MicrostockGroup

 

I have had about 5 uploads of a total of about 60 images that have been sitting there and not been reviewed since 1 Nov.  Then all of a sudden they review ALL of them.  Only one gets accepted and all the rest get rejected!!  Each with the same rejection that they are not looking for that kind of image???

Same photos accepted and selling at other sites??

I have never had a problem like this with this site.  Its weird.  I wonder what is going on.

Stacey (suwanneeredhead) and I just had the same thing happen to both of us with very large batches uploaded over different days and after long waits for the photos to be approved (graphics were cherry picked approved early on) there were mass rejections often with one approval out of an entire batch of 15 or 20. We're talking around 100 photos with blanket rejections between the two of us and the reviews happened at the same time ...

I too am wondering what is happening between them and IS ...

-Mark

Two long-time/full-time reviewers left Stockxpert due to disagreements with new Istock management.. the one or two reviewers that are left have been told the work will NOT be picked up by replacement staff from istock..

Honestly I have to commend the skeleton staff that are left for even bothering to keep the site going, and it must be tough on them too being understaffed, the forum is full of complaints but of course no-one knows or has been told what's going on.. the reviewers must be working flat out to try and get the queue down with, I repeat, NO REPLACEMENTS for the missing reviewers now, or in the future..

Review times have been running 1-2 weeks for me. That said, I've (almost) always had large % rejections when i submit in bulk (this has been the case for the last 2 years). However, when I submit in small batches (2-5), the rejection % seems to be much lower.
Sales have been steady regardless (knock on wood).

Bringing a thread back from the near death experience. Two month old questions and while I was surfing the forums this morening I found a similar question on the StockXpert forum. Two messages, one help file, combined into this response. Anything in italics is my emphasis.

"In the Jupiter era we were asked to approve almost all subject as long as the quality was there in order to use the image count for sale as a marketing tool to get more buyers. This is no longer the case.

Images of nature and scenery are mostly rejected because the demand is not very high and because 95% of contributors upload this type of imagery."

"We also need to take into account production value. It is very frustrating as a contributor who devotes time and money on getting the perfect shots to see his work buried under pages of nature images with low or no production value. Again, about 95% of contributors upload nature and sceneries at one point and these subject matters are the lowest selling image types on the site yet they take up about a third of the content available online."

"TOPICS WE ARE NOT SO KEEN ON

Sunsets, landscapes, flowers, pets, very basic studio pics, vacation shots... If you think you can provide better than the ones we have online, upload them, but remember: we're very picky about these. "

What they are saying is, if you want to submit something that they are already overloaded with, which also don't sell well, it needs to be above average. It appears that yours were good enough. 

Second part, I'll guess that the IS legal team has been educating the StockXpert reviewers to their standards and we will probably see both sites attempting to have consistent rules for rejection and approval based on content. This will make for less mystery in life. I'm all for it when I see how varied other agency opinions have been in the past. Since material from both sites will be going to the "site without a name" (just like Prince?) it only makes sense to have the same standards going in.

the same here. Whole batch rejected for the reason "we don't need this subject..."

Just uploaded one, and before I could finish the keywords and click submit it for review, the status popped up as "rejected by admin_crew poor lighting" do they have a robot that reviews images now? In my account it shows as pending? Huh? which is it?

This is an edit of a refused image, where I fixed the problem with a reflection and altered it back to isolated on black, which it was shot as,  before I "fixed" it and made it isolated on yellow. Which I thought was a more appealing background color for food.

Automatic rejection for re-upload of similar image, without looking at it? Automatic rejection for isolated on black? How does a photo get rejected in under 60 seconds?

Well... not that what you say isnt true..to a degree it may very well be true.
     However,  I just punched in a thread about an hour ago reviving this topic....
     As said on that thread,  I just experimented with an upload there, havent uploaded there since mid of last year or so.   The three images were rejected.  One,  'not interested".  The other two,  a dining room table and a brick sidewalk  rejected for need of a property release.
  My point.  I have all three images in my IS port.  So in my particular case with these particuar images... this doesnt apply.
   I'm wondering if they are 'shutting down'  people that already have an IS port???  Is that stupid thinking?  ...or paranoia...  LOL  =tom