MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Reviewers went crazy  (Read 9718 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: December 10, 2013, 10:07 »
+14
Salve,
what is going on with SS??

I have many pictures on many agencys and know how crazy some rejections can be - but until now SS was one of the most serious agencies.
But since a while i find so absurd & crazy rejections (out of focus = not true / noise, but other images of the same shoot with much more !!!! noise have been accepted and much more)

and the most funny:
one images shows a plain object (no depth in the image) and the reviewer says "focus not where we think it should be".
The focus is on the object - shot with a Hasselblad and its so sharp you can make prints as big as houses from it!!
so he wants to have it out of focus???

arghhh...that is so f************************* how these amateur-reviewers waste a desogners / fotographers time!!

Why dont they hire some people who can do a good job??

i think i will delete my account

massimo (pissed off)


« Reply #1 on: December 10, 2013, 10:33 »
0
I've had those too. The point is the focus is not where they think it should be.

I got a new one today - styling rejection on plates of food. The funny thing was that I had been worrying about them looking too much like something out of a five-star hotel and thinking they might not be good for blogs etc.

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #2 on: December 10, 2013, 11:18 »
0
Yes, I have the impression that it happens too much often now.

There is already a thread about inconsistent rejections.
I should be better to post anything about these rejections there to show to Shutterstock that the problem is really serious. If for any inconsistent rejection we open a thread our laments will have less effect than if they are all grouped in one single thread.

The thread is this one:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/shutterstock-com/inconsistent-reviewing/msg355435/
« Last Edit: December 10, 2013, 15:09 by Beppe Grillo »

« Reply #3 on: December 10, 2013, 11:20 »
0
Must be a new batch of Reviewers, there was a Reviewer's job posting on their site a couple weeks ago.  Seems like every year this time the rejections get wonky.

« Reply #4 on: December 10, 2013, 11:22 »
+1
Could be a machine, if a machine searches for contrasts to determine focus and sharpnes, it wouldnt find any difference in sharpness in a flat image.

« Reply #5 on: December 10, 2013, 12:01 »
-3
Hi All,

As always, if you feel strongly that a rejection was conducted in error (or if you're confused as to why the reason was applied), please reach out to the Support team.     

From the other thread:

Hello everyone,

If someone experienced an unjust review, we are ready, willing and able to help correct the issues directly with everyone.  We are here to help guide, correct and admit the mistake, whenever applicable (and if warranted).

Should you want to re-submit images that you feel were incorrectly reviewed or you feel that they may cause review issues for you of some kind (if a submission of new content), please feel free to add a custom note to the review team to let the team know some background on what you are submitting for review consideration (i.e.: this is a resubmission due to XYZ issue with image#1234567. Issue has been resolved.)  (Of course, if a resubmission, make sure the issue has been resolved -- do not resubmit without explaining or correcting the main issue first.  Also, excessive re-submissions will not be tolerated by the review team.)  If in doubt, email us at [email protected].

Custom Note (a note that you create)
Using a scenario of an image of our moon, the custom note should simply reference that the image is your creation, not from any third party (i.e.: NASA); Reference that it is your own creation.

Alternate Idea (custom note that we issue to you before you submit)

You may also write in to us via [email protected] to request a custom note for the review team at any time for any image you feel may not be reviewed correctly (yes, before you submit! Simply send us a low-res version which will help us assess the image before you submit (keep the file attachments to under 20MBs, please)) or, if already reviewed/was not reviewed correctly (already rejected so, need to explain for a 2nd review consideration).  You may consider this a pre-screening of your content to ensure a seamless review process.  (Note: Some images may not be acceptable at all so, we may actually write back saying no custom note will be issued because the image is not acceptable due to XYZ reason.  This will save time for everyone involved and help with the processing of images through review which is great for everyone involved.)

Finally, should anyone ever have any difficulties, please reach out to us via [email protected].  We are here to help everyone be successful.

Sincerely,
Anthony Correia
Director, Contributor Success
Shutterstock|Bigstock

Best,

Scott

« Reply #6 on: December 10, 2013, 13:43 »
+11
Scott,

 I sent an email to [email protected] regarding rejections last Dec 2nd and have had no reply yet. What's the normal time I can expect I have a response?

« Reply #7 on: December 10, 2013, 18:17 »
+2
Bottom line, something is going on there with regard to "focus" rejections.  I've gotten some crazy ones too.   If I resubmit with a (polite) note, they're accepted - but what a waste of time.

I'm the guy who keeps saying SS is now using software for a first-pass inspection - i.e. they have a focus 'bot.  They know isn't perfect but are counting on us to resubmit and when that happens it goes straight to a human. 

Hardly anyone seems ready to believe this, but on the other hand SS isn't denying it.   One thing I can say with confidence - if they haven't already automated parts of their inspection, they will, and soon.

« Reply #8 on: December 10, 2013, 19:40 »
+3
Bottom line, something is going on there with regard to "focus" rejections.  I've gotten some crazy ones too.   If I resubmit with a (polite) note, they're accepted - but what a waste of time.

I'm the guy who keeps saying SS is now using software for a first-pass inspection - i.e. they have a focus 'bot.  They know isn't perfect but are counting on us to resubmit and when that happens it goes straight to a human. 

Hardly anyone seems ready to believe this, but on the other hand SS isn't denying it.   One thing I can say with confidence - if they haven't already automated parts of their inspection, they will, and soon.

That wouldn't surprise me much, they also might have something that looks at the histogram and rejects for "light" if it doesn't fit what the program thinks it should be.

« Reply #9 on: December 10, 2013, 19:42 »
-4
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 00:15 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #10 on: December 10, 2013, 20:34 »
-6
I LOVE Shutterstock!

 :)

aly

« Reply #11 on: December 10, 2013, 21:33 »
+4
Yes I feel very frustrated  with last few weeks of reviewing and have just sent off a whole batch asking for another person to look at them as the same old reasons  are wearing thin-poor composition, cropping, out of focus, white balance incorrect, poor rasterizing, focal point not correct, etc, etc. I shall wait hopefully for a reply. Some are rejected completely yet one out of the whole batch is accepted. How? Why?  Do they fall asleep  or what. Please SS  I wish you may review your reviewers!

« Reply #12 on: December 11, 2013, 00:04 »
0
Scott,

 I sent an email to [email protected] regarding rejections last Dec 2nd and have had no reply yet. What's the normal time I can expect I have a response?

Hi Peresanz,

When did you send the email?  In general, our weekday turnarounds for a first reply are within 24 hours (up to 48 hours during weeks with high inquiry volume), but the turnaround could depend on whether the issue had to be escalated.  If you haven't heard back within 48 hours during the week, feel free to reach out again.  If it's an inordinate amount of time (i.e., days have gone by), then I would certainly reach out.

Best,

Scott


« Reply #14 on: December 11, 2013, 02:19 »
0
Scott,

 I sent an email to [email protected] regarding rejections last Dec 2nd and have had no reply yet. What's the normal time I can expect I have a response?

Hi Peresanz,

When did you send the email?  In general, our weekday turnarounds for a first reply are within 24 hours (up to 48 hours during weeks with high inquiry volume), but the turnaround could depend on whether the issue had to be escalated.  If you haven't heard back within 48 hours during the week, feel free to reach out again.  If it's an inordinate amount of time (i.e., days have gone by), then I would certainly reach out.

Best,

Scott

Hi Scott,

I sent the email to [email protected] on December 2. Do you want me to re-send the email? do I put a Cc to someone just to check that the email goes out properly?

Regards,
Pere

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #15 on: December 11, 2013, 05:05 »
+3


maybe i should go exclusive with DP - i have a AR there around 98% with over 12.000 images and not such stupid rejections

You are probably too much good for Shutterstock.
Don't lose your time to sell you off on sites like these, you are not for them.
You deserve more to be exclusive on Yay or Cuscaster

« Reply #16 on: December 11, 2013, 08:49 »
0


maybe i should go exclusive with DP - i have a AR there around 98% with over 12.000 images and not such stupid rejections

You are probably too much good for Shutterstock.
Don't lose your time to sell you off on sites like these, you are not for them.
You deserve more to be exclusive on Yay or Cuscaster

heheheheheh ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


AYA

« Reply #17 on: December 11, 2013, 09:50 »
+11
Hello,

Regarding reviews - as you would expect, review objections fall into three categories:

A. The review was correct according to our standards.
B. The review determination was on the line, meaning that there were legitimate questions about the quality of the image relative to our standards, but a more forgiving review could get the image into the collection.
C. The review determination was in error and will be reversed, either because the reviewer accidentally selected the wrong rejection reason or because the senior review team felt the reviewer hadn't made the best determination.

We train and review the reviewers, but a Support ticket will help us look into the exact complaint if you feel strongly that a specific review determination was unfair or inaccurate.

Best,

Scott


Hi Scott,
it is great of you to take part in the forum considering the hostility going on and thank you for the solutions you offered. Can I suggest one thing? I think the frustration around the reviewers comes from the fact that it's so inconsistant AND so drastic. It doesn't make much sense that a batch be rejected 100% and a second batch from the same serie be accepted  100% the next week.
I think a lot of contributors are feeling insulted because it doesn't seem to be very respectful of their time or creativity. As for myself, I am waiting until this unjustified rejection phase passes befor submitting my work.
The solutions you offer are very nice but until contributors can actually understand the logic behind the reviewers decision, I mfeel like tempers are going to flare on this Forum.

I hope to hear from you to get more understanding,

Julie

« Reply #18 on: December 11, 2013, 10:56 »
0
We would actually undersstand, if you said it was a machine to save money, and we had an automated way of reuploading without having to send the files through the net again.

On the other hand, that would not work, as people would just reupload all their files and cause a traffic jam.

So it is hopeless unless you come up with something smart.

But we would understand that you wanted to save money on reviews, we are all in the same boat, and want the business to thrive.


« Last Edit: December 11, 2013, 11:01 by JPSDK »

« Reply #19 on: December 11, 2013, 14:03 »
+7
Maybe an easy fix would be to flag any big difference in acceptance rate (the often mentioned close to 100% rejection of a batch from a contributor who normally has close to 100% acceptance rate).

If a review leads to such difference (that's easy to spot fully automated) it is sent to a senior reviewer for double checking before it is published to the contributor.

That would fulfill several purposes:
avoid frustration for contributors
avoid additional load on the review team through re-submissions
provide an automated quality check on reviewers

« Reply #20 on: December 11, 2013, 15:58 »
0
Scott,

 I sent an email to [email protected] regarding rejections last Dec 2nd and have had no reply yet. What's the normal time I can expect I have a response?

Dear peresanz,

We normally answer questions like yours within 24hrs or less.  For your specific question, another dept needed to be engaged which caused the delay you experienced, unfortunately.  Please accept my apologies and know that a member of my staff is working on resolving your case immediately.

Sincerely,
Anthony Correia
Director, Contributor Success
Shutterstock|Bigstock

« Reply #21 on: December 11, 2013, 16:19 »
+1
Scott,

 I sent an email to [email protected] regarding rejections last Dec 2nd and have had no reply yet. What's the normal time I can expect I have a response?

Dear peresanz,

We normally answer questions like yours within 24hrs or less.  For your specific question, another dept needed to be engaged which caused the delay you experienced, unfortunately.  Please accept my apologies and know that a member of my staff is working on resolving your case immediately.

Sincerely,
Anthony Correia
Director, Contributor Success
Shutterstock|Bigstock

Dear Anthony,

 Many thanks for your reply. I really appreciate your coming here to the microstocks group
and your attitude when dealing with contributors. The more I have to deal with other agencies the clearer the
difference is too.

Regards,
Pere


« Reply #23 on: December 11, 2013, 19:54 »
+7
I've said this before about reviewing in general, not specificially about SS, but I'll say it again: in any human assessment of art materials there is always going to be some variation in standards, just as there are variations in the quality of work individuals produce. I don't think any of us know precisely what it is that reviewers look for. I happen to have a very good acceptance rater - 90% +, mostly - so it does come as a bit of a shock when I get a batch where 9 out 0f 10 are rejected. However, I can see that I might be working at just slightly better than the required standards, so an off-day for me, or an inspector who is feeling a bit grumpy, might tip the whole assessment against me.

We all scream and shout about how our wonderful work is rejected by blind idiots, but a decade in this game has persuaded me that the inspectors/reviewers, whatever they are called, do a damned good job. I can look back at files where I had a hissy-fit over rejections seven or eight years ago and wonder how I could ever have submitted such rubbish. There were even some files a year or 18 months ago that I got upset over being rejected - but I've since returned to them and found they could be enormously improved (after which they got accepted).

So while there will always be some marginal or doubtful decisions, I really don't have a lot of time for those who shout down the reviewers. Without them, many of us would never have reached the standard that we have, and I for one am a lot better for it, and not just because of shooting stock.

« Reply #24 on: December 12, 2013, 17:55 »
+2
I've said this before about reviewing in general, not specificially about SS, but I'll say it again: in any human assessment of art materials there is always going to be some variation in standards, just as there are variations in the quality of work individuals produce. I don't think any of us know precisely what it is that reviewers look for. I happen to have a very good acceptance rater - 90% +, mostly - so it does come as a bit of a shock when I get a batch where 9 out 0f 10 are rejected. However, I can see that I might be working at just slightly better than the required standards, so an off-day for me, or an inspector who is feeling a bit grumpy, might tip the whole assessment against me.

We all scream and shout about how our wonderful work is rejected by blind idiots, but a decade in this game has persuaded me that the inspectors/reviewers, whatever they are called, do a damned good job. I can look back at files where I had a hissy-fit over rejections seven or eight years ago and wonder how I could ever have submitted such rubbish. There were even some files a year or 18 months ago that I got upset over being rejected - but I've since returned to them and found they could be enormously improved (after which they got accepted).

So while there will always be some marginal or doubtful decisions, I really don't have a lot of time for those who shout down the reviewers. Without them, many of us would never have reached the standard that we have, and I for one am a lot better for it, and not just because of shooting stock.

Good balanced assessment

« Reply #25 on: December 12, 2013, 19:30 »
0
I've said this before about reviewing in general, not specificially about SS, but I'll say it again: in any human assessment of art materials there is always going to be some variation in standards, just as there are variations in the quality of work individuals produce. I don't think any of us know precisely what it is that reviewers look for. I happen to have a very good acceptance rater - 90% +, mostly - so it does come as a bit of a shock when I get a batch where 9 out 0f 10 are rejected. However, I can see that I might be working at just slightly better than the required standards, so an off-day for me, or an inspector who is feeling a bit grumpy, might tip the whole assessment against me.

We all scream and shout about how our wonderful work is rejected by blind idiots, but a decade in this game has persuaded me that the inspectors/reviewers, whatever they are called, do a damned good job. I can look back at files where I had a hissy-fit over rejections seven or eight years ago and wonder how I could ever have submitted such rubbish. There were even some files a year or 18 months ago that I got upset over being rejected - but I've since returned to them and found they could be enormously improved (after which they got accepted).

So while there will always be some marginal or doubtful decisions, I really don't have a lot of time for those who shout down the reviewers. Without them, many of us would never have reached the standard that we have, and I for one am a lot better for it, and not just because of shooting stock.

I find I can process a file one day, look at it next day and wonder what I was thinking. A week later I can look again and decide the first was best after all.
I agree that we get some very odd rejections from (especially) SS, but if I find it hard to decide on my own files, I shouldn't be surprised if someone else also finds it hard.
I think maybe SS don't have enough rejection reasons, so the reviewer has to put something, and OOF is first on the list.

I've just been looking at zero sellers, and only a few of them surprised me :D
« Last Edit: December 12, 2013, 19:33 by Travelling-light »

« Reply #26 on: December 13, 2013, 07:40 »
+2
Well, one year ago I had 99.9999% approval rate on SS with 4500+ vectors. Then suddenly I could get nothing approved.  All different reasons. After about 2 months and only getting a couple items up I just stop uploading onto SS. I starting thinking this week that the problems with the SS reviews may have got better...but after seeing this thread ...why try.  It seems sad nothing has changed. I have 300+ good selling vector files not on SS now. It is a shame things seem the same. This thread makes me sad.


Me


« Reply #27 on: December 13, 2013, 08:29 »
-1
Well, one year ago I had 99.9999% approval rate on SS with 4500+ vectors. Then suddenly I could get nothing approved.  All different reasons. After about 2 months and only getting a couple items up I just stop uploading onto SS. I starting thinking this week that the problems with the SS reviews may have got better...but after seeing this thread ...why try.  It seems sad nothing has changed. I have 300+ good selling vector files not on SS now. It is a shame things seem the same. This thread makes me sad.

Seems daft to not upload them, if they get rejected so what. The only one you are hurting by not uploading is potentially yourself. You never know, what if they all get accepted? They might never sell, or they might become your bestsellers on SS.

« Reply #28 on: December 13, 2013, 08:37 »
-1
Well, one year ago I had 99.9999% approval rate on SS with 4500+ vectors. Then suddenly I could get nothing approved.  All different reasons. After about 2 months and only getting a couple items up I just stop uploading onto SS. I starting thinking this week that the problems with the SS reviews may have got better...but after seeing this thread ...why try.  It seems sad nothing has changed. I have 300+ good selling vector files not on SS now. It is a shame things seem the same. This thread makes me sad.

Seems daft to not upload them, if they get rejected so what. The only one you are hurting by not uploading is potentially yourself. You never know, what if they all get accepted? They might never sell, or they might become your bestsellers on SS.

Thanks been a Microstock artist for 7 years now. Good luck :)

« Reply #29 on: December 14, 2013, 11:45 »
+2
Hi guys!
I don't write much here, but this really caught my attention and its getting frustrating..
 I have around 3500 images on SS and until a couple of months ago i had a consistent 80-90% acceptance rate, but suddenly very few approvals.
I am getting very strict reviews with new reasons I haven't received:
flaky mascara on the eye of the model,
styling issues on objects not people,
most non white models i use i get the incorrect white balance rejection.

So my question is:
Am i getting a random reviewer and SS suddenly become more strict or... is another person reviewing my pictures and just not liking them?

« Reply #30 on: December 14, 2013, 14:54 »
0
Judging by the reaction to this topic.....I too am dealing with the current SS rejection onslaught....I'm wondering if this current practise is also inflicted on the wannabes who are trying to qualify. Is this a case of far too many contributors and far too many uploads to deal with? I'm now at the point where I'll compare my image to similar subjects on SS's first page and try to be non-biased in my assessment. Is my image as good as or better than what I see on the first page? If not, I don't bother uploading.

« Reply #31 on: December 14, 2013, 15:28 »
+3
There have been threads like this before.   It starts with "I used to have 90% acceptance, now I get weird rejections for focus and lighting."   Responses fall into 2 groups:

1.  Me too.  What's going on?

2.  Your photos are no good.  I love SS!  They are the best!


« Reply #32 on: December 14, 2013, 23:15 »
0
Used to have a fairly decent acceptance rate as well through shutterstock. Now I just submitted a batch and had everything rejected which has not been the norm for me. I have had rejected due to the signature that someone uses which is nothing more then their printed name, and editorial image didn't include a model release and a property release, to the models shirt wasn't ironed, and that an image of someone grabbing their hair pulling their hair and pulling it out while screaming was not attractive as it was lit from in front and below the model.

Yes some of the rejections I'll admit deserved it. I was sloppy and screwed the pooch so to speak, others I can see depending upon the reviewer, but others I'll say that I do not understand.

gillian vann

  • *Gillian*
« Reply #33 on: December 15, 2013, 07:45 »
+2
I also have a very high rejection rate at the moment, I thought it was because they knew I was giving them stocksy castoffs....

« Reply #34 on: December 15, 2013, 09:51 »
0
I also have a very high rejection rate at the moment, I thought it was because they knew I was giving them stocksy castoffs....

Your folio at Stocksy is first class.

After five years in this biz I still find it hard to take when talented creators* are talking about high rejection rates. But it won't change. The volume is too high, the investment in quality too low and its cheaper and quicker to sell a cow than a Ferrari.

* I include myself in the mediocre but persistent talent school

« Reply #35 on: December 15, 2013, 10:26 »
+1
But the accepted stocksy images are not the ones that are being rejected just the (presumably) rejected stocksy images ....

I don't think it's so much a "quality" thing with either site, more what they feel fits their respective collections.

OM

« Reply #36 on: December 15, 2013, 18:33 »
0
Despite all the rejections, I noticed that 190,000 new images were added this week (again!).


« Reply #37 on: December 16, 2013, 01:15 »
0
I've also had a number of "focus on the wrong place" rejections this week. Shooting on isolated white at F8, this seems unlikely.

But more annoying is my model release is now being refused as "an unacceptable foreign language release." I use the standard iStock Chinese MR (which is listed on SS's accepted foreign language MRs) but I have included the English translation with it. I have about 120 images on SS using the same MR.

« Reply #38 on: December 16, 2013, 10:49 »
0
I stopped uploading to SS for the moment till the reviewing gets to a normal level. I have 100% rehjections over the last few weeks and they are all accepted on othe sites. IQ is not disputed on the others.

« Reply #39 on: December 16, 2013, 16:04 »
0
I stopped uploading to SS for the moment till the reviewing gets to a normal level. I have 100% rehjections over the last few weeks and they are all accepted on othe sites. IQ is not disputed on the others.
It's not all about IQ (assuming you mean technical quality) as virtually everything will have that these days.

dpimborough

« Reply #40 on: December 17, 2013, 05:37 »
+6
Instead of rejecting new stuff maybe they should look at clearing out some of the appalling junk images they have in the 25 million or so they have on their books.

If they have too many images maybe they should look at culling some of the similars where you get page after page of the same item shot at one degree angle changes.

It would also be beneficial if they came out and said what images they don't want rather than allowing the "focus not in the place we think it should be" or "incorrect white balance" and so on and so forth.


 ;D


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
27 Replies
11967 Views
Last post February 19, 2008, 19:52
by madelaide
15 Replies
6123 Views
Last post May 28, 2008, 18:13
by runamock
9 Replies
3580 Views
Last post May 28, 2014, 17:25
by Phadrea
7 Replies
3069 Views
Last post August 26, 2016, 02:47
by ShadySue
4 Replies
2894 Views
Last post May 26, 2020, 18:34
by mj007

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle