Author Topic: no point in submitting to shutterstock right now unless you want 90-100% rejects (Read 11595 times)

pics2 · « **Reply #25 on:** April 10, 2020, 11:52 »

. . .

Deyan Georgiev Photography · « **Reply #26 on:** April 13, 2020, 07:17 »

Quote from: SuperPhoto on March 30, 2020, 22:40

seems right now the solution by some reviewers at shutterstock is to reject 100% of items. total laziness.

the reasons have no bearing on the video footage. its actually a complete waste of time right now to even bother submitting.

I'd recommend everyone else here for the time being don't submit to shutterstock, unless you want to re-do your work later.

Sorry, no one from us like rejections, but to me this sounds like good news from Shutterstock, the better news can be to start removing some existing crap.

There are black clouds coming over this business after COVID-19, and if this is true and they apply rigorous review this will improve the revenue per photo accepted.

The old experienced contributors knows very well the value of acceptance, this is not a routine process.

P.S. I don't mention your rejections or someone's particular, I focus my thoughts as a whole about the collection.

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #27 on:** April 13, 2020, 07:18 »

If they were only allowing quality items in - I'm all for that.

That's not the case. They are just mass rejecting because the reviewers - whomever they are - just don't feel like working.

Quote from: Deyan Georgiev Photography on April 13, 2020, 07:17

Quote from: SuperPhoto on March 30, 2020, 22:40
seems right now the solution by some reviewers at shutterstock is to reject 100% of items. total laziness.

the reasons have no bearing on the video footage. its actually a complete waste of time right now to even bother submitting.

I'd recommend everyone else here for the time being don't submit to shutterstock, unless you want to re-do your work later.

Sorry, no one from us like rejections, but to me this sounds like good news from Shutterstock, the better news can be to start removing some existing crap.

There are black clouds coming over this business after COVID-19, and if this is true and they apply rigorous review this will improve the revenue per photo accepted.

The old experienced contributors knows very well the value of acceptance, this is not a routine process.

P.S. I don't mention your rejections or someone's particular, I focus my thoughts as a whole about the collection.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #28 on:** April 13, 2020, 11:43 »

Quote from: SuperPhoto on April 13, 2020, 07:18

If they were only allowing quality items in - I'm all for that.

That's not the case. They are just mass rejecting because the reviewers - whomever they are - just don't feel like working.

Sure looks that way much of the time. I can stand a real or honest rejection, but when 30% are rejected for "focus", it just seems like that's not standards but lazy reviews. When someone is taking photos and panning, the background is going to be out of focus and blurred.

Quote from: Deyan Georgiev Photography on April 13, 2020, 07:17

Sorry, no one from us like rejections, but to me this sounds like good news from Shutterstock, the better news can be to start removing some existing crap.

P.S. I don't mention your rejections or someone's particular, I focus my thoughts as a whole about the collection.

I doubt if they will be removing much, except people with hundreds of similar images, patterns and that. Going through 320 million images for someone who has two similar shots isn't going to happen. People with hundreds, might happen. As for quality, and reviews, if it's accepted, I doubt they will be removing for that reason.

But still, how about consistency and realistic rejections? Focus is being used just to hit a button and move on. Either that or as absurd as Microstock was with everything must be tack sharp and in focus, they have raised that another level. There should be some leeway for useful an marketable content. Of course maybe they have enough of everything and are starting to only accept super sharp content.

I don't know if I want to play their game and start downsizing just for SS. How much should I care if they are mostly selling sub now?

William Perry · « **Reply #29 on:** April 13, 2020, 14:13 »

Could this be AI?

William Perry · « **Reply #30 on:** April 13, 2020, 14:17 »

I have had a lot of review problems with SS too, but they do sell.

A week ago out of the blue I was contacted by SS Premium. In the end one of my images sold for 2,000 to 3,000 and I made 1,000 for that one sale.

This is the first time it has happened to me, but it is another reason to persevere even with the ridiculous rejection reasons.

bestravelvideo · « **Reply #31 on:** April 13, 2020, 15:00 »

There must be someone, a team, that is responsible for the reviewing process and is accounted for all this. If there is a team that now reassigned the work, let’s assume that an initial screening is done by AI and then a human might see our photos-videos etc.
If he/she is working from a remote location in a distant country where we would need to change 3 flights and travel 23 hours to get there, chances are he is not having a big 4K calibrated monitor.
Let’s assume again this real, not AI, person sees a photo in a 15-inch laptop or a video on a PC with no decent video card. Even if he is an honest worker, he can’t see DOF properly or judge background noise or see a panning scene without stutter.
Why do we care about that? We don’t, because we need our work to be reviewed but we should care because we get rejections we don’t accept as valid ones.
Just now I had one of three videos accepted, with two rejected for focus (not valid) and noise (denoised with Neat video and not blurred or pixelated).
If they need slow apertures let’s just tell us that they do.
Let’s just tell us we should not need cinematic fast lenses and they need all focused focus and videos.
It’s simple. They could say, from now on … etc.
Also, they need to make clear what the rejection reason is.
If this person who sees that, has some preset buttons to press, let’s give him more options that make it clear.
Also, since they have such a big amount to review, they could simply add a tab with the option we add comments. That is always under the assumption that a person and not a machine reads them.
As things are, it is a continuous fight couples that are bored of each other have, with ironies and shouts.
If they want, they can do some small steps to improve reviews and keep the interest in the relation alive.
Do they?

elena_86 · « **Reply #32 on:** April 16, 2020, 03:16 »

Even I had most of my content rejected (vectors) for "irrelevant keywords" since last week. In more than ten years it's the first time I have this "keywords" issue, sounds more like a random reason to reject my content.