MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Find the Vetta  (Read 4372 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: January 15, 2012, 03:09 »
0
from my observation Vetta seems better quality than alot of the Agency stuff.


« Reply #26 on: January 15, 2012, 04:00 »
0
from my observation Vetta seems better quality than alot of the Agency stuff.

You win the satisfaction of being the most eagle-eyed Vetta scout on MSG. And you're right, Vetta still beats Agency, since a lot of that stuff wouldn't even pass inspection for the main collection. Yet another issue that I'm sure drives customers nuts.

« Reply #27 on: January 15, 2012, 04:22 »
0
from my observation Vetta seems better quality than alot of the Agency stuff.

You win the satisfaction of being the most eagle-eyed Vetta scout on MSG. And you're right, Vetta still beats Agency, since a lot of that stuff wouldn't even pass inspection for the main collection. Yet another issue that I'm sure drives customers nuts.

With all respect, I think that if an independent had submitted those files they would all have been rejected except for the pano. That doesn't mean they are bad photos, it just means that different requirements seem to apply to indes and exclusives.

« Reply #28 on: January 15, 2012, 04:24 »
0
from my observation Vetta seems better quality than alot of the Agency stuff.

You win the satisfaction of being the most eagle-eyed Vetta scout on MSG. And you're right, Vetta still beats Agency, since a lot of that stuff wouldn't even pass inspection for the main collection. Yet another issue that I'm sure drives customers nuts.

If I was an Istock exclusive I'd probably get one of those little badge things for this amazing talent. wooyay ! Istock you rock !  :p

I don't think it drives the customer nuts it
a) Drives them to other sites or
b) they're oblivious to it and it increases their spend 30x

« Reply #29 on: January 15, 2012, 04:27 »
0
from my observation Vetta seems better quality than alot of the Agency stuff.

You win the satisfaction of being the most eagle-eyed Vetta scout on MSG. And you're right, Vetta still beats Agency, since a lot of that stuff wouldn't even pass inspection for the main collection. Yet another issue that I'm sure drives customers nuts.

With all respect, I think that if an independent had submitted those files they would all have been rejected except for the pano. That doesn't mean they are bad photos, it just means that different requirements seem to apply to indes and exclusives.

Why so?

« Reply #30 on: January 15, 2012, 05:08 »
0
Filtration, mostly, and I'm certain they would find some reason to reject the flower if I sent it.

ShadySue

« Reply #31 on: January 15, 2012, 06:00 »
0
I have a small handful of Vetta's & I can't seem to get anything else in either.

I believe the secret is the difficulty and/or rarity of the image.
Unique location, or unique content or fantastical composting.
In my mind, these are what they want now.

Unique location/content doesn't do it, I can testify.

Fantastical composition?  Type in any generic word, push the slider up to 3 (and down to 3 if you like), sort by age and decide for yourself. Depending on the word you choose you may need to remember all the images ingested as Vetta.

« Reply #32 on: January 15, 2012, 13:18 »
0
Filtration, mostly, and I'm certain they would find some reason to reject the flower if I sent it.

There's not a whole lot of filtration going on with these though, save for the building which is just an exposure blend. But point taken that anything can seemingly be rejected as 'overfiltered'. Quick search for Cosmos Flower though shows that there are some non-exclusives getting those in, so it looks like it's doable.

traveler1116

« Reply #33 on: January 15, 2012, 14:20 »
0
from my observation Vetta seems better quality than alot of the Agency stuff.

You win the satisfaction of being the most eagle-eyed Vetta scout on MSG. And you're right, Vetta still beats Agency, since a lot of that stuff wouldn't even pass inspection for the main collection. Yet another issue that I'm sure drives customers nuts.

With all respect, I think that if an independent had submitted those files they would all have been rejected except for the pano. That doesn't mean they are bad photos, it just means that different requirements seem to apply to indes and exclusives.
Come on, that's just silly.  Look at the latest accepted photos.

« Reply #34 on: January 15, 2012, 16:08 »
0
from my observation Vetta seems better quality than alot of the Agency stuff.

You win the satisfaction of being the most eagle-eyed Vetta scout on MSG. And you're right, Vetta still beats Agency, since a lot of that stuff wouldn't even pass inspection for the main collection. Yet another issue that I'm sure drives customers nuts.

With all respect, I think that if an independent had submitted those files they would all have been rejected except for the pano. That doesn't mean they are bad photos, it just means that different requirements seem to apply to indes and exclusives.

Come on, that's just silly.  Look at the latest accepted photos.

agree. can't believe that some contributors here think that they're being singled out. as though iStock has nothing better to do than petty retaliation against independents. really is silly

« Reply #35 on: January 15, 2012, 16:45 »
0
from my observation Vetta seems better quality than alot of the Agency stuff.

You win the satisfaction of being the most eagle-eyed Vetta scout on MSG. And you're right, Vetta still beats Agency, since a lot of that stuff wouldn't even pass inspection for the main collection. Yet another issue that I'm sure drives customers nuts.

With all respect, I think that if an independent had submitted those files they would all have been rejected except for the pano. That doesn't mean they are bad photos, it just means that different requirements seem to apply to indes and exclusives.

Come on, that's just silly.  Look at the latest accepted photos.

agree. can't believe that some contributors here think that they're being singled out. as though iStock has nothing better to do than petty retaliation against independents. really is silly

I don't think I am being singled out, I think there are two different queues which probably have different inspectors and it would be a simple matter to apply different levels of rigour. I don't spent time examining new uploads so maybe I'm wrong, but it is an impression I got some time ago as a result of some of my own rejections compared with acceptances I saw back then.

Actually, I'm not sure why some people seem able to believe that inspectors will go to the trouble to single out their friends for special treatment and might not single out people they don't like for the opposite treatment, one is no sillier than the other, though I'm not claiming that it happens.

« Reply #36 on: January 15, 2012, 17:28 »
0
^ I think it would it's human nature to make inspection decisions with some bias--whether it's positive or negative--on a subconscious level. where I think it gets silly is suggesting it is part of their typical, management-sanctioned workflow....

« Reply #37 on: January 15, 2012, 17:59 »
0
^ I think it would it's human nature to make inspection decisions with some bias--whether it's positive or negative--on a subconscious level. where I think it gets silly is suggesting it is part of their typical, management-sanctioned workflow....

Agreed. As an independent I get virtually no rejections from IS nowadays. After 5K-odd submissions I've had more than enough feedback to understand what they will or won't accept. I think they're remarkably consistent considering how many inspectors they have.

« Reply #38 on: January 15, 2012, 19:01 »
0
from my observation Vetta seems better quality than alot of the Agency stuff.

You win the satisfaction of being the most eagle-eyed Vetta scout on MSG. And you're right, Vetta still beats Agency, since a lot of that stuff wouldn't even pass inspection for the main collection. Yet another issue that I'm sure drives customers nuts.

With all respect, I think that if an independent had submitted those files they would all have been rejected except for the pano. That doesn't mean they are bad photos, it just means that different requirements seem to apply to indes and exclusives.

Come on, that's just silly.  Look at the latest accepted photos.

agree. can't believe that some contributors here think that they're being singled out. as though iStock has nothing better to do than petty retaliation against independents. really is silly

I don't think I am being singled out, I think there are two different queues which probably have different inspectors and it would be a simple matter to apply different levels of rigour. I don't spent time examining new uploads so maybe I'm wrong, but it is an impression I got some time ago as a result of some of my own rejections compared with acceptances I saw back then.

Actually, I'm not sure why some people seem able to believe that inspectors will go to the trouble to single out their friends for special treatment and might not single out people they don't like for the opposite treatment, one is no sillier than the other, though I'm not claiming that it happens.

According to Donald G at IS, there are indeed different queues, he is part of the independent submission queue and others are part of the exclusive queue.  I can't find the exact post but according to him this is the way they divide the submissions.  So having criteria for one versus the other is entirely possible.

KB

« Reply #39 on: January 15, 2012, 19:12 »
0

According to Donald G at IS, there are indeed different queues, he is part of the independent submission queue and others are part of the exclusive queue.  I can't find the exact post but according to him this is the way they divide the submissions.  So having criteria for one versus the other is entirely possible.
It may be entirely possible, but having spent plenty of time in both queues, I saw no evidence at all that one queue's inspection criteria are different from another.

« Reply #40 on: January 15, 2012, 19:25 »
0

According to Donald G at IS, there are indeed different queues, he is part of the independent submission queue and others are part of the exclusive queue.  I can't find the exact post but according to him this is the way they divide the submissions.  So having criteria for one versus the other is entirely possible.
It may be entirely possible, but having spent plenty of time in both queues, I saw no evidence at all that one queue's inspection criteria are different from another.

How could you possibly see it?  The fact that they segregate the queues opens up that possibility.  Ask yourself why Q1 inspects these images and Q2 only inspects these images. Is it for speed only?

« Reply #41 on: January 15, 2012, 19:27 »
0
honestly, whatever criteria they use to inspect, whatever number of queues they have--to suggest they're using inspection as a means of retaliation is still absurd

« Reply #42 on: January 15, 2012, 19:30 »
0
honestly, whatever criteria they use to inspect, whatever number of queues they have--to suggest they're using inspection as a means of retaliation is still absurd

So why segregate?

traveler1116

« Reply #43 on: January 15, 2012, 19:40 »
0
honestly, whatever criteria they use to inspect, whatever number of queues they have--to suggest they're using inspection as a means of retaliation is still absurd

So why segregate?
The exclusive queue is faster, that's one of the tangible benefits of exclusivity so it makes sense to have two queues.  One fast one and one slower one.

« Reply #44 on: January 15, 2012, 19:47 »
0
honestly, whatever criteria they use to inspect, whatever number of queues they have--to suggest they're using inspection as a means of retaliation is still absurd

So why segregate?
The exclusive queue is faster, that's one of the tangible benefits of exclusivity so it makes sense to have two queues.  One fast one and one slower one.

Speed is what I suggested originally.  But it is not what I believe.  
« Last Edit: January 15, 2012, 19:51 by Mantis »

traveler1116

« Reply #45 on: January 15, 2012, 19:56 »
0
honestly, whatever criteria they use to inspect, whatever number of queues they have--to suggest they're using inspection as a means of retaliation is still absurd

So why segregate?
The exclusive queue is faster, that's one of the tangible benefits of exclusivity so it makes sense to have two queues.  One fast one and one slower one.

Speed is what I suggested originally.  But it is not what I believe.  
It wouldn't make sense to have everyone in the same queue if exclusive files are supposed to get inspected faster. 

« Reply #46 on: January 15, 2012, 20:00 »
0
honestly, whatever criteria they use to inspect, whatever number of queues they have--to suggest they're using inspection as a means of retaliation is still absurd

When I was a reviewer at LuckyOliver, where my name was signed to every review, my fellow reviewers and I were accused of such nonsense on a regular basis.  These folks never stopped to think we'd lose our jobs, if we were caught retaliating or favoring one contributor over another.   

KB

« Reply #47 on: January 15, 2012, 20:41 »
0
It may be entirely possible, but having spent plenty of time in both queues, I saw no evidence at all that one queue's inspection criteria are different from another.

How could you possibly see it? 
How could I possible see it? Perhaps you didn't understand what I meant: Having submitted as both an independent for over 3 years and an exclusive for over a year, I haven't noticed any difference in what I get accepted and what I get rejected. No differences at all.

« Reply #48 on: January 16, 2012, 05:45 »
0
honestly, whatever criteria they use to inspect, whatever number of queues they have--to suggest they're using inspection as a means of retaliation is still absurd

So why segregate?
The exclusive queue is faster, that's one of the tangible benefits of exclusivity so it makes sense to have two queues.  One fast one and one slower one.

That's right. And another tangible benefit could be different standards particularly if you have different inspection teams. Years ago Gostwyck (who watches these things far, far more closely than I do) pointed out some dreadful stuff that was getting approved for one particular high-ranked exclusive which we both agreed neither of us could get through. If Gostwyck says things have changed and it's the same for everyone, then I accept his assessment (because he watches these things).

I'm sure if it had been said years ago that exclusives would have an easier inspection because they can't put their less good files anywhere else it would have got a big "wooyay" and have been hailed as a right and proper benefit.  Of course that could not be said because it would have run directly against the "excusive content is superior to non-exclusive content" mantra, but I did have the impression that it was something the management kept in mind. Of course, I could be entirely wrong and/or the thinking might have changed (it does seem to have got easier to get acceptances at iS, but then we're all developing our skills, too).

« Reply #49 on: February 12, 2012, 15:04 »
0
Hmm, I would go with the river shot


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
12 Replies
4584 Views
Last post July 03, 2009, 11:01
by willie
Vetta

Started by SNP « 1 2 3 4  All » iStockPhoto.com

79 Replies
13895 Views
Last post September 18, 2009, 06:30
by Adeptris
19 Replies
4884 Views
Last post August 17, 2010, 01:08
by lagereek
2 Replies
1285 Views
Last post May 11, 2011, 12:32
by GrantP
12 Replies
2224 Views
Last post July 05, 2011, 14:45
by Shank_ali

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors