Florin1961 has asked me to raise this issue on his behalf on MSG (due to him struggling a bit with his English). Hope I can reflect his dissatisfaction and message correctly:

1. The period between an image being accepted and visible in the database seems very long.
2. There is no consistency in what an acceptable standard is. What is acceptable the one time is rejected the next.
3. He has questioned some of the rejections and they admitted to their mistake and promised to rectify it, but did nothing after that. So, the issue is still unresolved although they said they will fix it.

Florin1961 is a sales manager at a large business and find the lack of consistency and clear and proper decision making especially frustrating.

1) It has been 72hrs for some time now, even if you cant see it it is searchable.

2) Different reviewers with different ideas on what has CV, which is subjective depending upon which reviewer is reviewing your images at the time.

3) Mass produced letter for everyone who questions the review process, just resubmit with a note stating what you fixed and move on.

My Take is this is normal op at any given time and that Florin1961 is still new to this somewhat and therefore a NEWB.

Stop worrying about what you have no control over upload more and keep on getting it, move on.

Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on October 31, 2012, 23:16

1) It has been 72hrs for some time now, even if you cant see it it is searchable.

2) Different reviewers with different ideas on what has CV, which is subjective depending upon which reviewer is reviewing your images at the time.

3) Mass produced letter for everyone who questions the review process, just resubmit with a note stating what you fixed and move on.

My Take is this is normal op at any given time and that Florin1961 is still new to this somewhat and therefore a NEWB.

Stop worrying about what you have no control over upload more and keep on getting it, move on.

Sound advice. Does not help to ponder too much about what you can not change.

^^ This correct.  When I feel strongly about an image or series of images and they get rejected, I either resubmit with a note or send an email to contributor help and ask for a re-evaluation.  Here's the kicker.  Sometimes I hear back from them and other times I do not.  The last time I did this they responded, re-reviewed my images and accepted all of them.  So if you believe in your work then fight for every one you feel is a winner.  I have had two images recently that are nice but simply were not worth fighting the rejection..both considered trademark violations.  I just didn't want to fight that battle because it's their policies that also account for rejections, not necessarily image technical quality and marketability (LCV).

No matter how big or how small, all the sites use people to evaluate the images. Every persons experience, like and dislikes differ and ALL are prone to errors. The sites can just train their reviewers up to a certain point and then subjective selection will always be required in the final instance (what will sell).
If a refusal is bound to cost you income and the rejection is technical (and you have the time and the site is one who is prepared to listen to reason), then I think it is worth the fight, else, just move on.

If i was a reviewer I would reject all things cats, as I really dislike cats.

Considering some site's rejection rate, it seems like they dislike contributors. 

Florin explained a bit more to me now and I think I understand his frustration. He is still trying to get approval as contributor and wondered why they can not approve a person based on his Bigstock portfolio. If I understand correctly they actually rejected some of his images for not being commercial while they can actually find the image on BS with sales. He feels that this can be established with a software link between the two databases. Images are rejected by them which have been approved and are selling well on BS. This is apparently the point he made to them and what they agreed to, but still did not accept his images.
Hope I explained his predicament better this time round.

Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on October 31, 2012, 23:16

2) Different reviewers with different ideas on what has CV, which is subjective depending upon which reviewer is reviewing your images at the time.

Still falls back to the fact that CV is subjective.

Falling back on previous reviewer's decisions can at least create more consistency. That is the point.

Quote from: CD123 on November 03, 2012, 00:12

Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on November 02, 2012, 23:15

Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on October 31, 2012, 23:16

2) Different reviewers with different ideas on what has CV, which is subjective depending upon which reviewer is reviewing your images at the time.

Still falls back to the fact that CV is subjective.

Falling back on previous reviewer's decisions can at least create more consistency. That is the point.

It's not falling back on a previous reviewers decision it is that they are different reviewers with different thoughts on what has CV.

one solution would be to have any images rejected for subjective reasons - LCV, framing, composition, etc automatically be sent to a second reviewer and only rejecting if both agree.

this would be a much more reasonable (and fair) approach, but unlikely. 

Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on November 03, 2012, 08:01

Quote from: CD123 on November 03, 2012, 00:12

Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on November 02, 2012, 23:15

Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on October 31, 2012, 23:16

2) Different reviewers with different ideas on what has CV, which is subjective depending upon which reviewer is reviewing your images at the time.

Still falls back to the fact that CV is subjective.

Falling back on previous reviewer's decisions can at least create more consistency. That is the point.

It's not falling back on a previous reviewers decision it is that they are different reviewers with different thoughts on what has CV.

one solution would be to have any images rejected for subjective reasons - LCV, framing, composition, etc automatically be sent to a second reviewer and only rejecting if both agree.

this would be a much more reasonable (and fair) approach, but unlikely.

This has worked for me a few times.

can only understand the last rejection because of the crane, other are ridiculous, I am also sure you have took a version of the big ben with sky on a side no?

In my humble opinion (and I say it in all honesty as I do not see myself as an expert), the second image I can imagine that they felt that you have too much of the structure blow the clock (sort of stuck between taking the whole tower and zooming in on only the clock). The second can be the crane and rooftops. A problem you would not have had if you where closer to the bridge or zoomed in on it more. The first one is a closer call. The fact that your image barely misses the ground (just above ground level) might cause the rejection. They probably wanted either more tilt up or down or move back and get ground and structure in one shot. So you are sort of stuck between two shot alternatives from framing perspective.
This is just what I think they might have thought (but I might be completely wrong about them having it slightly right).

In my humble opinion (and I say it in all honesty as I do not see myself as an expert), the second image I can imagine that they felt that you have too much of the structure blow the clock (sort of stuck between taking the whole tower and zooming in on only the clock). The second can be the crane and rooftops. A problem you would not have had if you where closer to the bridge or zoomed in on it more. The first one is a closer call. The fact that your image barely misses the ground (just above ground level) might cause the rejection. They probably wanted either more tilt up or down or move back and get ground and structure in one shot. So you are sort of stuck between two shot alternatives from framing perspective.
This is just what I think they might have thought (but I might be completely wrong about them having it slightly right).

Ok, you caught me at Canterbury: I had to avoid a host of tourists standing on the grass in front of the cathedral basically forever (when a group of 40 entered the cathedral, the next group came and so on...)

But in the case of Big Ben and Tower Bridge, I submitted similar pictures at different levels of zoom and cropping as well, and had them rejected as well last week for the same reason.

the problem at SS sometimes is that one day they (reviewers) wake up and want a blue sky with plenty copy-space (too bad that day you decided to have your subject on all frame), on the other day they want the object on the full frame (the day you decided to give them a picture with copy-space)