitoned of an enhanced contributor or something where the photographer gets paid a higher amount like 3 bucks min - 60 bucks.. ???

what would be the difference? they don't say exclusive. so other than making more per dl , what do you have to do or give up?
thanks in advance to anyone who care to answer that for me 8)

lisafx

« Reply #18 on: March 28, 2008, 16:58 »
0
Sorry, not familiar with an "enhanced contributor" program at BigStock.  Could you post a link?

« Reply #19 on: March 28, 2008, 17:37 »
0
Sorry, not familiar with an "enhanced contributor" program at BigStock.  Could you post a link?


He probably means the Special Licensing commission when your shots can be sold at highly priced affiliates like CrystalGraphics.

Quote
If you decide to take part in Special Licensing (you should!) you can earn up to $60 per image download. Average Special Licensing commission is about $12 per image. We highly recommend you opt-in to Special Licensing.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2008, 17:39 by FlemishDreams »

fotoKmyst

« Reply #20 on: March 28, 2008, 18:50 »
0
Sorry, not familiar with an "enhanced contributor" program at BigStock.  Could you post a link?


He probably means the Special Licensing commission when your shots can be sold at highly priced affiliates like CrystalGraphics.

Quote
If you decide to take part in Special Licensing (you should!) you can earn up to $60 per image download. Average Special Licensing commission is about $12 per image. We highly recommend you opt-in to Special Licensing.



sorry, i should have gone back to it to copy paste , but yes,
FlemishDreams, you got it!

my question is what do you have to do to get this? or have to give up to get this?
it does not say exclusive either. just earning more. ???


« Reply #21 on: March 28, 2008, 19:13 »
0
it is their version of extended licenses.  You can make sure you are signed up here

http://www.bigstockphoto.com/account/uploads/license/

(if you are logged in)

« Reply #22 on: March 28, 2008, 19:56 »
0
I haven't hit a single destructive upload, but my acceptance ratio there for the most part sucks, worse than DT.  Every shot that is rejected is rejected for the exact same thing.  Blurriness.  Same files get accepted at IS, SS, DT, FT, but not at BigStock.  Thus far I have basically figured out that their reviewers have zero tolerance for any DOF effects, shot down 'em all, and they can't tell the difference between an unsharpened photo and a blurry one.  Seriously, my 17-40L does not take blurry pictures at infinite focus, an aperture of f/8, and a shutter speed of 1/250.  I could drink a couple of pots of coffee and still get tack sharp shots with those settings.  Oh well though, kinda rolls off, not like I'm missing out on the millions with those rejected photos (but it would be nice if they'd accept some of my better images, the rejected ones tend to also be my most popular elsewhere), they still accept a decent amount.  I am not changing my workflow to do something special for BigStock like creating a separate sharpened file, though, so I'll just have to live with the less than 100% acceptance.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2008, 20:03 by Waldo4 »

« Reply #23 on: March 28, 2008, 22:43 »
0
my question is what do you have to do to get this? or have to give up to get this?

Follow the link of Leaf. Check all types of licenses. Then apply this (1) to your existing port and (2) as default for your future uploads.
Do it in those two steps.

You should do it. It doesn't mean exclusivity, just more money with no extra pain.

suwanneeredhead

  • O.I.D. Sufferer (Obsessive Illustration Disorder)
« Reply #24 on: March 29, 2008, 00:15 »
0
curious. i visited their site, and there is a menitoned of an enhanced contributor or something where the photographer gets paid a higher amount like 3 bucks min - 60 bucks.. ???


Or were you talking about the program where they subcontract your work out to affiliate websites that are more midstock priced? Here's the discussion, it starts out angry like nobody realized this was going on, but then Dawn & Tim explain on page 2:

http://www.bigstockphoto.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=2699&highlight=crystal

Its just another way they're trying to help us make money. And BTW I have a huge port on BigStock, they accept just about everything I submit when others don't, and I get a payout every couple of months with a small 300+-image port.

« Reply #25 on: March 29, 2008, 01:52 »
0
I don't like only receiving 11% commission on my sales, so I opted out.  20% is as low as I will go and that is only because istock spend lots on advertising.  I sell at higher prices on a few sites but get at least 50% commission on most of them.

« Reply #26 on: March 29, 2008, 02:07 »
0
All,

A heads up to everyone it appears that "Attila the Reviewer" has surfaced at BigStockPhoto (BigStock). It has been seven days since my last approval (1) and 29 rejections since then. Hell ... even God rested on the 7th day.

Mark

Sometimes, improving techniques of shooting and image processing helps...

« Reply #27 on: March 29, 2008, 15:05 »
0
All,

A heads up to everyone it appears that "Attila the Reviewer" has surfaced at BigStockPhoto (BigStock). It has been seven days since my last approval (1) and 29 rejections since then. Hell ... even God rested on the 7th day.

Mark

Sometimes, improving techniques of shooting and image processing helps...

nata_rass

Clearly you did not get the joke ... or read the posts above.

With only a couple of posts to your name, and the designation of "newbie" here on MSG perhaps you are not familiar with the wanderings of "Attila the Reviewer" who has been known to crop up from time after drifting aimlessly from stock site to stock site ...

Mark

« Last Edit: March 29, 2008, 15:58 by mwp1969 »

« Reply #28 on: March 29, 2008, 15:48 »
0
I got nailed with a blanket "no commercial value" rejection at BigStock recently.  The subject was of a blind person's white cane encountering various obstacles and accessible platforms.  Too much of a niche subject for their tastes, I suppose...although the subject sells very well everywhere (including BigStock).

fotoKmyst

« Reply #29 on: March 29, 2008, 21:33 »
0
my question is what do you have to do to get this? or have to give up to get this?

Follow the link of Leaf. Check all types of licenses. Then apply this (1) to your existing port and (2) as default for your future uploads.
Do it in those two steps.

You should do it. It doesn't mean exclusivity, just more money with no extra pain.

thanks leaf,
thanks FlemishDreams 8)

appreciate you taking the time to answer my question, even though it was not related to mwp's "attila".

btw, "attila sounds  anal... ::) i hope you're all just joking!  ;D

« Reply #30 on: April 16, 2008, 18:38 »
0
I just got my first review there back.  One image (accepted on IS) rejected for being OOF, another (also accepted at IS) "too many", and a third (accepted at SS) also OOF.  I'm just laughing and might ask for a re-review on the first because it's a seller for me.  :-)

Now I can't get the site to load in order to put another batch into the que.

fotoKmyst

« Reply #31 on: April 16, 2008, 20:21 »
0
how do you know it's atilla? is he the one who deletes like 10 shots at once with "this is a snapshot" LOL

if so, ya, i just got him . most of my accepts were not him. for sure! ;D

so perharps he did rest.... i hope he doesn't wake up  ;D

« Reply #32 on: April 16, 2008, 20:24 »
0
I just got my first review there back.  One image (accepted on IS) rejected for being OOF, another (also accepted at IS) "too many", and a third (accepted at SS) also OOF.  I'm just laughing and might ask for a re-review on the first because it's a seller for me.  :-)

Now I can't get the site to load in order to put another batch into the que.

that's really strange. i got in several times this morning and i just checked . it's working for me.

maybe it's your browser. did you try typing the URl rather than bookmark.?

« Reply #33 on: April 16, 2008, 20:34 »
0
I think it's my ISP but I'm going to try a full restart. 

« Reply #34 on: April 16, 2008, 21:02 »
0
Yep, it was an ISP issue.  Silly, stupid DNS servers.  :-)

« Reply #35 on: May 13, 2008, 09:52 »
0
All,

A heads up to everyone it appears that "Attila the Reviewer" has surfaced at BigStockPhoto (BigStock). It has been seven days since my last approval (1) and 29 rejections since then. Hell ... even God rested on the 7th day.

Mark


I noticed you didn't get very many supporters on your comment.  I have been on SS for a couple of months now and have been doing pretty good.  I decided a couple of weeks ago to try the other top sites and I have to say I was quite surprised at the amount of rejection I got on pictures that had been accepted by SS and are selling well.  Out of the 10 pictures I submitted, the rejected all but one.  Quite a few were rejected due to "blurry image", which I disagree with.  From a new person's perspective, I'd say that Attila the Reviewer has taken a full time position as BigStock.

RacePhoto

« Reply #36 on: May 14, 2008, 02:42 »
0
All,

A heads up to everyone it appears that "Attila the Reviewer" has surfaced at BigStockPhoto (BigStock). It has been seven days since my last approval (1) and 29 rejections since then. Hell ... even God rested on the 7th day.

Mark


I noticed you didn't get very many supporters on your comment.  I have been on SS for a couple of months now and have been doing pretty good.  I decided a couple of weeks ago to try the other top sites and I have to say I was quite surprised at the amount of rejection I got on pictures that had been accepted by SS and are selling well.  Out of the 10 pictures I submitted, the rejected all but one.  Quite a few were rejected due to "blurry image", which I disagree with.  From a new person's perspective, I'd say that Attila the Reviewer has taken a full time position as BigStock.

I'm not going to be my usual sarcastic self on this one.

I have more photos on BigStock than anywhere else of the magnificent seven. Part of the reason is size of course, I have old photos from the old cameras, also I'll confess that I'm still more of a beginner in stock. Sites like IS, SS, DT, and StockXpert, regularly reject photos that get I accepted at BigStock.

The only thing I can guess is that while my pictures aren't the best "stock", some are even highly saturated, they are usually sharp, and that may be the problem that some others are having? 90% of them came from the Canon 10D.

I've had photos taken with the 40D and my 28-135 lens, that are rejected for sharpness. And the rejections can be justified. If I reduce the size of the same images and upload to BigStock, they are accepted.

What I'm guessing at here, since I can't see Mark's or your photos, is that maybe they are expecting crisp, sharp photos, and any softness gets them rejected.

Just a guess. But I don't doubt that both of you are taking at least equal or better compositions, so what's left? I don't sharpen images or use noise reduction. (maybe if there's a big blue sky, that would show loads of CA) in which case select whatever way you prefer and use noise reduction only on the sky.

Normally all I do is, crop, view at 100% for spots, hairs, blemishes, dust bunnies... magic healing tool is my best friend. Then search for logos and things that we can't include, blur, clone or paint those out.  Color correction for tint, then levels, black first then white. This isn't heavy editing or time consuming.

If it wasn't for stock, and I was making prints for myself, I'd possibly use the dodge and burn tools to improve areas that needed help. But more editing takes more time.

When I get sharpness rejections on images, shot on a tripod at f/8 or smaller, ISO 100, I begin to think it's the lens. Then I say to myself, this is stock! What the heck do they want for a dollar!

Always remember, if you are counting acceptance and not sales, you can upload just about anything to SV and have it accepted.  ;) Otherwise, don't expect any rational or logical consistency between the sites for what gets accepted or rejected. In fact, you can have a photo rejected, and accidentally re-submit it a second time and it gets accepted at the same site.

I don't bother playing that game or re-submitting anything, but others have taken their chances and had a different reviewer accept the same photos that have been rejected two weeks before. I don't even track my rejections anymore, just accepted and active photos.

Funniest one is a photo that was rejected everywhere except IS and they are the most consistent for reviews of anyplace, from my experience. Similar is a photo that was rejected on 8 out of 9 sites, and it's only up on BigStock. If neither of these sell, 8 of 9 sites, were right? If they do sell, then someone with a sharp eye saw the potential that all the rest missed.

Reviews are subjective, that's life.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
5329 Views
Last post June 11, 2007, 07:55
by Bateleur
1 Replies
4686 Views
Last post July 06, 2007, 19:41
by HughStoneIan
0 Replies
3341 Views
Last post July 08, 2007, 04:06
by rjmiz
2 Replies
6366 Views
Last post September 11, 2007, 02:14
by sharpshot
32 Replies
9165 Views
Last post October 07, 2011, 06:17
by lthn

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors