Author Topic: New Upload Limits at BigStockPhoto (Read 13716 times)

packerguy · « **on:** May 06, 2009, 12:53 »

Below is from FAQ.

Why are you restricting the number of uploads to my account?
In order to manage the number and quality of images that are submitted to the Approval Queue, we have to place some restrictions on uploading. These have been revised as of May 2009.

If you are uploading good quality images, that are marketable, you will have no limits generally. But if you upload a lot of images and delete them (this wastes bandwidth and server space) or you submit a lot of images that are low quality or not very marketable, you will have some restrictions, which will be removed if you take the time to learn what is going wrong with some of your images and how to improve your shots.

These are the current upload retrictions that you might run into, updated May 2009:

New users with less than 15 total approved images are limited to 15 images in the Admin Approval Queue at a time
Users with an approval percentage of 50% or less are limited to 10 images in the Approval Queue at a time
Users with an approval percentage of 70% or less are limited to 20 images in the Approval Queue at a time
Users with an approval percentage of 85% or less are limited to 40 images in the Approval Queue at a time
Users with an approval percentage of 92% or less are limited to 50 images in the Approval Queue at a time
Users with higher than 92% approval percentage have no limit.

Images that are uploaded and deleted will also lower your rating. Deleted images count the same as declined images.
An approval rating of 50% means that half of your images were approved, and the other half were deleted by you or denied. A rating of 95% means one out of twenty images is not approved. So it's a ratio of approved images compared to all images that were approved, deleted or denied.

Remember, uploading images and deleting them affects your rating too, so please take some care not to upload images you don't intend to submit. Thanks again.

wins75 · « **Reply #1 on:** May 06, 2009, 13:38 »

Let's see if their review times improves or is it just a cost cutting measure.

fotografer · « **Reply #2 on:** May 06, 2009, 13:45 »

It's about time they did something to lessen the queue. Everytime I upload a batch I have had dozens of sales on other sites before they are even looked at by BS.

disorderly · « **Reply #3 on:** May 06, 2009, 13:49 »

One bit of this bit me hard. Their acceptance percentage is based on the number of acceptances divided by the number of uploads. That means that images you upload but delete before submission count against you. I've hurt my percentage by automating my upload to different sites, then deleting those images BigStock would reject for violating its rules against nudity or anything too suggestive. I've asked them to reevaluate their policy of counting deletions as rejections, but don't expect much.

melastmohican · « **Reply #4 on:** May 06, 2009, 14:24 »

I asked customer support do delete couple hundred files from my queue (at first a did not have IPTC data) and then I learned that it will affect my acceptance ratio. So now I am *removed coarse language* up cause this will never expire and I have to get same amount images approved to even reach 50%.

goldenangel · « **Reply #5 on:** May 06, 2009, 14:40 »

Quote from: melastmohican on May 06, 2009, 14:24

I asked customer support do delete couple hundred files from my queue (at first a did not have IPTC data) and then I learned that it will affect my acceptance ratio. So now I am *removed coarse language* up cause this will never expire and I have to get same amount images approved to even reach 50%.

Once it happened to me that my ftp client tried to uplaod the same file there many times, which resulted in it being uploaded around 70 times. I asked their customer support to delete these files and adjust my acceptance ratio. It took a few days but they finally did it. You might want to consider doing something similar.

cthoman · « **Reply #6 on:** May 06, 2009, 15:00 »

Quote from: melastmohican on May 06, 2009, 14:24

I asked customer support do delete couple hundred files from my queue (at first a did not have IPTC data) and then I learned that it will affect my acceptance ratio. So now I am *removed coarse language* up cause this will never expire and I have to get same amount images approved to even reach 50%.

And here I thought this was just to punish me. I deleted over 100 images a while back because they didn't sell vectors when I originally uploaded, then they did. I also recently tried to get them to replace some of my original thumbnails because their first thumbnail generation for vectors was garbage. After a few back and forth emails, they said that they couldn't replace the thumbnails and recommended I delete the files and reupload them. I guess it's good I just left them because that would have really dug a hole for me.

dbvirago · « **Reply #7 on:** May 06, 2009, 15:38 »

So if you have 90% acceptance you are restricted due to quality?? And it's not a restriction on uploading, it's a restriction on what's in the que. So if the reviewers are slow or someone is on vacation, we get penalized. Frankly, I don't care how big the que is or how long it takes to get reviewed. I upload every day, I get reviews every day. Today's review may be from an upload 2 weeks ago.

Milinz · « **Reply #8 on:** May 06, 2009, 15:51 »

**Your Approval Rating: 93.87%

So, I can upload as many as I wish ;-)

peep · « **Reply #9 on:** May 07, 2009, 02:06 »

Quote from: packerguy on May 06, 2009, 12:53

New users with less than 15 total approved images are limited to 15 images in the Admin Approval Queue at a time
Users with an approval percentage of 50% or less are limited to 10 images in the Approval Queue at a time
Users with an approval percentage of 70% or less are limited to 20 images in the Approval Queue at a time
Users with an approval percentage of 85% or less are limited to 40 images in the Approval Queue at a time
Users with an approval percentage of 92% or less are limited to 50 images in the Approval Queue at a time
Users with higher than 92% approval percentage have no limit.

Why 92% for heaven's sake? Why not 90 or 95%

Some obnoxious contributor who has the ratio of 91,99%?

Lcjtripod · « **Reply #10 on:** May 07, 2009, 07:50 »

I do not have a problem with any site setting upload limits and making rules for us photographers to follow. Which we should and cooperate with the site. It is best for all concerned.

However I do have a problem when they set the rules for US to follow and they do not follow THEIR rules.

Example: From my port on BigStock.

Upload Summary
Approved: 2,148 ***
*Denied/Deleted:184
Waiting Approval:0
Pending Your Edit:0
Total:2,332

**Your Approval Rating: 92.11%

**Approval Rating (experimental): an overall status on your photos you've submitted in the last 90 days.

***NOTE: This is the accurate number of approved images in the Admin Queue database, but it may not be the same as the BigStock photo search database, since the latter is updated only twice daily.

This is the rule that BigStock does not follow:
**Approval Rating (experimental): an overall status on your photos you've submitted in the last 90 days.

If BigStock followed their rule of 90 days my approval rating would be 100% (Last 90 days - 21 uploads and no deletes. = 100% approved. Yet my approval rating is only 92.11%

If BigStock followed this rule they made many of the persons posting before me would no longer have a problem as the problem would have been fixed automatically in 90 days.

I'm not knocking BigStock as they are my favorite site (for many reasons) I just wish they would listen to their contributors more offten and make corrections to benefit all.

Just my .02 cents.
-Larry

mantonino · « **Reply #11 on:** May 07, 2009, 09:52 »

Yeah, I'm NOT HAPPY at all. I'm glad some of you mailed them actual "complaint" letters because I just FLIPPED THE F OUT on them. I have self-edited my gallery, made a mistake reuploading a batch of 50 and deleted it so I didn't have two of each, and self-edited my gallery some more. All to find out today that THAT IS GOING AGAINST ME - to improve the quality of their gallery overall is hurting me. Changing the rules is one thing, changing them on something that SHOULDN'T have mattered - ok ok I'll come back when I don't need to flip the F out.

Karimala · « **Reply #12 on:** May 07, 2009, 13:02 »

I was struck by the fact that deletions count against us, too. I had just decided yesterday I was going to go through my DT and BigStock portfolios and clean them up, and now I'm darn glad I didn't start deleting at BigStock. So...unless they remove deleted files from the percentage calculations, I'll have to leave my old crummy stuff in their archives. No way am I going to shoot myself in the foot when I'm just a few percentage points away from unlimited uploading!

Plus, I would be over 92% had it not been for the blanket rejection of 50+ images for a minor issue on the model releases that could have been easily ignored. I had maintained a 90%+ acceptance rate for almost 3 years up until that point. Grrrrr.

batman · « **Reply #13 on:** May 07, 2009, 13:14 »

Quote from: Karimala on May 07, 2009, 13:02

I was struck by the fact that deletions count against us, too.

Karimala, BigStock is not the only site that counts deletion as a rejection. If you submit an image to most site and before the review, you delete it, it gets included generally as part of your rejection. That's why Support will advise you to be careful to only upload only when you are certain that is the image you want reviewed. There is only two parts in the ratio, so I can't see how deletion will not be factored into your rejections.

Karimala · « **Reply #14 on:** May 07, 2009, 13:51 »

Quote from: batman on May 07, 2009, 13:14

Quote from: Karimala on May 07, 2009, 13:02
I was struck by the fact that deletions count against us, too.

Karimala, BigStock is not the only site that counts deletion as a rejection. If you submit an image to most site and before the review, you delete it, it gets included generally as part of your rejection. That's why Support will advise you to be careful to only upload only when you are certain that is the image you want reviewed. There is only two parts in the ratio, so I can't see how deletion will not be factored into your rejections.

Really? In over 3 years, I've never noticed that before. I just did at BigStock though...deleted two images from the queue that are being rejected elsewhere primarily for "too many on site", and my percentage dropped by .05%. I can live with that, because it's so rare that I ever delete anything before approval.

What I'm having an issue with are images that have been online for a year or two or three that I would like to remove, because they are not reflective of my current skills. Improving the archives and our own portfolios by pruning dead wood should not count against us.

I'd also like to see the sites with upload limits shorten the duration counted in the percentage. At DT, my acceptance rate is 77.3% over the course of 3 1/2 years. However, over this past year it is 91%. Big improvement!

Having been a reviewer and seeing the ridiculous amount of garbage that comes through the queue, I definitely support the need for upload limits. I just want them to be fair and reflective of the photographer's current work. Like so many others in the beginning of microstock, I barely even knew how to use a camera and had a steep learning curve. In three years I have grown into a fairly decent photographer, and I would like my upload limits to reflect the hard work I've put into photography instead of reflecting my start as a true amateur.

travismanley · « **Reply #15 on:** May 07, 2009, 13:55 »

Quote from: Karimala on May 07, 2009, 13:51

Quote from: batman on May 07, 2009, 13:14
Quote from: Karimala on May 07, 2009, 13:02
I was struck by the fact that deletions count against us, too.

Karimala, BigStock is not the only site that counts deletion as a rejection. If you submit an image to most site and before the review, you delete it, it gets included generally as part of your rejection. That's why Support will advise you to be careful to only upload only when you are certain that is the image you want reviewed. There is only two parts in the ratio, so I can't see how deletion will not be factored into your rejections.

Really? In over 3 years, I've never noticed that before. I just did at BigStock though...deleted two images from the queue that are being rejected elsewhere primarily for "too many on site", and my percentage dropped by .05%. I can live with that, because it's so rare that I ever delete anything before approval.

What I'm having an issue with are images that have been online for a year or two or three that I would like to remove, because they are not reflective of my current skills. Improving the archives and our own portfolios by pruning dead wood should not count against us.

I'd also like to see the sites with upload limits shorten the duration counted in the percentage. At DT, my acceptance rate is 77.3% over the course of 3 1/2 years. However, over this past year it is 91%. Big improvement!

Having been a reviewer and seeing the ridiculous amount of garbage that comes through the queue, I definitely support the need for upload limits. I just want them to be fair and reflective of the photographer's current work. Like so many others in the beginning of microstock, I barely even knew how to use a camera and had a steep learning curve. In three years I have grown into a fairly decent photographer, and I would like my upload limits to reflect the hard work I've put into photography instead of reflecting my start as a true amateur.

Im guessing the reasons sites factor in deleted images into approval rating is that they have paid for those photos to be reviewed. If you go and delete old photos with low or no sales that eliminates the possibility that they will make any money off them.

batman · « **Reply #16 on:** May 07, 2009, 14:02 »

Quote from: travismanley on May 07, 2009, 13:55

Im guessing the reasons sites factor in deleted images into approval rating is that they have paid for those photos to be reviewed. If you go and delete old photos with low or no sales that eliminates the possibility that they will make any money off them.

travis, ...into rejections, you mean ! yes, i agree. especially for BigStock . they tend to work slowly with sales unlike other sites that sells straight off like SS. the first time i requested deleted of a whole stack of my work, they actually told me to leave me. i told them that was crazy as there were no sales at all.
but i left it, and voila , the sales came. i couldn't believe why anyone was able to locate such old images, but that was just the way it is with BigStock. i do sell quickly for some new images, but it seems i sell more of my oldest image. i cannot explain that, maybe they rotate or something.

also going back to Karimala. i like the idea of getting rid of dead images too. you could rework on them and resubmit with a fresh look. but all this takes up your time as well, which could be better spent in making new images and uploading them. what do you think?

travismanley · « **Reply #17 on:** May 07, 2009, 14:11 »

Quote from: batman on May 07, 2009, 14:02

Quote from: travismanley on May 07, 2009, 13:55
Im guessing the reasons sites factor in deleted images into approval rating is that they have paid for those photos to be reviewed. If you go and delete old photos with low or no sales that eliminates the possibility that they will make any money off them.

travis, ...into rejections, you mean ! yes, i agree. especially for BigStock . they tend to work slowly with sales unlike other sites that sells straight off like SS. the first time i requested deleted of a whole stack of my work, they actually told me to leave me. i told them that was crazy as there were no sales at all.
but i left it, and voila , the sales came. i couldn't believe why anyone was able to locate such old images, but that was just the way it is with BigStock. i do sell quickly for some new images, but it seems i sell more of my oldest image. i cannot explain that, maybe they rotate or something.

also going back to Karimala. i like the idea of getting rid of dead images too. you could rework on them and resubmit with a fresh look. but all this takes up your time as well, which could be better spent in making new images and uploading them. what do you think?

I have also noticed many of my sales are on older photos that dont sell particularly well at other sites.

As far as deleting old photos that you are not so proud of. Really what harm do they do just sitting in your portfolio? You have already done the work to upload them why not just let them sit? If you are worried about buyers stumbling across and old photo you took that is not reflective of your current skills why not direct people to a Flickr account or something similar with just your best images?

mantonino · « **Reply #18 on:** May 07, 2009, 14:21 »

The issue with deleting old work is that some people take this microstock stuff as a business and it's hard to brand yourself with 4 year old work on your "portfolio." I have another photography business and you can BET there's no 4 year old work on my website. We show new, current stuff to get jobs. We want to show new, current stuff in micro too so buyers bookmark us, favorite us, etc. and come back time & again to our folio.

Lcjtripod · « **Reply #19 on:** May 07, 2009, 15:15 »

Quote from: mantonino on May 07, 2009, 14:21

The issue with deleting old work is that some people take this microstock stuff as a business and it's hard to brand yourself with 4 year old work on your "portfolio." I have another photography business and you can BET there's no 4 year old work on my website. We show new, current stuff to get jobs. We want to show new, current stuff in micro too so buyers bookmark us, favorite us, etc. and come back time & again to our folio.

This is why all RF Sites should DELETE all images on their site over 2 years old and low rated. Make room for the new and better stuff instead of ... we have enough of that subject rejects!!!

-Larry

batman · « **Reply #20 on:** May 07, 2009, 15:21 »

Quote from: Lcjtripod on May 07, 2009, 15:15

Quote from: mantonino on May 07, 2009, 14:21
The issue with deleting old work is that some people take this microstock stuff as a business and it's hard to brand yourself with 4 year old work on your "portfolio." I have another photography business and you can BET there's no 4 year old work on my website. We show new, current stuff to get jobs. We want to show new, current stuff in micro too so buyers bookmark us, favorite us, etc. and come back time & again to our folio.

This is why all RF Sites should DELETE all images on their site over 2 years old and low rated. Make room for the new and better stuff instead of ... we have enough of that subject rejects!!!

-Larry

well said lcjtripod. the fact that the old excess images didn't sell really says nothing that the new ones won't. to reject the new images based on this premise is counterproductive. delete the old and accept the new. now you won't have too many.

mantonino · « **Reply #21 on:** May 08, 2009, 11:26 »

Update on the "deletes":

http://www.microstockgroup.com/bigstock-com/BigStock-deleting-old-photos-will-not-affect-your-upload-approval-rating/

Lcjtripod · « **Reply #22 on:** May 08, 2009, 11:44 »

Quote from: mantonino on May 08, 2009, 11:26

Update on the "deletes":

http://www.microstockgroup.com/bigstock-com/BigStock-deleting-old-photos-will-not-affect-your-upload-approval-rating/

Great news!

Even better if they can make it retroactive and help the people in the past that made errors or errors were made by the upload process. (non valid .jpg) I bet I have had a hundred of those deletes.

Thanks Tim (BigStock)

-Larry

lephotography · « **Reply #23 on:** July 17, 2009, 00:08 »

I think that it was a good move on BS. There are so many people uploading that dont even have SLR cameras and hundreds of people thinking that stock photography is simple & anyone can do it to make a easy penny.
There is ALOT of bad images submitted everyday in huge masive amounts and takes up a big huge amount of time for reviewers and money to approve them when something like this can be set into place.
If it were your company and you had to pay for each image to be reviewed, you would think it was a good idea as well.

It speeds up review times and the overall quality of images on BS will improve because people will be more picky on what they are uploading.

GOOD JOB BS!

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: New Upload Limits at BigStockPhoto (Read 13716 times)

packerguy

wins75

fotografer

disorderly

melastmohican

goldenangel

cthoman

dbvirago

Milinz

peep

Lcjtripod

mantonino

Karimala

batman

Karimala

travismanley

batman

travismanley

mantonino

Lcjtripod

batman

mantonino

Lcjtripod

lephotography

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors