A well-known contributor gets fed up and decides to do something about it:
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=54499

Edit: Changed subject of posting - sorry to mislead.

Reading the linked thread, it's clear the title of this one is inaccurate.  Sean isn't quitting Shutterstock; he's merely backing off from uploading new images.  In that regard I know exactly how he feels; I've been getting a lot of rejections lately.  Unlike Sean, I don't suffer from poor and expensive bandwidth and can fix & submit multiple times if needed.  But like Sean, I'm not happy about the number and type of rejections I've had there lately.

I hate to say this as I like most of forgiss portfolio, but most of the rejections I saw I agree with it. Although what I saw are only thumbnails, issues with poor composition and lightening seem evident to me. Denis

Some of the images can be seen on DT where it was accepted. That Forgiss knows what sells can certainly not be disputed, after all he makes a seven figure amount (in US$) from microstock annually.

Quote from: CCK on January 20, 2009, 16:13
Some of the images can be seen on DT where it was accepted. That Forgiss knows what sells can certainly not be disputed, after all he makes a six figure amount (in US$) from microstock annually.

Quote from: CCK on January 20, 2009, 16:13
Some of the images can be seen on DT where it was accepted. That Forgiss knows what sells can certainly not be disputed, after all he makes a seven figure amount (in US$) from microstock annually.

I don't think reviews should be based on those criteria but the pictures themselves. Denis

Quote from: CCK on January 20, 2009, 16:13
.... after all he makes a seven figure amount (in US$) from microstock annually.

Really? How do you know this? Everywhere that you can actually see his sales suggests he's making mid-five figure amounts at most. He'd have to be at Yuri's level to be doing 7 figures.

Quote from: cybernesco on January 20, 2009, 16:27
I don't think reviews should be based on those criteria but the pictures themselves. Denis

I'd agree, but (and you knew there was one coming) a good indication of what will sell is what is already selling.  If Shutterstock accepts only a limited range of lighting styles, then seeing a broader range at another site and seeing that those images sell well would suggest that Shutterstock is losing business because of its restrictive policies.  I looked at Forgiss's pictures and, which I might not have gone quite so dark on a couple of them, think they were good enough to let a customer decide.

Quote from: disorderly on January 20, 2009, 16:35

Quote from: cybernesco on January 20, 2009, 16:27
I don't think reviews should be based on those criteria but the pictures themselves. Denis

I'd agree, but (and you knew there was one coming) a good indication of what will sell is what is already selling.  If Shutterstock accepts only a limited range of lighting styles, then seeing a broader range at another site and seeing that those images sell well would suggest that Shutterstock is losing business because of its restrictive policies.  I looked at Forgiss's pictures and, which I might not have gone quite so dark on a couple of them, think they were good enough to let a customer decide.

SS has 5,600,000 images and DT has 4,700,000.  I have 982 on SS and 902 on DT.  SS is my number two earner after IS. 98% of all my images at SS has sold at least once.  It is selling good mainly because I have a very broad range. Probably that most of the 4,700,000 photos that DT has are probably with SS as well. So as it stands now SS is probably at least as broad as DT or maybe even more. Denis

I'm not questioning Shutterstock's success; they're my top earner as well.  But that doesn't change my feeling that some of their reviewers are unnecessarily restrictive regarding what qualifies as good stock.  You seem to suggest that the reviewers in this case are right because of Shutterstock's success.  I'd say that's something that has to be evaluated over time.  iStockphoto was my biggest earner for almost three years; now it's Shutterstock.  I wouldn't place any bets on who it'll be three years from now.

Forgiss didn't said that he's off from SS, indeed. Just that he had enough and he'll stop uploading. However, I find some of those rejected photos with some flaws, so I can't just ditch the reviewer completely. As well, I didn't experienced that "mass rejection at SS" that became so popular in discussions.
I'm sorry about him, but I just think he should take it easier with rejections, it's not the first time when he makes waves at SS with these. Yea, it happens... move on, shoot what's next... resubmit IF it's REALLY valuable, etc.

Quote from: sharply_done on January 20, 2009, 15:10
A well-known contributor gets fed up and decides to do something about it:
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=54499

I read all about someone's perception of why he quit. What's your opinion sharply?
You obviously have one, or else you would not have published this. Speak up now or forever hold your peace 

Quote from: disorderly on January 20, 2009, 17:35
I'm not questioning Shutterstock's success; they're my top earner as well.  But that doesn't change my feeling that some of their reviewers are unnecessarily restrictive regarding what qualifies as good stock.  You seem to suggest that the reviewers in this case are right because of Shutterstock's success.  I'd say that's something that has to be evaluated over time.  iStockphoto was my biggest earner for almost three years; now it's Shutterstock.  I wouldn't place any bets on who it'll be three years from now.

Reviewers are partly reponsible for my limited success as I new nothing about photography 3 years ago and I think this apply to many of us. Now I rarely get rejections but when I get one I still take it as learning process. Only Crestock that I don't understand their rejections.  Regarding Forgiss thumbnails that I saw I do aggree with the rejections and this has nothing to do with the success of SS or how much he makes or how well he is known.  SS success depends on several components for which "reviewing images" is certainly one of them. Denis

opa, forgot my own tupenny's worth :
the fact is stock photography is no rocket science, SS knows that. even if the top contributors move out, there will be truckloads of clones moving in to fill the void.

Quote from: gostwyck on January 20, 2009, 16:29

Quote from: CCK on January 20, 2009, 16:13
.... after all he makes a seven figure amount (in US$) from microstock annually.

Really? How do you know this? Everywhere that you can actually see his sales suggests he's making mid-five figure amounts at most. He'd have to be at Yuri's level to be doing 7 figures.

I heard it from Forgiss, and I trust him to tell the truth.

Sorry - duplicate posted

Quote from: CCK on January 20, 2009, 18:35

Quote from: gostwyck on January 20, 2009, 16:29

Quote from: CCK on January 20, 2009, 16:13
.... after all he makes a seven figure amount (in US$) from microstock annually.

Really? How do you know this? Everywhere that you can actually see his sales suggests he's making mid-five figure amounts at most. He'd have to be at Yuri's level to be doing 7 figures.

I heard it from Forgiss, and I trust him to tell the truth.

Maybe it is $12345.67. 

Quote from: Fred on January 20, 2009, 19:26

Quote from: CCK on January 20, 2009, 18:35

Quote from: gostwyck on January 20, 2009, 16:29

Quote from: CCK on January 20, 2009, 16:13
.... after all he makes a seven figure amount (in US$) from microstock annually.

Really? How do you know this? Everywhere that you can actually see his sales suggests he's making mid-five figure amounts at most. He'd have to be at Yuri's level to be doing 7 figures.

I heard it from Forgiss, and I trust him to tell the truth.

Maybe it is $12345.67. 

That is still A LOT OF MONEY 

Quote from: Fred on January 20, 2009, 19:26

Quote from: CCK on January 20, 2009, 18:35

Quote from: gostwyck on January 20, 2009, 16:29

Quote from: CCK on January 20, 2009, 16:13
.... after all he makes a seven figure amount (in US$) from microstock annually.

Really? How do you know this? Everywhere that you can actually see his sales suggests he's making mid-five figure amounts at most. He'd have to be at Yuri's level to be doing 7 figures.

I heard it from Forgiss, and I trust him to tell the truth.

Maybe it is $12345.67. 

Yes, I've seen this before. Someone thinks you include the decimals. Maybe if we tell them, some others will read it and get some education?  

Seven figures is $1,000,000 a year. Of course if I'm the dummy and he's making a million a year, then feel free to take your best shot.

I don't think anyone, even the often sited one of the top ten in the world, is making a million a year gross, before expenses, let alone netting anything close to a quarter of that. That would be SIX figures and I'm impressed, but it's not making 8 figures.  

Quote from: tan510jomast on January 20, 2009, 19:37
That is still A LOT OF MONEY 

Yes it is!

7500 downloads a year at IS is nothing to cry about either. Nice work, Forgiss.

making that much money in US currencies, and living in some foreign land where the daily wages are like peanuts, would you not be getting midnight visits from the mafia ? (just wondering)

Quote from: hali on January 20, 2009, 19:42
making that much money in US currencies, and living in some foreign land where the daily wages are like peanuts, would you not be getting midnight visits from the mafia ? (just wondering) 

Quote from: tan510jomast on January 20, 2009, 19:37
That is still A LOT OF MONEY 

UNLESS they mean after foreign exchange they earn 7 digit figure in THEIR COUNTRY.

Quote from: hali on January 20, 2009, 19:43

Quote from: hali on January 20, 2009, 19:42
making that much money in US currencies, and living in some foreign land where the daily wages are like peanuts, would you not be getting midnight visits from the mafia ? (just wondering) 

Quote from: tan510jomast on January 20, 2009, 19:37
That is still A LOT OF MONEY 

UNLESS they mean after foreign exchange they earn 7 digit figure in THEIR COUNTRY.

If he's in Indonesia it's 10 or 11 figures. Please, lets just talk dollars. If I wanted to quote my income last year in Rupias it would be $4693748.6488434 

Don't know what it is in Singapore or Canadian dollars. (or Euros?) South African Rand converts $1000 equals 9860 Rands, so that would be about ten times bigger a number than in the somewhat universal base currency the US dollar. You noticed, we get paid in dollars, except for a very small who get paid in Euros?

Whatever it is, it's good work and he's doing well in sales. I think people are just trying to make things correct in common terms. Seven figures is a million dollars.

SS has certain reasons for refusal - one of them being noise because they sell a considerably upsided version and someone told me that noise causes big problems.  They do seem to hate shadows, perhaps even noiseless dark areas do not upsize well?

I have one book cover, it's a dark and moody photo, rejected by SS IS StockXpert.  It was picked for a cover because it represented so well the dark content of the book.  No, this photo is not a best seller, but it does sell and last year I had at least 4 requests to use it in a way that might be against the terms of the agency (most of the requests have been from publishers and education facilities).  Buyers don't need just shiny and happy.  Dark and moody will likely never be a best seller for any agency, but there is definitley a place for many photos that are rejected, basically for shadows.

Quote from: RacePhoto on January 20, 2009, 19:59
EDITED
Whatever it is, it's good work and he's doing well in sales. I think people are just trying to make things correct in common terms. Seven figures is a million dollars.

If I had a million dollars.... I would stop contributing to microstock, put all my money in Real Estate and lie on the beach in Greece, and forget about this forum

Quote from: hali on January 20, 2009, 22:42

Quote from: RacePhoto on January 20, 2009, 19:59
EDITED
Whatever it is, it's good work and he's doing well in sales. I think people are just trying to make things correct in common terms. Seven figures is a million dollars.

If I had a million dollars.... I would stop contributing to microstock, put all my money in Real Estate and lie on the beach in Greece, and forget about this forum

If I had a million dollars, I'd go someplace where no one knows me, pretend I'm poor, and avoid all the people who just want to be friendly because of money. Won't be Greece, but it will be warmer than where I am now!  Oh and I'd still keep taking photos, because I do it for the entertainment and because I enjoy photography. Money isn't my motivation. Anyone else who has worked as a professional musician knows exactly what I'm talking about.