Please forgive me if this is a simple procedure but I need some advice on resubmitting to Shutterstock.

I recently disagreed with a reviewer's reasons for rejecting an image and asked SS to look at the image and provide a second opinion. They wrote back and told me to include a remark/quote from the administrator.

When you resubmit, do you have to start from scratch? Can you not use the rejected image in the "rejected" category?

Where do you place the administrator's remark? Do you cut and paste it into the "description/title/caption"?

Sorry if I sound clueless but your help would be appreciated. 

Take heart. I find myself in the same situation with SS where almost
everything is being rejected. In my case it's almost always "focus"
issues. I've been very careful when submitting. Always checking the
image at 100% and yet I'm still getting that same rejection reason.

I wonder now if a contributor has a lower acceptance ratio than SS's
standard, they now reject everything. 

I'm now submitting one image at a time. When it's rejected I send an
email to support and see if they agree with the assessment. Reducing
the image by 20% will also be part of my gameplan.

I agree with JSNOVER. When I signed up with 123RF it was with the understanding that I would be paid a certain rate if I contributed to their agency. If they're going to set "new terms" then apply it to new contributors in January when things take effect. Don't punish me. I've worked long and hard on a portfolio that has contributed to their success. Their attitude appears to be "Hey....forget what I offered you when you signed up. We've decided to move the goal posts and if you don't like it....tough!"

SS and IS are the only agencies whereby you need to "qualify".
Submit 10 images to SS, get 7 or more approved and you're in.
Submit 3 images to IS, get them all approved, and you're in.

All agencies, that I'm aware of, do not require video clip qualification which explains why there's so much cr@p out there. That will change once agencies have a good stockpile of clips to offer buyers.

100 years ago working stiffs were making pennies - working long hours - and with no benefits. Sound familiar? Unions, like it or not, balanced the playing field. Stock agencies have the ideal conditions. They have thousands - many times tens of thousands of people working for them - they pay them pennies for their efforts and they don't have to worry about the upfront costs of running a business - healthcare, dental, holiday pay, etc.

The agencies are empowered. Period. And it'll stay that way as long as WE, the contributors to their enterprises, work as single individuals.

Strength in numbers in a united front allows for a loud, common voice that will be heard by the agencies. If, for example, 123RF goes ahead with its commission cuts in the new year - and everyone pulled out in unison or at the very least, stopped contributing images, it would send a clear and resounding message to other agencies who are considering the same action.

For the record....I DID report it but they said nothing about a "new reviewer".

SS      - by a country mile
123RF - BME
DP      - down from August's BME but decent.
DT      - dead, deader, deadest. A reflection of what you've
            been witnessing in the poll results. My best agency in
            2011. My worst agency in 2012. Weren't they sitting
            around 30% late last year? And for those of you who
            are going to respond with a BME or reasonable facimile;
            look at the microstock poll. The truth in black and white.
            THEY know they have to turn the ship around. My suggestion
            would be to re-adopt 2011 tactics.

The Sasquatch: A rare image that nobody else has taken (or submitted). In my case it would be a Llama doing a cow. 

"In my opinion, it's not the company. It's almost always the reviewer."
 
I agree. Case in point. My themes are consistant. Recently DT rejected a large batch of submissions. A good 80% rejected. It shock my confidence and I swore I'd limit my submission maximum to 5 until it was reviewed. Trouble was it takes so long to get DT to review that I had another stockpile sitting on my drive....so I closed my eyes, crossed my fingers and submitted 80 in one batch. And wouldn't you know it, 80%+ were accepted. And again...I do landscape and unusual subjects. That batch was no different from everything else I was submitting.

It's the reviewer.

When you get 29 out of 30 rejected and you have a 70% acceptance rate....it's the reviewer.

Very disappointed with DP.

Say what you will about 123RF but I still regard them as the best communicators in the business. You may not like their game plan but they're giving us all plenty of time to opt in or opt out.

Good communication conveys: "We are partners. This is our game plan." Poor communication, as DP has recently demonstrated conveys: "You work for us....we do what we want." ....Very disappointing.

The bottom line is, folks, the agencies are empowered. They do what they want because, in the end, they know for every few dozen who drop them, there's a hundred more ready to submit.

We work individually not collectively.  And as long as that's the order of business agencies will do what they * well please.

I don't bother submitting anymore. They've made it clear that they have far too
many submissions to deal with and that reflects in the number of rejections I was getting. Pretty frustrating when YOU KNOW their reasons for rejections are borderline absurd.

DP has, in the past few months, surpassed # of sales. DT is an agency, that I feel, is failing. Weren't they somewhere in the 30-32 "earnings rating" last January? Too bad. This was/is an agency that has the highest "per image payout" in the industry.

Can you say 123BUG.