I browsed a little at crestock earlier today (which I don't do much, I don't upload much there either, since they are good on rejections and poor with sales...) to find out one of my shots in the "worst image of the day" archive...
this is the one: http://www.crestock.com/todays-worst-image.aspx?id=572.

I don't mind getting a beat when I deserve one, but to claim that this photo is blurry makes me think that the honorable judge needs a new pair of glasses... 

the picture is pin sharp, and actually sold a few times on other sites (including SS and IS which I believe won't accept blurry shots...).

all in all, it made my day. good to start a day laughing 

well i would have to agree here.  it looks like the judge needs new glasses

It does look blurry though if you just looks at the lights and not the buildings.... but.....

well it confirms my suspicions about Crestocks "High Standards"

I'll have to take your word for it that the image is sharp - I've also had plenty of rejections on images that were deemed sharp enough on 6 other stock sites.

The image in my eyes is very usable for stock - plenty of copyspace, and a theme that relates to Electricity generation.

To me the whole "worst images" section is offensive. Is there something in their terms and conditions that entitles them to insult submitters? Maybe a lawsuit waiting to happen

Why would any serious site accept something that they think deserves to have fun poked at it? And why would they insult a contributor like that? For that matter, I wonder why theyd want to show off bad images. All seems a bit tacky and amateurish to me.
(image seems fine...)

the worst images of the day are not accepted.

I believe it is there to try and help people learn what a good / bad stock image is, and probably for interest sake to drive traffic.  If people find it helpful or not I dunno... I don't tend to pay much attention to the judge's decisions

Some of the worst photos of the day have given me a laugh.  Crestock spend lots on advertising, I have seen 2 page adverts in design magazines. 

Sold 300 there so far but it is disappointing that most of them are for $0.25.  If that doesn't change soon I will have to stop uploading.

In the early days of Crestock i complained about the humiliation to the photogs with that worst image of the day.
They replied to me that the photog in question is asked if image may be portrayed as worst of the day.
Still, i think it is no good to do so... this has been one of the reasons I quit crestock in the early days already.

Patrick H.

Golden rule of biz never "EVER" humiliate your best ppl.

Lets hope this isn't your 15 minutes of fame

If it's any consolation, I don't think Judge Ross has too keen an eye for commercial imagery: Although I've been selected for 'Today's Best Image' (a rather unprecedented) ten times, for the most part the shots he's selected are not amongst my best sellers on Crestock or anywhere else.

to quote a former poster who was banned from this forum, i';d love to c things from his point of view but i don't think i could get my head that far up my ass 

to quote a former poster who was banned from this forum, i';d love to c things from his point of view but i don't think i could get my head that far up my ass 

Lots of booze and lube 

if there's one dope thats going to hasten the death of any stock site its that arrogunt wigged gobshite waving his gavel around like he knows what hes talking about. so incensed wuz i by some of his off the wall critiques i simply stopped uploading, which reminds me i must delete whats already up there.

You sound familiar. Contakt = Editorial?

I thought it had been said in the site that images would only be shown there with the photographer's consent? Not that I see a reason why someone would accept this, given the way this is presented.

Regards,
Adelaide

Hola,

Just finished reading all the posts and not really sure where to start..

First, may i humbly suggest a more relaxed approach to Judge Ross. We don't mind a little bit of controversy, stirring up some dust every now and then, but we do not want this to deter anyone from contributing. This is not a reflection on the business as a whole, but is a very small part of the Crestock community that is currently being redeveloped and that, when released, i'd encourage all of you to be a part of.

Lior, our apologies because there seems to have been a small error made here. Without wanting to kill any of the myth or controversy of Judge Ross, images are chosen so that they will not offend. That is, from contributors who haven't been active in 2 years. The chances that the original contributor will see the images are slim. And, then, in this case, it was a 'borderline' rejection (don't know exactly as i can't find the full-size original) and the reasons for rejection aren't apparent at preview size. I believe this was a mistake, and this is not the intended result of Judge Ross' picks.

Perhaps they might consider changing 'Today's Worst Image' to 'Today's Best Rejection'. This way they could use part of the site to educate contributors as to why an image that is acceptable elsewhere is unacceptable at Crestock.

As it stands, I see no use for the 'Worst Image' other than to get an occasional chuckle, which isn't advancing anybody's career.

This is where I'd like Judge Ross to be heading. Like everyone's mum would have told them growing up, 'If you don't have anything helpful to say, don't say anything at all.' The education of contributors is something that i've been investing a lot of time into, and perhaps Judge Ross would be a good place to give out some good advice and useful articles on avoiding the issues he raises.

Thanks for the feedback,

Josh - Crestock.com