I will say it again here I guess, PhotoDune does need to hire better reviewers, from my top 20 pictures at SS, half were rejected there.. from 3500 files at SS to 2200..

Quote from: luissantos84 on January 23, 2012, 19:27

I will say it again here I guess, PhotoDune does need to hire better reviewers, from my top 20 pictures at SS, half were rejected there.. from 3500 files at SS to 2200..

They don't have their own reviewers, they outsource.

from what I can see top contributors don�t have a rejection, nothing strange there but honestly its about time to be fair with other contributors too proper rejections/approvals

Anyone else find their reviews rather arbitrary? Alot of my best sellers didn't make it through, and even one of those initially accepted as part of their test didn't make it through. Oh well LOL!

Oh and if a photodune person happens to read this it sure would be nice to see a picture of the file you rejected, especially if you are asking for something before resubmitting it, as I may have multiple files from the same shoot with similar names, and may have no idea which one it is without putting codes in titles and descriptions which you don't want.

And one last grip...it would be nice to get specific rejections, rather than ones that list 3 different possibilities. It helps us authors argue our case if its clear the reviewer fat fingered it...which we all know from time to time happens.

Hi there gwhitton!

I admit that sometimes reviews do seem somewhat arbitrary or don't seem make sense from an author's perspective. We do frequent quality checks that I cover with the review team to figure out where we have inconsistencies or where we need to make improvements. There are lots of aspects of the review process we're working on which continually lead to an improved system and we, of course, use feedback from threads like these.

As much of the PhotoDune review team is still very new, we often times struggle with consistency between different reviewers, which is something we're always working on and which takes time for a team, especially a large and growing one, to develop in together. There are several features we're working on that I believe will greatly alleviate issues in this area. In the mean time, if you have concerns about your reviews, you can email me at jarel[at]envato.com or submit a support ticket.

Regarding seeing rejected images, you can actually see your rejected images by visiting your hidden tab in your PhotoDune account.

Unfortunately we're not really able to provide highly specific rejections at this time. The review messages list similar potential issues (eg. from lighting, or quality issues, etc) which should, in most cases, provide enough information to make the necessary improvements and resubmit. If it becomes clear that we need to provide more specific feedback, we'll certainly do that.

From what I can gether in this thread, you are rejecting bona-fide sellers and proven commercial value files. Thats no good is it? especially for an agency that wants to grow bigger. Wont get very far doing that, will we.

From what I gathered you have to upload shoots via FTP one by one. Because of the MRs so they don't get mixed up. You have to UL a shoot, process the photos in order to UL a new one? Is it normal for processing of small batches to take forever? 17 files are being processed for at least half an hour now . If that's the normal process, that it's really way too time consuming and it takes away all of the advantages of ULing via FTP

From what I can gether in this thread, you are rejecting bona-fide sellers and proven commercial value files. Thats no good is it? especially for an agency that wants to grow bigger. Wont get very far doing that, will we.

Very accurate statement.  I had a bunch of my good selling model shots rejected for their canned reasons, except for one last week.  It was a more specific rejection telling me to photoshop out the nipple protrusion on the bikini top.  I guess it was too cold when we did the shoot, so there is a slight nipple hard on you can see on the bikini.  I laughed and moved on. 

Quote from: lagereek on January 25, 2012, 01:24

From what I can gether in this thread, you are rejecting bona-fide sellers and proven commercial value files. Thats no good is it? especially for an agency that wants to grow bigger. Wont get very far doing that, will we.

Very accurate statement.  I had a bunch of my good selling model shots rejected for their canned reasons, except for one last week.  It was a more specific rejection telling me to photoshop out the nipple protrusion on the bikini top.  I guess it was too cold when we did the shoot, so there is a slight nipple hard on you can see on the bikini.  I laughed and moved on. 

I know they were puritan fanatics the moment I read their not a hint of nudity rule, but that really makes me laugh. Is the trend regarding the owners of new agencies going towards religious fanatics or what? New wave of puritanism and fake morality in some countries? You can't witness anything like that in Europe, for example

Lol anything even remotely related to sex (not a hint of nudity etc) is either immediately rejected or put on hold for a second opinion. PD must be owned by a bible belt fanatic, blinded by idiotic puritanism. I know sex doesn't sell as MS, but some concepts, just a hint, a taste of sex can go a long way, especially in advertising. I really feel sorry for such ppl. Even more for my sales.

I dunno, I find this one more of a love&tenderness photo, romantic if you will, him expressing love and devotion, not sexual desire, lust, passion etc. Mine are conceptual, I guess more sexual as well, but there's no nudity or even profanity.

Quote from: wut on January 31, 2012, 17:03

I dunno, I find this one more of a love&tenderness photo, romantic if you will, him expressing love and devotion, not sexual desire, lust, passion etc. Mine are conceptual, I guess more sexual as well, but there's no nudity or even profanity.

Love, tenderness, and maybe a bit of a foot fetish...

If you don't have any nudity, you might want to contact them and ask what the problem is, so you can either plead your case, or else have a firmer idea of what they're rejecting so you don't waste time in the future. 

A bit maybe. I guess your name carries a lot of weight

I already had my finger on the trigger, but decided against it. The reason was I'm not going to loose any time with low earners. I'm going to treat them as such until they prove otherwise (although I have daily sales since day one, that was yesterday). I'm going to send everything (well not anything violent and sexual obviously) and what gets accepted, gets accepted. I won't loose any sleep over it. That being said, my approval rate is 100% if I forget those in question (less than 10 photos)

Is there a way to check which files were sold? I can't find anything past the number of DL in a given month...

You can look at the Statements tab from the Author Dashboard, or hover over your name when you're logged in and the drop down menu includes a statements item. It'd be nice if the list included a thumbnail of the image, and if it had totals (but there's a downloadable CSV you can quickly get that from)

Quote from: wut on January 31, 2012, 11:38

Lol anything even remotely related to sex (not a hint of nudity etc) is either immediately rejected or put on hold for a second opinion. PD must be owned by a bible belt fanatic, blinded by idiotic puritanism. I know sex doesn't sell as MS, but some concepts, just a hint, a taste of sex can go a long way, especially in advertising. I really feel sorry for such ppl. Even more for my sales.

I don't know about that.  This is my all time best selling shot at PD:  Kind of sexy/kinky if you ask me.   

Lisa, you are so flexible and have incredible balance. There simply are no lengths/pleasures that you won't go to, to produce such outstanding material. 

don�t know if my comments in this thread were the trigger to last night new reviewing of my entire portfolio at PD but I am very happy they have done it, thanks a lot guys, appreciate it  

p.s: not beeing sarcastic, my port went from 2200 to 2800!