MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: review inconsistancy  (Read 2226 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: February 05, 2016, 18:48 »
Has anyone else noticed a lot of recent inconsistency in the review process at Bigstock lately?

I recently had a whole batch of photographs that were all rejected, many that have been accepted at all other agencies, including the crazy Shutterstock.  In another batch, they accepted some that I did not even bother to upload to others due to noise but it was a popular topic.  I do like the way they will notify buyers to stick to smaller sizes rather than total rejection for noise.  Action and outdoor shots are not always possible to do without noise.  The ones where they have done that have all sold.

But lately, I feel like the weekend reviewer at SS has moved to Bigstock.  Rejection of images that are in focus, correctly lighted, correct white balance.  I know reviewing can be subjective and one can learn from rejections and all that... but sometimes, the reviewer just is not doing their job.  Has anyone ever resubmitted to Bigstock when they know he review was bogus?  Maybe it is not worth it---photos are on other sites and selling so maybe I should just move on. 
« Last Edit: February 05, 2016, 22:21 by Hildegarde »

« Reply #1 on: February 06, 2016, 14:03 »
hmm, interesting 8)
did this just happened??? if so, i am interested to know if there is a change to the reviewing at ss
.  if ss is back to normal proper reviewing, then maybe just maybe
the rogue reviewer is sacked or transfered to bigstock.

let's wait for some ss contributors to tell  us if last week's review at ss is back to normal.
or worse news that the rogue reviewer has won another post to get more work at bigstock too.

if red fact #2 is true, then it's really dog crap hell for both uploading to ss and bs b*llsh*t !!!

« Reply #2 on: February 07, 2016, 03:31 »
On resubmitting - Sometimes I realize the rejection was warranted, usually because there is noise in the photo I overlooked. Sometimes I think the reviewer was high and I resubmit.

« Reply #3 on: February 07, 2016, 04:18 »
no issues with bigstock, fair reviews

« Reply #4 on: February 07, 2016, 05:13 »
Almost no rejection with Bigstock

« Reply #5 on: February 07, 2016, 14:33 »
Sometimes I think the reviewer was high and I resubmit.

maybe! after approving one thousand marijuana pictures in a row, it definitely can OD your eyes  8)

« Reply #6 on: February 08, 2016, 14:06 »
I was getting almost everything accepted at Bigstock for months (and then if one or two rejected, usually for noise on action shot so understandable).

Just in the past week, Bigstock has been rejecting everything. images accepted elsewhere at agencies that have strict review standards (SS, Fotolia).

On the other hand, SS seems slightly more reasonable and more images have been accepted there than usual.   Not a drastic change but closer to reasonable.


Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
review times

Started by Greg Boiarsky General Stock Discussion

2 Replies
Last post September 01, 2006, 12:01
by Wisent
30 Replies
Last post March 19, 2007, 05:06
by Karimala
2 Replies
Last post May 07, 2012, 18:06
by heywoody
5 Replies
Last post October 10, 2012, 17:24
by tab62
46 Replies
Last post December 18, 2012, 13:58
by CD123


Microstock Poll Results