I agree the new reviewers are a bit overzealous to say the least. I have had at least one photo rejected out of every batch recently. The reasons are ridiculous and the photos were accepted everywhere else. I think they do the stupid rejections so that nobody can say they are doing nothing....

Quote from: FlemishDreams on October 21, 2008, 17:44
After 3 years of almost 98% approvals at BigStock, and after resuming uploads after a 5 months stop, if must have hit the new Atilla-class of reviewers too. ...

last may lcjtripod and shutterdrop were complaining, then it stopped.
now FlemishDreams, a revival of Atilla .
i must admit, that BigStock has been quite consistent and reasonable with my rejections. perharps i was lucky, i did have a few Atilla type rejections but not enough for me to get miffed.
but i am sure Atilla or his children, or relative are working with BigStock.
maybe for the holiday rush. if so, i think it would be best not to upload anymore "snapshots",
go on a break until Atilla leaves, maybe?

update: i am sure Atilla is back with BigStock.
it's been months since i got a rejection for "snapshot".
last night i got a bunch of rejections, all "this is a snapshot".
atilla is back. i will stop uploading to BigStock, until he goes away,...
which would be after the christmas rush. i hope.

I don't know if this also by Attila, but these two images:



Got rejected:

  3953209 New Year 2009 - 1
  Reason: please provide and appropriate title. thanks
  3953210 New Year 2009 - 2
  Reason: please provide and appropriate title. thanks

What is inappropriate, New Year?   

These images in BigStock are also named New Year 2009:


So I am really puzzled.

Regards,
Adelaide

Quote from: madelaide on November 15, 2008, 01:35

Well this new league of Atillas is certainly still in training. A real Atillish rejection notice of "2009" would look like this:

+ Framing, cropping or lack of composition. Consider portrait, rather than landscape, thank you.
+ Copyright issues; can you please file a Font Release Form?
+ The focus is not there where we feel it should be, and we're having a bad hair month anyways.
+ Distorted pixels, oversampling, white balance issues. Chromatic aberration visible on "9".
+ We don't need this type of images at the moment, thank you. Please reupload end of 2009. Your images are competitive with mine.

Quote from: madelaide on November 15, 2008, 01:35
I don't know if this also by Attila, but these two images:



Got rejected:

  3953209 New Year 2009 - 1
  Reason: please provide and appropriate title. thanks
  3953210 New Year 2009 - 2
  Reason: please provide and appropriate title. thanks

What is inappropriate, New Year?   

These images in BigStock are also named New Year 2009:


So I am really puzzled.

Regards,
Adelaide

It may be the "-1" and "-2" that are unacceptable.  I have had this problem before. I believe it has to do with an issue of positioning in the search or something like that.  Did you change the title and resubmit them?

alpy7,

Now that you've mentioned it, it must be the numbering.  I think they say somewhere not to use it (I'm not sure it's BigStock).  It does makes sense if not all of the images in a series are approved, however it makes tracking sales so much easier....

Flemish,

Maybe after resubmission I will get some of those rejections.

Regards,
Adelaide

Yeah I remember that from early days. They don't like numbering in titles. I had some early on rejected, and also some accepted, but they stripped out the numbers, so I have many images there with the same name.

UPDATE on reviewers and review time on BigStock.

I gave up on them a while back and then went back on and gave them another try. I'm happy to report that approval times are taking longer and I think that is a sign of less reviewers that do not know anything. I Hope they fired them!

Approval are now 100% with no crappy reject reasons.

Me happy now!

-Larry