50 accepted...50 rejected, exact same reject reasons

donding

« on: July 07, 2010, 10:19 »

#link

I had exactly 50 accepted and exactly 50 rejected for exactly the same reason with the latest batch

"Other concerns. Composition, styling, and/or lighting do not quite reflect the aesthetic that appeals to Veer customers."

Some of them I can understand...but all of them for exactly the same reason? I find that strange. Any one else have a mass rejection where each of the reason's were exactly the same? The rejects I got before would have the reason explained a little more and the rejects varied...not all the exact same. Many of these are on all the other sites I'm on and sell well. Probably if I contacted them and questioned this I probably wouldn't hear back because of the overload from others because of rejects from them. It just doesn't make sense. Now I'll probably be stuck on there with a few dollars shy of payout and never reach it since I have had absolutely no sales. I wasn't worried before because of the year end payout, I figured I had nothing to worry about, but now since they decided to change the rules after everyone started submitting to the Veer Dash for Cash, I am.


	Ignore \| Logged

Zeus

« Reply #1 on: July 07, 2010, 13:49 »

#link

Quote from: donding on July 07, 2010, 10:19

I personally think rejection reasons are nebulous at best at any site. Especially the above types. It's purely subjective and the whim of a reviewer.


	Ignore \| Logged

Albert Martin

« Reply #2 on: July 07, 2010, 16:19 »

#link

Such rejections come to that they wish to moderate their collection on subjective basis! That won't work well for their business.

Only what I approve is rejection due to technical issue. All rejections based on subjective basis are BS.


	Ignore \| Logged

Eireann

« Reply #3 on: July 07, 2010, 18:23 »

#link

Hi Donding,
50 of your images were rejected, all with the same reason.
'From an aesthetic point of view, the images do not appeal to Veer customers.'
I thought the whole point of launching Dash for Cash was to attract *new* customers. New customers - a variety of aesthetic preferences?
I was hoping Veer inspectors were done and dusted with this kind of rejections. It seems not.
But don't worry Donding

Hopefully, Veer knows what it's doing, clever marketing will soon follow and sales, real sales will help you, (and all of us), reach payout and beyond.
I'm light years away from payment (7 dollars in my account), but I'm keeping my hopes high.
They have everything they need to make it up there.
We can only wait and hope for the best.


« Last Edit: July 07, 2010, 18:24 by Eireann »	Ignore \| Logged

Zeus

« Reply #4 on: July 07, 2010, 18:34 »

#link

Quote from: Eireann on July 07, 2010, 18:23

'From an aesthetic point of view, the images do not appeal to Veer customers.'

Which are few and far between.


	Ignore \| Logged

donding

« Reply #5 on: July 07, 2010, 19:04 »

#link

The images were on a variety of subjects. All different. I really wish I knew the order I uploaded them to tell rather they just hit reject on the 1st 50 and then accept on the next 50. Being the rejection was the same on them all it almost seems like that is what they did. I think it's getting to the point that they are getting tired of reviewing and just hitting accept or reject. If the rejection reasons were more subjective I would think differently.


	Ignore \| Logged

m@m

« Reply #6 on: July 07, 2010, 19:13 »

#link

Quote from: Eireann on July 07, 2010, 18:23

I also believe in Santa Claus...and a few others...oh! wait, VEER too!!! Wink


	Ignore \| Logged

xst

« Reply #7 on: July 07, 2010, 22:56 »

#link

I noticed that several times.
all the same pattern.

apparently reviewer goes through images and check them one by one.
But as soon as he/she runs several images in row (I don't know how many -2-5-10?) with the same rejection reason - they just stop reviewing this batch and reject the rest with the same rejection reason.

I do have kind of proof of this behavior.


	Ignore \| Logged

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #8 on: July 07, 2010, 23:20 »

#link

When they are picky but rejections make sense (i.e. IS), I tend to submit only my best photos, but when there are a lot of serial / random rejections then I tend to submit everything hoping a good % passes thru - no reason to lose my time trying to find a reason which is probably not there

I can't see how this could be any good for them as well

I'm not speaking about veer only, it's a more general issue.


« Last Edit: July 07, 2010, 23:35 by microstockphoto.co.uk »	Ignore \| Logged

donding

« Reply #9 on: July 08, 2010, 12:05 »

#link

Quote from: microstockphoto.co.uk on July 07, 2010, 23:20

Kinda reminds me of 123RF.


	Ignore \| Logged

louoates

« Reply #10 on: July 17, 2010, 09:02 »

#link

Yesterday IS rejected a vertical shot (for lighting and artifact issues) and accepted a horizontal shot OF THE VERY SAME setup shot seconds apart. Huh

I could go on and on....


	Ignore \| Logged

fljac

« Reply #11 on: July 17, 2010, 09:16 »

#link

Just wondering....

How is it possible for the editor to determine, wether or not a certain image will appeal to the customers? I really doubt that it is possible for the editor to know anything about what current and future customers has a need for Grin

...Why not just be honest and introduce another rejection reason, witch could be:

Great image, nothing wrong, but we just don't want it, have a nice day!

Till now I have no complaints, my initial batch of 10 were processed within less than 1 week - 8 approved and 2 rejected. The 2 rejections were for this reason:

Composition, styling, and/or lighting do not quite reflect the aesthetic that appeals to Veer customers. Please review our Contributor Guidelines to get a better sense of what we're looking for.

Both rejected images has passed inspection in lots of other sites, but still.... It's just two images, and if veer decides that they don't want them, even though they are selling in several other sites, well, that's veers decision.


	Ignore \| Logged

cclapper

Premium Member

« Reply #12 on: July 17, 2010, 10:49 »

#link

Quote from: louoates on July 17, 2010, 09:02

Yesterday IS rejected a vertical shot (for lighting and artifact issues) and accepted a horizontal shot OF THE VERY SAME setup shot seconds apart. Huh

I could go on and on....

Know what you mean.


	Ignore \| Logged

lefty

« Reply #13 on: July 17, 2010, 11:14 »

#link

Quote from: cclapper on July 17, 2010, 10:49

Quote from: louoates on July 17, 2010, 09:02

Yesterday IS rejected a vertical shot (for lighting and artifact issues) and accepted a horizontal shot OF THE VERY SAME setup shot seconds apart. Huh

I could go on and on....

Know what you mean.

I think it is different reviewers. I too get often rejection for "poor lighting" of the same shoot.
eg. latest from agency , no need to mention who, 7 approvals, 3 rejection.
All shot with same position and same composition.

I just let go, and say thank you to the reviwers for my 7 approvals.


	Ignore \| Logged

louoates

« Reply #14 on: July 17, 2010, 12:29 »

#link

These are prime candidates for re-submissions without changes. I did so with one a few months ago and it was accepted. It's now my number two best seller at that site!