MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Frustrated with Shutterstock reviewers  (Read 6081 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: November 16, 2019, 05:51 »
+7
Just look at this https://www.shutterstock.com/video/search/countdown?sort=newest

At the same time I still got many rejections for dumb reasons of cool video backgrounds accepted anywhere else than on SS
 >:(

admin edit: edited subject for wording.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2020, 07:25 by leaf »


« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2019, 10:20 »
+1
What do you expect they pay reviewers peanuts and recruit anyone with minimal oversight  :(

Pay peanuts what do you get ?  ;D
« Last Edit: November 16, 2019, 16:45 by Bad Robot »

« Reply #2 on: November 16, 2019, 12:32 »
+4
For fun a few months ago I sent SS a request that I was interested in becoming a photo reviewer.  They responded back to me in a couple of weeks . I didn't not save their email but it went something like this. It was a very nice and polite letter. Thank you for your interest in SS. At this time you just don't have the experience we are looking for as we have other applicants that fit our requirements better. Thank you from SS.  So I guess my dream job will be on hold. Now for my background. I have been doing stock photos since Mosses came down form the mountain. I have a small site on SS and most all the other top sites. I get small sales from most of the sites daily. I have sold/published over a million photos in my time on earth as a photographer ..again over a long time in the business. So maybe someday I can get my dream job as a reviewer. I can only hope and pray....W.Scott McGill 

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #3 on: November 16, 2019, 13:22 »
+5
Unbelievable. They clearly favor some contributors over others, even though all these should have been rejected for being too similar.

But Shutterstock is going down the drain anyway, if they continue this way.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #4 on: November 17, 2019, 16:53 »
+2
For fun a few months ago I sent SS a request that I was interested in becoming a photo reviewer.  They responded back to me in a couple of weeks . I didn't not save their email but it went something like this. It was a very nice and polite letter. Thank you for your interest in SS. At this time you just don't have the experience we are looking for as we have other applicants that fit our requirements better. Thank you from SS.  So I guess my dream job will be on hold. Now for my background. I have been doing stock photos since Mosses came down form the mountain. I have a small site on SS and most all the other top sites. I get small sales from most of the sites daily. I have sold/published over a million photos in my time on earth as a photographer ..again over a long time in the business. So maybe someday I can get my dream job as a reviewer. I can only hope and pray....W.Scott McGill

You are probably over qualified, that's the line I used to get. Seems counter intuitive that someone who is better qualified, can't get a job. But what they are saying is, you are too smart and they couldn't mold you into the person they wanted.  :) Or you are too experienced and you wouldn't follow their limited and restrictive standards.

Of course the usual reminder, they make the rules, even when they are legally going their own way.

https://careers.shutterstock.com/jobs/openings/



« Reply #5 on: February 10, 2020, 02:44 »
+3
Unbelievable. They clearly favor some contributors over others, even though all these should have been rejected for being too similar.

But Shutterstock is going down the drain anyway, if they continue this way.

The income from selling images from shutterstock is getting worse.

« Reply #6 on: February 10, 2020, 06:54 »
0
What do you expect they pay reviewers peanuts and recruit anyone with minimal oversight  :(

Pay peanuts what do you get ?  ;D

How much do they pay?

« Reply #7 on: February 10, 2020, 08:39 »
+1
I'm not sure what's going on with video reviews. Probably half of my submissions get rejected, usually for noise/pixillation/compression. I then resubmit it and they take it. If I didn't have such a high upload bandwidth it wouldn't be worth it, especially with these occasional $1.50 video sales.

« Reply #8 on: February 10, 2020, 12:12 »
0
What do you expect they pay reviewers peanuts and recruit anyone with minimal oversight  :(

Pay peanuts what do you get ?  ;D

How much do they pay?

Peanuts ~ why? looking for a job? ;D

« Reply #9 on: February 12, 2020, 16:15 »
0
Not all file reviewers are stupid. Obviously, someone has stable sex. This affects being focused on work or being bitter in life. When the company realizes that spam is swallowed and they do not have the full quality collections, they will wonder what is failing.

They have many eggs, but the eggs must be held in the large brain, above the head. I have not seen so much irresponsibility in a company ever. Hopefully Adobe will overcome them soon.

« Reply #10 on: February 13, 2020, 06:22 »
0
I agree  :)

I submitted 2 pics of Easter eggs as editorial. Twice I got the rejection reason "Non-Licensable Content: We cannot accept this image into our commercial or editorial collection, or we are no longer accepting this type of content." Third time was lucky. So the thread should be called "Yes, some Shutterstock Reviewers Are fxckxng Idiots!"

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #11 on: February 13, 2020, 07:23 »
+3
Pretty certain they're using AI on first submission. How else can someone explain that images are reviewed often a few seconds after submission?

Rise of the machines!

« Reply #12 on: February 13, 2020, 11:28 »
0
I am fully convinced that they are human. You mean images, not vector or illustration. They have several waiting bored someone send them pictures. The rest, we must wait. AI is something that has an incalculable value in this sector.

An AI of images, which dares decide what it sees, is worth more than Google and Facebook together. There is no AI that sees 3D perspective letters. He will tell you that they are macaroni.

Its software of similar images, is retouched by humans, since in similar its software sees an African dog and car keys as similar files.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #13 on: February 13, 2020, 11:45 »
+1
Pretty certain they're using AI on first submission. How else can someone explain that images are reviewed often a few seconds after submission?

Rise of the machines!

Humans, aided by software that tells them analysis of the images or video. Still stupid human tricks behind the flawed rejections.  ;)

« Reply #14 on: February 13, 2020, 11:52 »
0
They see that the income of new customers decreases, or they see that they lose customers. They dedicate money and effort in hiring survey and market analysis companies. They decide that they have spam, that the client has a hard time deciding once they don't look for what they consider the trend files, which everyone should put on their websites, news and blogs.

When they observe that there are customers who are looking for, because they do not settle for dandruff placed in relevant 70s, they decide to delete spam files. And they lose entire collections and keep spam, the finger against the virtual screen, the doctor, the viruses they like, etc.

Clients leave, and they keep dandruff and spam. They look like the modern ones in the galaxy and are old and very classic. They create a company that influences the world and the world turns its back on them.

They have google indexing their advertising as it helps them a lot. They have departments that work very well. And they have some brains that must retire.

It is better that they pay a lot and well to the reviewers, it is the most important thing of the company. People with common sense.

Adobe focuses on its image editing software. And Shutterstock focuses on attracting customers in any corner of the world. Lots of publicity. The same thing that keeps 123RF, advertising, then, customers when they look and also see, they leave.

« Reply #15 on: February 13, 2020, 12:16 »
0
Nearly all of my submissions over the past week were rejected for "visible sensor or lens dust".
Those were new pics I took last weekend but also older pictures from a year ago.
Those have been accepted by all other agencies with no problems.
At normal 100 % I cant even discover any dust. Just at even higher resolutions and a very harsh contrast I was able to discover very few and small spots.
Never had that before. There must be somebody out there with a magnifying glass searching at 600 % on altered pictures.
If this continues Ill stop uploading to SS.

« Reply #16 on: February 15, 2020, 07:29 »
+1
I defenately give up with SS for now.
My 95 % approval rate changed to 95% rejection rate over the last 10 days.

Most images were rejected for "lens dust" and I removed every oh so small spot I could discover, uploaded the images for a second time and then got a rejection for poor quality instead ( "using auto-focus or poor camera sensor"). Well , I work with a Sony A7RII with a 42 MP full frame sensor. If this is a poor sensor I simply give up with SS.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #17 on: February 15, 2020, 12:20 »
+1
I defenately give up with SS for now.
My 95 % approval rate changed to 95% rejection rate over the last 10 days.

Most images were rejected for "lens dust" and I removed every oh so small spot I could discover, uploaded the images for a second time and then got a rejection for poor quality instead ( "using auto-focus or poor camera sensor"). Well , I work with a Sony A7RII with a 42 MP full frame sensor. If this is a poor sensor I simply give up with SS.

Downsize 10MP and upload again.

Do you have sensor dust? Doesn't matter how big or what camera if you have a dirty sensor. Of course then why are the others accepting them? I don't know...

Anyone here would need to see full size image to guess why they are rejected. I suppose you could link to accepted versions on other agencies?

« Reply #18 on: February 15, 2020, 14:02 »
0
I defenately give up with SS for now.
My 95 % approval rate changed to 95% rejection rate over the last 10 days.

Most images were rejected for "lens dust" and I removed every oh so small spot I could discover, uploaded the images for a second time and then got a rejection for poor quality instead ( "using auto-focus or poor camera sensor"). Well , I work with a Sony A7RII with a 42 MP full frame sensor. If this is a poor sensor I simply give up with SS.



Thanks for sharing your experience. I understand you perfectly. For 20 days, revisions in illustrations went well. Over the weekend, the examiner left, or the entire team. I have had to go back to photography until this character, the current illustration examiner, leaves the agency. Illustrations, two rectangular, look similar. Strike of illustrations for 15 days.

I do not believe that the current examiner of illustrations can last more than two weeks. For now, photographs. There is some tension in the photo exam, but they are a bit more human. Logically far from the professionalism of Adobe examiners, but still, the current photographers, have some common sense. In the illustrations, the current reviewer sees ghosts, if two are rectangular, he sees them Similar Content.

The current examiner of illustrations, to bitter the existence to another. I escape from him.

« Reply #19 on: February 15, 2020, 15:25 »
0
Thanks for sharing your experience. I understand you perfectly. For 20 days, revisions in illustrations went well. Over the weekend, the examiner left, or the entire team. I have had to go back to photography until this character, the current illustration examiner, leaves the agency. Illustrations, two rectangular, look similar. Strike of illustrations for 15 days.

I think I met the same reviewer!? Beginning last week, every illustration I uploaded was rejected for similar content. I don't know what the reviewer's issue was - they were all new concepts. I have over 700 illustrations at shutterstock and never ran into this problem before. For now, I have stopped uploading. I need a holiday from shutter...

« Reply #20 on: February 16, 2020, 08:29 »
+1
Here are a few of my theories, after some disastrous months in terms of review:

-reviewers are still humans, but are blindly following the advice from an AI. The work they perform in terms of intellectual property detection or just people detection can't be conducted solely by an AI (they were for instance able to reject a picture that had a Louis Vuitton logo hidden in the background of a picture, half hidden by cables and branches, that did not appear in the keywords nor in the title). However, it seems they don't even consider to challenge the AIs quality analysis, explaining why we get bogus rejections.

-there are probably KPI and staffing issues with the reviewers. I am receiving bulk rejections for absurd reasons (for instance a batch of 10 files that will all have the same rejection reason, generally the title is not in English or the image is underexposed, while actually my batches are made of totally different pictures and topics). In the meantime, while commercial pictures are reviewed extremely fast, it can take up to several days for an editorial picture to be reviewed. It's still not 123RF, but it can be a pain in the ass while covering topics like the Coronavirus, that are really hot at the moment. My interpretation on this is that they are put under pressure to reduce the amount of approved files, while being understaffed. It can explain why they are actually not doing a real job at some time (like rejecting 10 pictures in a row based on a one second appreciation of one picture or approving in 30s pictures that don't have any interest but don't raise any red flag from their AI).

-when it comes to photos, their policies can be easily bypassed. As I previously wrote, I reopened a folder called "shutterstock rejects" where I copy all the rejected photos. On first submission, I can have a rejection rate of around 50%. I re-sbumit the next day the same files with no modifications, there are already chances for 50% of these previously rejected files to be accepted. Then, for the remaining ones, I will decrease the resolution while applying some light noise reduction and clarity adjustments and resubmit. Most of the files will be accepted at that point. For the last ones, I will continue progressively decreasing the resolution till it reaches the lowest resolution authorized. At that point, the initial batch got an acceptance rate of around 98%. I'm still losing a bit (up until now, I was around 99% acceptabce), and I'm wasting my time, but at least I am partially saving my ass.

-last thing: they are not very good at rejecting similar content. I am conducting a strategy to re-upload in commercial pictures that I had a long time ago uploaded in editorial. I discovered that, all over those years, my editing techniques have greatly improved, thus enabling me to better delete intellectual property elements, people, while providing a much better overall processing. I can therefore provide quality files on topics where there are currently a lot of demand (like Iran). Normally, such files should be flagged as similar. However, if you simply mirror the file, it become accepted. I did it as a standard on this category of pictures, at I have an acceptance rate of around 99%...

To summarize, my interpretation is that they are struggling to improve their review process while being cheap, which is doomed to fail. Their system is so cheap, however, that it is still possible to get around it. It's totally stupid, because it can force you to decrease the quality of files that were just fine, but did not fit their AI requirements in terms of focus and noise (especially in editorial), but it works.

« Reply #21 on: February 16, 2020, 11:28 »
+1
In all relevant searches are the same as always. Never mind your Coronavirus editorials, or change the official name every day, the World Health Organization. You are placed on the page, 3, 4 and 5 of new files. If they have any quality, directly to page 12.

If they change their name now, they return the same images to Relevant in the new search. It is impossible, Valentine, Christmas, Coronavirus, Carnival, Hallowen, Black Friday, .......... Customers flee from the old tastes of SS. Finger to the screen, doctors and food scattered around the table, like a table for the irrational animals, the market is already saturated. Today's customers are from the 21st century

Maybe, the new CEO of SS puts order, maybe he can no longer, that is, worse than the previous one. We will see it.

His brain tells them, that the client leaves for the same reason in his arguments, All photos are the same.

They, their neurons, of Galactic Gods, do not recognize that the relevant page is similar. Spam in the new, to launch to your tastes, the tastes of the 70s of relevant image placers.
Conclusion, if you want something different as a client, you must go to modern agencies. Since the Similar Content is promoted by the agency itself, diverting quality and modernity towards the competition.

The examiners head out of the course like a football stadium, without understanding Spam's difference from valid and necessary collections. However, they will continue to hide these images and offer Archaic and Prehistoric Dandruff to customers, without variety in the possible tastes of a global market.

If you are not of the classics of your taste, if you sell, it is because customers are looking for you, since SS does not offer more than a certain taste of images, of course, as customers surely say when leaving the company, Similar Files.

Without modifying your files, they will surely end up being accepted, if they are valid, at the time a reviewer examines you with common sense.

« Reply #22 on: February 16, 2020, 14:26 »
+2
I agree  :)

I submitted 2 pics of Easter eggs as editorial. Twice I got the rejection reason "Non-Licensable Content: We cannot accept this image into our commercial or editorial collection, or we are no longer accepting this type of content." Third time was lucky. So the thread should be called "Yes, some Shutterstock Reviewers Are fxckxng Idiots!"

reviewers sometimes reject these as 'original art' (same with any graffiti on an old wall)

« Reply #23 on: February 16, 2020, 14:27 »
0
I defenately give up with SS for now.
My 95 % approval rate changed to 95% rejection rate over the last 10 days.

Most images were rejected for "lens dust" and I removed every oh so small spot I could discover, uploaded the images for a second time and then got a rejection for poor quality instead ( "using auto-focus or poor camera sensor"). Well , I work with a Sony A7RII with a 42 MP full frame sensor. If this is a poor sensor I simply give up with SS.

Downsize 10MP and upload again.

Do you have sensor dust? Doesn't matter how big or what camera if you have a dirty sensor. Of course then why are the others accepting them? I don't know...

Anyone here would need to see full size image to guess why they are rejected. I suppose you could link to accepted versions on other agencies?

I've had images w  real sensor dust accepted by other agencies - SS is by far the strictest

« Reply #24 on: February 16, 2020, 17:56 »
0
In all relevant searches are the same as always. Never mind your Coronavirus editorials, or change the official name every day, the World Health Organization. You are placed on the page, 3, 4 and 5 of new files. If they have any quality, directly to page 12.

If they change their name now, they return the same images to Relevant in the new search. It is impossible, Valentine, Christmas, Coronavirus, Carnival, Hallowen, Black Friday, .......... Customers flee from the old tastes of SS. Finger to the screen, doctors and food scattered around the table, like a table for the irrational animals, the market is already saturated. Today's customers are from the 21st century

Maybe, the new CEO of SS puts order, maybe he can no longer, that is, worse than the previous one. We will see it.

His brain tells them, that the client leaves for the same reason in his arguments, All photos are the same.

They, their neurons, of Galactic Gods, do not recognize that the relevant page is similar. Spam in the new, to launch to your tastes, the tastes of the 70s of relevant image placers.
Conclusion, if you want something different as a client, you must go to modern agencies. Since the Similar Content is promoted by the agency itself, diverting quality and modernity towards the competition.

The examiners head out of the course like a football stadium, without understanding Spam's difference from valid and necessary collections. However, they will continue to hide these images and offer Archaic and Prehistoric Dandruff to customers, without variety in the possible tastes of a global market.

If you are not of the classics of your taste, if you sell, it is because customers are looking for you, since SS does not offer more than a certain taste of images, of course, as customers surely say when leaving the company, Similar Files.

Without modifying your files, they will surely end up being accepted, if they are valid, at the time a reviewer examines you with common sense.

One Of the most brilliant Posts I've read In a lot of years. Thanks.

« Reply #25 on: February 16, 2020, 19:17 »
0
I am aware that you have read a post in recent years, therefore, the thanks are mine.
Thanks to you.

First by your effort to understand my words. That shows, that you put interest in the background, above the supplementary forms of irrelevant details in the way of developing writing, or my effort in trying to collaborate despite my barriers with the rest.

And of course, I thank you for having contributed what has more value in this life, time. You have contributed your time, to collaborate, without decision power in the Agency, to try to help other users for a long time. Your time. Therefore, thank you very much.

Already by mail, I sent you the agreed 60 dollars.
Greetings.

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #26 on: February 17, 2020, 04:37 »
+4
In all relevant searches are the same as always. Never mind your Coronavirus editorials, or change the official name every day, the World Health Organization. You are placed on the page, 3, 4 and 5 of new files. If they have any quality, directly to page 12.

If they change their name now, they return the same images to Relevant in the new search. It is impossible, Valentine, Christmas, Coronavirus, Carnival, Hallowen, Black Friday, .......... Customers flee from the old tastes of SS. Finger to the screen, doctors and food scattered around the table, like a table for the irrational animals, the market is already saturated. Today's customers are from the 21st century

Maybe, the new CEO of SS puts order, maybe he can no longer, that is, worse than the previous one. We will see it.

His brain tells them, that the client leaves for the same reason in his arguments, All photos are the same.

They, their neurons, of Galactic Gods, do not recognize that the relevant page is similar. Spam in the new, to launch to your tastes, the tastes of the 70s of relevant image placers.
Conclusion, if you want something different as a client, you must go to modern agencies. Since the Similar Content is promoted by the agency itself, diverting quality and modernity towards the competition.

The examiners head out of the course like a football stadium, without understanding Spam's difference from valid and necessary collections. However, they will continue to hide these images and offer Archaic and Prehistoric Dandruff to customers, without variety in the possible tastes of a global market.

If you are not of the classics of your taste, if you sell, it is because customers are looking for you, since SS does not offer more than a certain taste of images, of course, as customers surely say when leaving the company, Similar Files.

Without modifying your files, they will surely end up being accepted, if they are valid, at the time a reviewer examines you with common sense.

One Of the most brilliant Posts I've read In a lot of years. Thanks.

Really? Maybe it's just me but the broken English in that post read like a lot of incoherent thoughts and mumbo-jumbo.  I get that English isn't his first language and despite the language barrier he's trying to convey his message, I can respect that, but 'one of the most brilliant'?
« Last Edit: February 17, 2020, 04:40 by Noedelhap »

« Reply #27 on: February 17, 2020, 09:08 »
+3
it's a company who clearly don't have a clue of what they are doing...rejection for invisible noise is the norm, then they add fe noise crap that can be seen especially from new contributors...really go to some thread of shutter stock forum and see some portfolio, files without any clues or interest commercial value added daily,unbelievable...next financial year will be the nail odin the coffin of this company.

« Reply #28 on: February 18, 2020, 02:46 »
+2
it's a company who clearly don't have a clue of what they are doing...rejection for invisible noise is the norm, then they add fe noise crap that can be seen especially from new contributors...really go to some thread of shutter stock forum and see some portfolio, files without any clues or interest commercial value added daily,unbelievable...next financial year will be the nail odin the coffin of this company.
and yet they are the most profitable microstock company....how many years have you been predicting they will go bust? They are very good at marketing to buyers which is what really matters sadly.

« Reply #29 on: February 18, 2020, 03:53 »
+1
In all relevant searches are the same as always. Never mind your Coronavirus editorials, or change the official name every day, the World Health Organization. You are placed on the page, 3, 4 and 5 of new files. If they have any quality, directly to page 12.

If they change their name now, they return the same images to Relevant in the new search. It is impossible, Valentine, Christmas, Coronavirus, Carnival, Hallowen, Black Friday, .......... Customers flee from the old tastes of SS. Finger to the screen, doctors and food scattered around the table, like a table for the irrational animals, the market is already saturated. Today's customers are from the 21st century

Maybe, the new CEO of SS puts order, maybe he can no longer, that is, worse than the previous one. We will see it.

His brain tells them, that the client leaves for the same reason in his arguments, All photos are the same.

They, their neurons, of Galactic Gods, do not recognize that the relevant page is similar. Spam in the new, to launch to your tastes, the tastes of the 70s of relevant image placers.
Conclusion, if you want something different as a client, you must go to modern agencies. Since the Similar Content is promoted by the agency itself, diverting quality and modernity towards the competition.

The examiners head out of the course like a football stadium, without understanding Spam's difference from valid and necessary collections. However, they will continue to hide these images and offer Archaic and Prehistoric Dandruff to customers, without variety in the possible tastes of a global market.

If you are not of the classics of your taste, if you sell, it is because customers are looking for you, since SS does not offer more than a certain taste of images, of course, as customers surely say when leaving the company, Similar Files.

Without modifying your files, they will surely end up being accepted, if they are valid, at the time a reviewer examines you with common sense.

One Of the most brilliant Posts I've read In a lot of years. Thanks.

And at the same time one of the worst conclusions for the indusrty i guess, assuming that modern agencies with strict curation and fresh content are?
Unsplash and similar :/
« Last Edit: February 18, 2020, 04:25 by georgep7 »

« Reply #30 on: February 18, 2020, 05:45 »
+1
In all relevant searches are the same as always. Never mind your Coronavirus editorials, or change the official name every day, the World Health Organization. You are placed on the page, 3, 4 and 5 of new files. If they have any quality, directly to page 12.

Actually... not. At the moment, my newer files are even working better than usual. It seems they are regularly updating their algorithm, and, at the moment, the most recent uploads are slightly pushed, even though it's not as spectacular as I have been able to observe previously.


Conclusion, if you want something different as a client, you must go to modern agencies. Since the Similar Content is promoted by the agency itself, diverting quality and modernity towards the competition.


I would like to believe what you're saying, but my numbers are saying something else.

If I compare the 2019 yearly RPI to 2018 by platforms, here is the evolution:
Shutterstock   -10,09%
IStock   -9,03%
123RF   21,52%
Alamy   -25,19%
Dreamstome   60,84%
Depositphotos   14,50%
Adobe   108,52%
Bigstock   -10,77%

As we can see, SS is far from being the only problematic platform. We can see, indeed, that the smaller platforms are getting better numbers, including some notorious golden turds like 123RF and DP. Adobe is showing an amazing performance, with a three digit yRPI growth.

That being said, here is the fundamental data: the revenue share from SS, IS and Alamy all together has not changed a lot: they represented 84% of my income in 2019 vs 89% in 2018, SS being stable at 32%. In the meantime, AS showed an amazing evolution, but we're talking about jumping from 1.5% of the revenue share in 2018 to 4%. It's expected to be smaller, as I have only 25% of my portfolio on this platform, but we're still talking about marginal phenomenon.

So, yes, I'd like to think that SS is decreasing in favor of other agencies, but it's not the case. The issues we're dealing with when it comes to Shutterstock are not that different from the general ones about Microstock.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2020, 09:26 by BalkanskiMacak »

Shelma1

« Reply #31 on: February 18, 2020, 07:24 »
+3
Follow the money.

1. Reviewers get paid per image, so if they reject everything in two seconds and then accept in two seconds when resubmitted they get paid twice.

2. If youre an established contributor, you make a higher royalty rate and SS keeps less of the money, so your work gets rejected more often and when accepted automatically gets pushed back in the search. That way new contributors can flood the site with images that get pushed to the top, and SS keeps more money by paying lower royalties.

« Reply #32 on: February 18, 2020, 09:01 »
0
Follow the money.

2. If youre an established contributor, you make a higher royalty rate and SS keeps less of the money, so your work gets rejected more often and when accepted automatically gets pushed back in the search. That way new contributors can flood the site with images that get pushed to the top, and SS keeps more money by paying lower royalties.

I'm definitely not sure about that theory. I studied the numbers after reaching a new tier, and it did not have a significant impact.

being in a higher tier may mean you are more expensive, indeed, but it means your photos are more bankable, as it needs more than a few ducks in pound to reach the levels. Therefore, your return on investment may be higher.

« Reply #33 on: February 18, 2020, 10:38 »
+1
getting rejected 99.99% of uploaded footage. Only stupid reasons. This stock website is crap. It makes me go scouting all other newer crappy footage they accept and spam their email, twitter and facebook with hypocrisy standards.

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #34 on: February 18, 2020, 13:14 »
+3
getting rejected 99.99% of uploaded footage.

You've uploaded 10,000 clips and only had 1 of them approved?

« Reply #35 on: February 18, 2020, 13:47 »
0
uploaded 50 new files in the last month and only 1 was accepted. It seems like they are f*cking with me. I uploaded 20 thousand files since 2012, mostly no problems.

« Reply #36 on: February 18, 2020, 15:25 »
+1
Rejections are generated by the nerves and pressure. They work with the pressure that customers leave the Agency because they offer them too similar content. It goes by times, what lasts the reviewer without common sense, the content continues its course, with stable increases, since the rejected genre is placed in the following week, the following month, or three months later.

I hope that the department of placing images in the shop window will grant other types of files to the clients, otherwise they will follow the amazing numbers of Freepik. It finds no ceiling in its growth.


 Similar Content is what is offered. Having everything is something that made SS the number 1. As long as the tastes of the department do not change to offer images to the current times, the client will continue his pilgrimage towards the extremely modern and avant-garde quality month after month, to the minimum price. having everything in SS is good, offering the rancid and outdated tastes of the 70s, no.

They are losing complete collections of very valid files for potential clients and continue to offer the same line of the files. The client has a hard time finding something fresh. For other customers, it doesn't matter exactly, they don't have time, and they keep choosing in the first third of the New or Relevant page.

« Reply #37 on: February 20, 2020, 00:44 »
0
Follow the money.

1. Reviewers get paid per image, so if they reject everything in two seconds and then accept in two seconds when resubmitted they get paid twice.

2. If youre an established contributor, you make a higher royalty rate and SS keeps less of the money, so your work gets rejected more often and when accepted automatically gets pushed back in the search. That way new contributors can flood the site with images that get pushed to the top, and SS keeps more money by paying lower royalties.
Correct.And...something to consider.....Most of the really good "Original" Thinkers and shooters are gone. Try spending your time Trying to Help 9000 People on the critique forum do Better............In Vain. I have and will never again. I actually thought I was Helping.  I was Not...........................MY BAD!
« Last Edit: February 20, 2020, 00:50 by rinderart »

« Reply #38 on: February 22, 2020, 03:10 »
+1
Im now quite sure my photos are no longer reviewed by a human but by a digital programme.
I uploaded about 40 pictures over the last week, all in batches of 3 or 4 pictures, and they were reviewed within one (ONE!) minute or two minutes, but never waiting for more than two minutes for review.
And all got rejected.
Several reasons, always the same reason for the whole batch.
Im quite sure no human was involved in that process.
So I now stopped uploading. A rejection rate of 100 % makes me step out now.
And the other agencies (Bigstock, Dreamstime, Adobe, iStock, deposit) all had no problems with those pictures and accepted them.
Thats GOODBYE Shutterstock for me.

Oh I nearly forgot: I uploaded 4 editorial pictures (same settings as the non editorial, but with tourists in it I have no release for). Those pictures took about 3 days to be reviewed and were all ACCEPTED!!! - so there a human was involved I guess).
« Last Edit: February 22, 2020, 03:14 by Astrantia »

« Reply #39 on: February 22, 2020, 03:25 »
+1
They are rejecting with no logic.
I am 100% sure its AI system. They are making the system learn on their own to enhance their intelligence.

I have multiple times asked them regarding rejections but no one listens or takes action.

« Reply #40 on: February 23, 2020, 14:43 »
+1
Best Blogger On the Planet..
If your not , You should read this Blogger. He is the best of the Best ever.
http://blog.melchersystem.com/the-things-that-kill-themselves/

« Reply #41 on: February 23, 2020, 16:37 »
+2
It seems that weekends are not a good time to send photos either. We will wait for daily days. Last week on daily days, the reviews were quite sensible. Both weekends quite badly. Reviewers of photographs with little common sense during the two consecutive weekends.

« Reply #42 on: February 24, 2020, 04:58 »
0
Something VERY odd is going on with reviews at the moment.

I had a load of vectors rejected for "Similar Content"... they have no resemblance to anything else in my portfolio. Never happened before. It was after I forgot to tick the "Illustrations" box on another jpeg batch that were illustrations resulting in a (correct) mass rejection.

I wonder if they have some policy that if you get a certain ratio of recent rejections they suddenly start rejecting subsequent batches out of hand? Whatever it is, I'm p*ssed.

« Reply #43 on: February 24, 2020, 05:15 »
0
Sometimes my pictures go to AI. A few seconds and rejections. Sometimes go to humans. More time and almost no rejections, but they are helped by AI too.

No way to know how or when submit. It's random.

Point to AS, AL and IS.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #44 on: February 24, 2020, 09:56 »
+3
Sometimes my pictures go to AI. A few seconds and rejections. Sometimes go to humans. More time and almost no rejections, but they are helped by AI too.

Is that a fact? Then what happens when I get accepted in a few seconds, is that AI too?

Do you have an inside source at SS that gave you this information?

« Reply #45 on: February 24, 2020, 12:36 »
0
If the agency got a credit for the value of the company during the next 500 years, they might have the ability to start in AI. However, they would invest it in creating commercial vectors, not saving the money of the reviewers.


They do not have adequate software to convert the vectors to .jpg if they do not go to an enormous size, we should not talk about AI, when the owners of the land, google, fail and fail again with only one language in conversations. IA is far from the reach of microstock agencies.

« Reply #46 on: February 24, 2020, 12:48 »
+1
Something VERY odd is going on with reviews at the moment.

I had a load of vectors rejected for "Similar Content"... they have no resemblance to anything else in my portfolio. Never happened before. It was after I forgot to tick the "Illustrations" box on another jpeg batch that were illustrations resulting in a (correct) mass rejection.

I wonder if they have some policy that if you get a certain ratio of recent rejections they suddenly start rejecting subsequent batches out of hand? Whatever it is, I'm p*ssed.

Yes, it seems that the reviewer saw that you were coming from rejections and thought you were trying to upload again. Everything seems to indicate that they are altered, very tense, far from the love of agency and photography or multimedia material.

The same as the like causes satisfaction, I think they are causing some attention so that we are constantly alert in the reviews. A kind of psychological hitch.


In their official forum, weekend reviewers have been very bad. I am ashamed, but it seems that SS is not ashamed.

The comments of the contributors are devastating to the behavior of the weekend photo reviewers. It's a weird thing that SS doesn't do anything.

« Reply #47 on: February 24, 2020, 13:13 »
+1
It's a weird thing that SS doesn't do anything.

they don't care... they only see $$$. The same happened to istock. So I stopped uploading. After few years deleted the whole portfolio. Now dejavu is happening again.

« Reply #48 on: February 24, 2020, 16:10 »
+1
Sometimes my pictures go to AI. A few seconds and rejections. Sometimes go to humans. More time and almost no rejections, but they are helped by AI too.

Is that a fact? Then what happens when I get accepted in a few seconds, is that AI too?

Do you have an inside source at SS that gave you this information?

BS uses the same program. Same rejections at the same time in the same pictures with the same reasons.

In a few seconds.

Not humans there.

« Reply #49 on: February 24, 2020, 17:30 »
0
It seems that of all the extra examiners, hired for the February campaign and hearts, some archives supervisor wanted to leave, and it seems that he has succeeded, after the prominence acquired this weekend. revision times are not seconds, there is less working today. Some are going to collect their economic settlement and merry Christmas. Or they have taken the software that examines you to a recycling chores.



As someone said here months ago, there can't be such a silly AI. That nonsense is something human.
corporate boycott, bitterness, trade union struggle, anything. Artificial Intelligence no, they are big words.

I insist, a software capable of displacing a human with the themes of art, taste, and possibilities or not of sales, has more value to humanity than the stock file business.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2020, 18:00 by Tenebroso »

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #50 on: February 25, 2020, 08:53 »
0
IA is far from the reach of microstock agencies.

State: Iowa IA. The Iowa abbreviation is IA. This is a unique place with its own history, culture, and geography.



IA   Internet Archive
IA   Information Assurance
IA   Information Architecture
IA   Intel Architecture

IA stands for Internal Assessment (International Baccalaureate testing)

Not humans there.

ET or other aliens then?

« Reply #51 on: February 25, 2020, 10:05 »
0
Speaking from my own experience and observations, all images are reviewed by AI at the first attempt. If/when they all get rejected instantly, you give them a second chance. Once again, all of your amazing work are getting rejected at the speed of light. When you are submitting those images for the third time it takes hours to review them. Now there is a human component involved in review process. Usually, at this point, they are all accepted.

angelawaye

  • Eat, Sleep, Keyword. Repeat

« Reply #52 on: February 25, 2020, 10:54 »
+1
For fun a few months ago I sent SS a request that I was interested in becoming a photo reviewer.  They responded back to me in a couple of weeks . I didn't not save their email but it went something like this. It was a very nice and polite letter. Thank you for your interest in SS. At this time you just don't have the experience we are looking for as we have other applicants that fit our requirements better. Thank you from SS.  So I guess my dream job will be on hold. Now for my background. I have been doing stock photos since Mosses came down form the mountain. I have a small site on SS and most all the other top sites. I get small sales from most of the sites daily. I have sold/published over a million photos in my time on earth as a photographer ..again over a long time in the business. So maybe someday I can get my dream job as a reviewer. I can only hope and pray....W.Scott McGill

Trust me, you wouldn't have wanted the job even if they were interested in your application. I had to sign an NDA so I can't say much more ...

« Reply #53 on: February 25, 2020, 10:59 »
0
For fun a few months ago I sent SS a request that I was interested in becoming a photo reviewer.  They responded back to me in a couple of weeks . I didn't not save their email but it went something like this. It was a very nice and polite letter. Thank you for your interest in SS. At this time you just don't have the experience we are looking for as we have other applicants that fit our requirements better. Thank you from SS.  So I guess my dream job will be on hold. Now for my background. I have been doing stock photos since Mosses came down form the mountain. I have a small site on SS and most all the other top sites. I get small sales from most of the sites daily. I have sold/published over a million photos in my time on earth as a photographer ..again over a long time in the business. So maybe someday I can get my dream job as a reviewer. I can only hope and pray....W.Scott McGill

Trust me, you wouldn't have wanted the job even if they were interested in your application. I had to sign an NDA so I can't say much more ...

I was a reviewer for a different agency over a decade ago. I did it for a couple of years. There is nothing to it. You just look at photos and decided to accept or reject based upon the agency's standards. Back then you were paid 50cents per review, so some inspectors were making 6 figures. Of cause this was a long time ago. No doubt a great deal has changed since.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2020, 11:01 by charged »

« Reply #54 on: February 25, 2020, 11:48 »
0
IA is far from the reach of microstock agencies.

State: Iowa IA. The Iowa abbreviation is IA. This is a unique place with its own history, culture, and geography.



IA   Internet Archive
IA   Information Assurance
IA   Information Architecture
IA   Intel Architecture

IA stands for Internal Assessment (International Baccalaureate testing)

Not humans there.

ET or other aliens then?


Santa is the parents.

« Reply #55 on: February 25, 2020, 11:49 »
0
are/is ?

 ???

« Reply #56 on: February 25, 2020, 14:06 »
+2
For fun a few months ago I sent SS a request that I was interested in becoming a photo reviewer.  They responded back to me in a couple of weeks . I didn't not save their email but it went something like this. It was a very nice and polite letter. Thank you for your interest in SS. At this time you just don't have the experience we are looking for as we have other applicants that fit our requirements better. Thank you from SS.  So I guess my dream job will be on hold. Now for my background. I have been doing stock photos since Mosses came down form the mountain. I have a small site on SS and most all the other top sites. I get small sales from most of the sites daily. I have sold/published over a million photos in my time on earth as a photographer ..again over a long time in the business. So maybe someday I can get my dream job as a reviewer. I can only hope and pray....W.Scott McGill

Trust me, you wouldn't have wanted the job even if they were interested in your application. I had to sign an NDA so I can't say much more ...

I was a reviewer for a different agency over a decade ago. I did it for a couple of years. There is nothing to it. You just look at photos and decided to accept or reject based upon the agency's standards. Back then you were paid 50cents per review, so some inspectors were making 6 figures. Of cause this was a long time ago. No doubt a great deal has changed since.

Ask Laurin he reviewed for 3 years and knows everyone important.

« Reply #57 on: February 25, 2020, 15:00 »
0
Thank you, you made me laugh. regards.


My words difficult to understand among humans, it is impossible for Artificial Intelligence. AI, IA, Artificial Intelligence. If we show the machine the Nike logo, every time you see Espaa, Spain in an image, you will understand the Nike brand in .

Already OCR (Optical character recognition or optical character reader ,OCR ) developers would like to, scan deciphering letters in images to advance in understanding the text, and that, which is plain text. Adding that the same word of the same language does not mean the same in Spanish from Europe to Spanish in Mexico. AI, IA, is simply impossible to distinguish a letter logo as text. If you go into 3d and with perspective, you can see from dirt to an octopus behind the logo of a beer.

In the discussion, they are not very human or very human, I no longer enter, but it is not the machines that examine the SS archives.

« Reply #58 on: February 25, 2020, 23:34 »
0
Long review times (for videos), mass rejections and sales (RPD) have plummeted the second half of the month.

« Reply #59 on: February 26, 2020, 07:16 »
0
Sometimes my pictures go to AI. A few seconds and rejections. Sometimes go to humans. More time and almost no rejections, but they are helped by AI too.

Is that a fact? Then what happens when I get accepted in a few seconds, is that AI too?

Do you have an inside source at SS that gave you this information?

It is a fact that AI is used in the review process, inside source Jon Oringer, 2016 Annual Report.  As far as I am aware the annual report is a legal document and falsehoods would be frowned upon, therefore I take it as fact.

« Reply #60 on: February 26, 2020, 09:08 »
+1
Perhaps they could use AI on large existing approved library in order to learn with no side effects, also evaluate, spot copiers, perhaps even irrelevant tagging etc etc Guess it is logic to protest for AI errors but an improved AI would be a really useful tool to clear libraries in the future.?

« Reply #61 on: February 26, 2020, 09:21 »
+1
Perhaps they could use AI on large existing approved library in order to learn with no side effects, also evaluate, spot copiers, perhaps even irrelevant tagging etc etc Guess it is logic to protest for AI errors but an improved AI would be a really useful tool to clear libraries in the future.?

In regards to search they have talked about their Machine Learning capabilities for many years, which gives you all you ask for and more, but which they choose not to use for those purposes. 

« Reply #62 on: February 26, 2020, 09:31 »
0
Sometimes my pictures go to AI. A few seconds and rejections. Sometimes go to humans. More time and almost no rejections, but they are helped by AI too.

Is that a fact? Then what happens when I get accepted in a few seconds, is that AI too?

Do you have an inside source at SS that gave you this information?


well in did get this from one of their insider


"If you have not a similar image in your own portfolio, It's probably because there's another approved image from another contributor that is very very similar to your photo to the extent that the image processing software has been fooled that it's the same photo! You can try again one more time and if it was rejected again for the same reason, then I'm afraid that there's no way to add this photo to the library."

« Reply #63 on: February 26, 2020, 09:34 »
+2
For fun a few months ago I sent SS a request that I was interested in becoming a photo reviewer.  They responded back to me in a couple of weeks . I didn't not save their email but it went something like this. It was a very nice and polite letter. Thank you for your interest in SS. At this time you just don't have the experience we are looking for as we have other applicants that fit our requirements better. Thank you from SS.  So I guess my dream job will be on hold. Now for my background. I have been doing stock photos since Mosses came down form the mountain. I have a small site on SS and most all the other top sites. I get small sales from most of the sites daily. I have sold/published over a million photos in my time on earth as a photographer ..again over a long time in the business. So maybe someday I can get my dream job as a reviewer. I can only hope and pray....W.Scott McGill

Trust me, you wouldn't have wanted the job even if they were interested in your application. I had to sign an NDA so I can't say much more ...

I was a reviewer for a different agency over a decade ago. I did it for a couple of years. There is nothing to it. You just look at photos and decided to accept or reject based upon the agency's standards. Back then you were paid 50cents per review, so some inspectors were making 6 figures. Of cause this was a long time ago. No doubt a great deal has changed since.

Ask Laurin he reviewed for 3 years and knows everyone important.


or so he tells us.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #64 on: February 26, 2020, 11:04 »
0
Sometimes my pictures go to AI. A few seconds and rejections. Sometimes go to humans. More time and almost no rejections, but they are helped by AI too.

Is that a fact? Then what happens when I get accepted in a few seconds, is that AI too?

Do you have an inside source at SS that gave you this information?


well in did get this from one of their insider


"If you have not a similar image in your own portfolio, It's probably because there's another approved image from another contributor that is very very similar to your photo to the extent that the image processing software has been fooled that it's the same photo! You can try again one more time and if it was rejected again for the same reason, then I'm afraid that there's no way to add this photo to the library."

Adobe has said the same when I had one rejected that was nothing like any of mine. I don't find the information controversial or a discovery?  ;D

I don't get that kind of reject, rarely for a series of shots, but apparently some people who upload gross of Lego People, find it upsetting. Or maybe someone with 50 poppy photos or how many marijuana bud shots, before the buyers have all they need? Yet on SS, the AI (yes I admit there's some software finding these to notify the reviewers) will find a blue and yellow boat, and start deciding all blue and yellow boats are similar. It's not very smart.

Here's an example of dumb AI similar detection



So no I don't disagree and yes you are right, similar can mean someone else uploaded something similar and the agency thinks they have too many already. FT before Adobe, rejected something I uploaded. I appealed and got this personal response from the reviewer. "too many like this and they don't sell well."  Nice that some individual's subjective opinion can decide what they accepted and what got rejected.

« Reply #65 on: February 27, 2020, 19:09 »
+2
The owner of the land, Google, invests what he does not have and more in trying to track the crime of hate speech in the EU. track and track for fake news. They are not able to see it clearly, and they would like it very much.

If SS used AI to give access or not to the archives in its library, minorities, religion, certain social groups and some country, they would have already exposed their complaints and possible diplomatic conflicts with some country.

The language is very subtle, and I firmly maintain that the examiners are human. It has no SS capability, nor means of AI in file exams. In addition, it may take decades to get something in this direction to start a path. Decades

The AI can't understand a picture today. I am not going to ask you also, that as you learn you will be looking longer if you find a file that you like very much, or get to love. Nor will I ask the AI to exclaim WOW when he finds a sexy robot.

If they had AI to decide on files, the SS would have more value than Google, Facebook, Whatsapp, Instagram, APPLE, Microsoft, ...

The new owner of the planet would be SS.

« Reply #66 on: February 28, 2020, 04:08 »
+1
"Nor will I ask the AI to exclaim WOW when he finds a sexy robot."

LOL!!!!!!!!

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #67 on: February 28, 2020, 09:16 »
+1
The owner of the land, Google, invests what he does not have and more in trying to track the crime of hate speech in the EU. track and track for fake news. They are not able to see it clearly, and they would like it very much.

If SS used AI to give access or not to the archives in its library, minorities, religion, certain social groups and some country, they would have already exposed their complaints and possible diplomatic conflicts with some country.

The language is very subtle, and I firmly maintain that the examiners are human. It has no SS capability, nor means of AI in file exams. In addition, it may take decades to get something in this direction to start a path. Decades

The AI can't understand a picture today. I am not going to ask you also, that as you learn you will be looking longer if you find a file that you like very much, or get to love. Nor will I ask the AI to exclaim WOW when he finds a sexy robot.

If they had AI to decide on files, the SS would have more value than Google, Facebook, Whatsapp, Instagram, APPLE, Microsoft, ...

The new owner of the planet would be SS.

"Nor will I ask the AI to exclaim WOW when he finds a sexy robot."

LOL!!!!!!!!


+ to both!  5,542 sexy robot stock photos  ;D

« Reply #68 on: February 28, 2020, 09:29 »
0
are/is ?

 ???

Santa (singular)

So "Santa is the parent"

and

Santa and Mrs Santa are the parents  ;D

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #69 on: February 28, 2020, 10:06 »
+1
are/is ?

 ???

Santa (singular)

So "Santa is the parent"

and

Santa and Mrs Santa are the parents  ;D

As a robot you should know best.

« Reply #70 on: February 28, 2020, 12:03 »
+2
"Nor will I ask the AI to exclaim WOW when he finds a sexy robot."

LOL!!!!!!!!

Yes I concur sexy robots are WOW!  ;D

But back to the subject.  I went for years without rejections now in the last month
stupid rejections for similars or "we are no longer accepting this kind of content.

Since when does having two photos of a subject at entirely different angles constitute similars?

Especially when they allow stolen news images and floods of similars from Eastern European and Asian countries.

Contacting so called contributor support is complete waste of time you get other contributors who know nothing and if you escalate to a "company rep" you get farmed out to someone in India who knows nothing too.

This company has gone to the dogs and is no longer worth the bother.

« Last Edit: February 28, 2020, 16:37 by Bad Robot »

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #71 on: February 29, 2020, 12:32 »
+3

But back to the subject.  I went for years without rejections now in the last month
stupid rejections for similars or "we are no longer accepting this kind of content.

Since when does having two photos of a subject at entirely different angles constitute similars?


When they make the rules, that's when.

If they only want photos of Pink Poodles between the hours of Noon and Nine on Wed. That's the way it is.

Remember all the shouting and hand wringing about too many similars, too much spam, too many of the same things. Well there we are, now SS is restricting similar content and subjects that are over produced, or already existing. Remember, how many people complained, and wanted tougher reviews, higher standards, while many people were critical of new members and their quality or content.

Some asked for that and we all got it, not like new rules would only apply to someone else.

« Reply #72 on: February 29, 2020, 14:58 »
0
The SS agency was characterized by having everything. That is a great value. If someone needs a file on the groin of a cricket, SS is likely to have it.

Now, if you are looking for the collection of uniforms of an army, go to another agency, SS accepts spam from covid 19, from a person with the boat in three hands, left, right and the center hand holding the boat. In addition, the same with a vaccine, vaccine in the right hand, vaccine in the left hand and vaccine in the center arm. all in order to divert the images you want to sell.


The spam is eaten voluntarily, not valid collections.
There is no such issue in threads of other agencies. It's not about spam of similar images, it's about common sense. It is not about the quality of the reviews, it is about global ridicule and that they are not considered professionals, something very negative for the agency.

If you want the sports uniform of the football teams of the European championship, or another event, do not look in SS. They only accept the first file. It's not about similar, it's about being a hater, troll, instead of a professional examiner. The head of the agency, for your home, and they will get the new boss, not to come to Christmas in this agency. The enemy is at home.

10 random people, found in any subway, train or bus station, from any corner of the world, put them to examine and do better. Better.


The issue is, what is the purpose of this stupidity? My neuron does not give me, I have no mental capacity to try to find a single reason for such stupidity.

The examiners, have to have a lot of stomach and a very special digestion, to read the comments on the official forum, and look the other way.

« Reply #73 on: February 29, 2020, 17:01 »
0
Some rejections are just automatic.

It's easy to see it on BS, the same program that SS uses, and they are using it on weekends or when they have a lot of pictures flood.

This week I had a 100/100 approved on BS but today I have a 100x100 rejection rate. Same pictures.

You can do nothing with this, just talk and have fun.

« Reply #74 on: February 29, 2020, 17:29 »
0
Saludos Trabuco


True, talking is the only thing we can do. And I do it, because I am aware, that the International Olympic Committee is meditating to include collaborators of SS archives among elite High Risk athletes.

It would be the first step in accessing an Olympiad and recognizing the work of SS contributors.


As for weekends, they only send very positive people, with great positivism that borders on faith in religions. A very cruel hope in this case, they will destroy you mercilessly.

Send on weekends only the brave ones do.

« Reply #75 on: February 29, 2020, 17:58 »
0
Saludos Trabuco


True, talking is the only thing we can do. And I do it, because I am aware, that the International Olympic Committee is meditating to include collaborators of SS archives among elite High Risk athletes.

It would be the first step in accessing an Olympiad and recognizing the work of SS contributors.


As for weekends, they only send very positive people, with great positivism that borders on faith in religions. A very cruel hope in this case, they will destroy you mercilessly.

Send on weekends only the brave ones do.

Hi Tenebroso.

I'm here just for one year and a half, not going to give any lesson to anyone. Anyway I could be wrong (in this thing and in everything else).

The point for me is: for some companies contributors are crap.

I mean, today I have sent a lot of pictures to these *insult removed* from 7AM to 12AM (maybe I should have gone to the gym or to play basket... better morning). As I said this week no problems, a hundred of pictures with no rejections so...

But today all of them rejected for the same reason (the other day was "file transfer error", today "out of focus"); so... I think I'm going to resubmit then again on Monday but, after that, I'm going to take some holidays, stop uploading, and think about in which agencies I wanna stay. Not more than 3 and the other ones just my current port with no new ones.

Regards.

« Reply #76 on: February 29, 2020, 17:58 »
0
edit

« Reply #77 on: February 29, 2020, 18:40 »
0
I am unable to assimilate, the benefit of treating ourselves as garbage. It is something extraordinarily different. a marketing and an economic editorial line simply too strange. Their failures, they dump them in the trash of the bloodsuckers and cabaret residents of naval ports, which is how they consider us. We are his great failure.

We are not worthy of breathing. All right.

Well, we are the worst of the human race, but they should....... to hide, make it more discreet. unless, the reason for such isolation and corporate suicide escapes us. I am unable to assimilate the reasons for giving the competition such obvious advantages.


They do not have the slightest modesty in showing their great affection for our work and they also show it to us. Maybe we should thank them for being so sincere.

« Reply #78 on: March 01, 2020, 02:46 »
0
Maybe we should thank them for being so sincere.

We know where is our place, but It's the worst corporative strategy ever.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
25 Replies
11064 Views
Last post April 04, 2015, 16:03
by stuttershock
957 Replies
141135 Views
Last post November 04, 2015, 14:39
by cascoly
22 Replies
5448 Views
Last post April 04, 2015, 18:37
by shudderstok
85 Replies
35622 Views
Last post April 04, 2015, 16:02
by stuttershock
212 Replies
20086 Views
Last post December 20, 2019, 10:08
by Snow

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle