Author Topic: Uploaded limits raised to 999 (Read 47646 times)

Poncke · « **Reply #150 on:** April 25, 2013, 11:49 »

A I see my 15000 images have gone to the queue. Good to know.

MichaelJayFoto · « **Reply #151 on:** April 25, 2013, 11:58 »

Quote from: dingles on April 25, 2013, 11:11

It was nice having things approved so quick for a little while, but I image that exclusives will be back to waiting 4 weeks and non-exclusives twice that.

I don't see mass uploads of non-exclusives having any impact on the review time for exclusives. And I don't think many of the additional images are those of exclusives because they already could upload more than they could have reasonably produced.

What I'd be more worried about is that non-exclusives will now be reviewed by a group of recently added inspectors. Who might tend to be "on the safe side" and show their superiors that they take the job seriously. Don't get me wrong, I don't blame any of them but I think a new inspector will tend to reject easier than a senior who has seen tens of thousands of crap images and likes to look for images he can accept. Pure speculation on my side here, of course.

tickstock · « **Reply #152 on:** April 25, 2013, 11:59 »

luissantos84 · « **Reply #153 on:** April 25, 2013, 13:31 »

amazing indeed, that is why iStock keep playing with us, sure I understand that we all need extra $$$ but this is just sad

gbalex · « **Reply #154 on:** April 25, 2013, 14:02 »

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on April 25, 2013, 04:17

Quote
Just flicking an 'upload limit' switch, then sitting back to watch the dollars roll in is not likely to cut it.

I'm not sure why removing the upload limit would cause 'the dollars to roll in'. It doesn't increase the number of sales, just the breadth of choice for buyers surely?

Think cost per sale. Flooding the site with Low Cost Per Sale images will improve the bottom line, however by lowering standards it drives down quality perception by buyers. It is one reason I left IS when they started flooding & pushing buyers to the high cost crap they flooded the site with over the last several years.

EmberMike · « **Reply #155 on:** April 25, 2013, 16:10 »

They increased the limit for vector artists a couple of months ago, and said that it had nothing to do with slower upload volume. Even though up to that point (and even afterwards) the vector queue was lightning fast and sometimes took less than an hour. They said it was because they brought on more reviewers. Yeah right.

I suspect the same holds true with the photo limits. They might say it has nothing to do with diminishing upload volume, but we all know better.

dingles · « **Reply #156 on:** April 25, 2013, 16:16 »

Quote from: EmberMike on April 25, 2013, 16:10

They increased the limit for vector artists a couple of months ago, and said that it had nothing to do with slower upload volume. Even though up to that point (and even afterwards) the vector queue was lightning fast and sometimes took less than an hour. They said it was because they brought on more reviewers. Yeah right.

I suspect the same holds true with the photo limits. They might say it has nothing to do with diminishing upload volume, but we all know better.

Yeah my last illustration was a few weeks ago and took over a week...the ones before that was less than a day to review.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #157 on:** April 25, 2013, 17:59 »

Quote from: EmberMike on April 25, 2013, 16:10

They increased the limit for vector artists a couple of months ago, and said that it had nothing to do with slower upload volume. Even though up to that point (and even afterwards) the vector queue was lightning fast and sometimes took less than an hour. They said it was because they brought on more reviewers. Yeah right.

I suspect the same holds true with the photo limits. They might say it has nothing to do with diminishing upload volume, but we all know better.

right Mike just got the notice today, a slow rolling announcement that changes nothing. March? New review standards.

Contributor News: March 21, 2013

Upload Limits Removed - Photo

We're happy to announce a big change to the community. We have removed the upload limits for photo contributors across the board, as has recently happened for Illustrations. Well actually, we’ve set the limit to 999. It's the quickest way to get around a load of developer time.

It's a great thing for all, especially those who are new to the site or on lower canister levels and desperately trying to build their portfolios.

Naturally, you're probably wondering if these upload increases will also mean an increase in inspection times. We don't foresee any significant increase in queue wait times – in fact, we've been ramping up and training new members of the team in preparation for these changes. If you've notice a decreased in inspection times recently, this is why.

Additionally, we've also carefully reviewed and revised some of our technical requirements for photos which will help reduce the number of outright rejections for small issues that don't compromise the composition nor limit the usefulness of the file. More emphasis will be placed on the qualities of file that are more central to its marketability such as subject relevance, beauty, concept or composition. As always, poorly composed and lit images, snapshots and serial duplicates will be rejected and dealt with appropriately.

ShadySue · « **Reply #158 on:** April 25, 2013, 18:04 »

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on April 25, 2013, 17:59

right Mike just got the notice today, a slow rolling announcement that changes nothing. March? New review standards.

Contributor News: March 21, 2013

I didn't even notice that March date in the title (cut and pasted from the last newsletter?)

gillian vann · « **Reply #159 on:** April 25, 2013, 18:53 »

for the record, has anyone noticed a decrease in review times?

ShadySue · « **Reply #160 on:** April 25, 2013, 18:57 »

Quote from: gillian on April 25, 2013, 18:53

for the record, has anyone noticed a decrease in review times?

Nope, it took four days (in the exclusive queue) for them to reject my latest upload.

photomort · « **Reply #161 on:** April 25, 2013, 19:22 »

I submitted 7 last night and had 5 accepted and 2 rejected (duplicates/similar) when I came down at 7 this morning. (exclusive)
I was surprised pleasantly.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #162 on:** April 25, 2013, 19:29 »

Just now checked the stats:

Waiting approval 126199

JPSDK · « **Reply #163 on:** April 25, 2013, 19:33 »

If they havent changed their upload procedure, a raise in numbers is meaningless.

Mantis · « **Reply #164 on:** April 25, 2013, 19:35 »

Quote from: jsnover on April 25, 2013, 19:29

Just now checked the stats:

Waiting approval 126199

WOW. Man I am sitting back imagining all of the future MSG discussions that will surely pop up about how this has affected sales, what shenanigans Istock will pull to deepen our distrust in them and so forth. This can't be good for the contributor unless it attracts a sh&t load of new buyers. I personally feel that this is being done for reasons that we will have to find out on our own.

ShadySue · « **Reply #165 on:** April 25, 2013, 19:40 »

Quote from: Mantis on April 25, 2013, 19:35

Quote from: jsnover on April 25, 2013, 19:29
Just now checked the stats:

Waiting approval 126199

WOW. Man I am sitting back imagining all of the future MSG discussions that will surely pop up about how this has affected sales, what shenanigans Istock will pull to deepen our distrust in them and so forth. This can't be good for the contributor unless it attracts a sh&t load of new buyers. I personally feel that this is being done for reasons that we will have to find out on our own.

It is scary, like when they attracted indies in to the exclusive programme by promising to grandfather them in if they committed to give up independence even if it was going to take some time for all their files to be released, then reneged on the grandfathering.

drial7m1 · « **Reply #166 on:** April 25, 2013, 20:26 »

I've seen some of my editorials approved in a few hours, but others will sit for a couple of days, regular photos can take from 2-4 days depending.

Not much of a change yet, but the number in the approval list have got up quite a bit.

mlwinphoto · « **Reply #167 on:** April 25, 2013, 21:15 »

Quote from: ShadySue on April 25, 2013, 18:57

Quote from: gillian on April 25, 2013, 18:53
for the record, has anyone noticed a decrease in review times?
Nope, it took four days (in the exclusive queue) for them to reject my latest upload.

My uploads (exclusive) are still being reviewed within 24 hours....kind of surprising, actually. It's meaningless, for me at least, as sales have been so poor since December that it all seems like a waste of time, mine and theirs.

gillian vann · « **Reply #168 on:** April 25, 2013, 21:20 »

just had a batch of 12 editorials reviewed and rejected in under 24hrs. I can't get the hang of their captioning system.

JPSDK · « **Reply #169 on:** April 25, 2013, 21:32 »

Quote from: gillian on April 25, 2013, 21:20

just had a batch of 12 editorials reviewed and rejected in under 24hrs. I can't get the hang of their captioning system.

noone can, i think it is only there to frustrate you and make you feel belittled

gillian vann · « **Reply #170 on:** April 25, 2013, 22:34 »

lol. I think I just had the info in the wrong box, as I seem to do every time I bother to upload editorial to iS. v frustrating but it's their playing field.

yuliang11 · « **Reply #171 on:** April 26, 2013, 03:52 »

Thank you istock, your sales are so crappy now that I can consider stopping uploads to your site which is extra tedious and it's not worth the time anymore. For the few months, my earnings from smaller sites such as 123, ft and even macrosites have surpasses istock photo.

michealo · « **Reply #172 on:** April 26, 2013, 07:23 »

Quote from: MichaelJayFoto on April 25, 2013, 11:58

What I'd be more worried about is that non-exclusives will now be reviewed by a group of recently added inspectors. Who might tend to be "on the safe side" and show their superiors that they take the job seriously.

Au contraire I think new inspectors are better, they are trained to the standards that exist today rather than ones in the past

tickstock · « **Reply #173 on:** April 26, 2013, 08:45 »

luissantos84 · « **Reply #174 on:** April 26, 2013, 09:24 »

Quote from: tickstock on April 26, 2013, 08:45

Quote from: yuliang11 on April 26, 2013, 03:52
Thank you istock, your sales are so crappy now that I can consider stopping uploads to your site which is extra tedious and it's not worth the time anymore. For the few months, my earnings from smaller sites such as 123, ft and even macrosites have surpasses istock photo.
Because they raised the upload limits to 999?

oh man you are losing your precious time here, 999!

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Uploaded limits raised to 999 (Read 47646 times)

Poncke

MichaelJayFoto

tickstock

luissantos84

gbalex

EmberMike

dingles

YadaYadaYada

ShadySue

gillian vann

ShadySue

photomort

Jo Ann Snover

JPSDK

Mantis

ShadySue

drial7m1

mlwinphoto

gillian vann

JPSDK

gillian vann

yuliang11

michealo

tickstock

luissantos84

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors