Author Topic: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots (Read 28341 times)

stockman11 · « **on:** October 14, 2019, 09:57 »

Pard my French, but I just have to let it out.

They reject left and right even images with good selling potential for being "similar", and when something gets rejected, there is no use to resubmit because 100% of rejected images just keep getting rejected for the same reason.

I don't think this is that much due to SS's policy itself, I think it's more about incompetent reviewers. They are not just incompetent, they are f*cking idiots.

I feel better now, but these idiots will remain being idiots and they'll just keep rejecting left and right without using their brain even a little.

Clair Voyant · « **Reply #1 on:** October 14, 2019, 10:21 »

Idiots might be a bit harsh. But there certainly is something gone wrong over there. I/we have simply stopped uploading there as so much gets rejected lately in stills/video/illustration with ridiculous reasons. I can accept rejections if they are valid. Last few months SS has gone insane with the rejections, to the point it's simply not worth my/our time to upload.

jonbull · « **Reply #2 on:** October 14, 2019, 10:22 »

since the similar policies i have probably 0,5% rejected for being similar..maybe you should review better your content.

jonbull · « **Reply #3 on:** October 14, 2019, 10:23 »

in the last month 750 uploaded near 735 accepted, and i shoot also food in series and some are similar but still different in terms of composition and usability....so maybe it's not the reviewer...the problem is they simply don't sell nothing zero...zero enhanced video..nothing...the more you upload the less earn...while for example adobe i sssellin g great and the new editorial policy make me sell much more..only now three images from dubai for 4,44 dollar each, while in ss 99 % ar subs...i wait impatiently the next quarter of ss to understand what's happening with them..i suspect is not my portfolio...i have literally thousand good images fo christmas..nothing sells, only the same old stuff...with relevant they killed all new files in practice.

Visualab · « **Reply #4 on:** October 14, 2019, 10:35 »

hi have the same issue...a lot of no sense rejection lately...until they came up with the policy i had only few rejection in 8 years....i suspect they are using AI tecnology to review content...

stockman11 · « **Reply #5 on:** October 14, 2019, 10:48 »

Quote from: jonbull on October 14, 2019, 10:22

since the similar policies i have probably 0,5% rejected for being similar..maybe you should review better your content.

Then I guess maybe other agencies who accept and buyers who buy that "similar" content should review their needs better.

jonbull · « **Reply #6 on:** October 14, 2019, 10:53 »

Quote from: stockman11 on October 14, 2019, 10:48

Quote from: jonbull on October 14, 2019, 10:22
since the similar policies i have probably 0,5% rejected for being similar..maybe you should review better your content.
Then I guess maybe other agencies who accept and buyers who buy that "similar" content should review their needs better.

this has nothing to do with similar content...

stockman11 · « **Reply #7 on:** October 14, 2019, 11:15 »

Quote from: jonbull on October 14, 2019, 10:53

Quote from: stockman11 on October 14, 2019, 10:48
Quote from: jonbull on October 14, 2019, 10:22
since the similar policies i have probably 0,5% rejected for being similar..maybe you should review better your content.
Then I guess maybe other agencies who accept and buyers who buy that "similar" content should review their needs better.

this has nothing to do with similar content...

If all other agencies accept something but SS doesn't, than SS (reviewers) definitely took it too far. "Similar" is a relative term which should be adjusted according to the needs of buyers which SS clearly didn't do. And no, my content isn't even close of being "too similar".

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #8 on:** October 14, 2019, 11:58 »

Quote from: stockman11 on October 14, 2019, 09:57

Pard my French, but I just have to let it out.

They reject left and right even images with good selling potential for being "similar", and when something gets rejected, there is no use to resubmit because 100% of rejected images just keep getting rejected for the same reason.

I don't think this is that much due to SS's policy itself, I think it's more about incompetent reviewers. They are not just incompetent, they are f*cking idiots.

I feel better now, but these idiots will remain being idiots and they'll just keep rejecting left and right without using their brain even a little.

I'll just predict yours will be one of the highest ever + posts of all time?

While I'm a little less angry, the latest SS review system is the most inconsistent anywhere and one of the most incomprehensible as well.

You have my vote.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #9 on:** October 14, 2019, 12:57 »

I wouldn't blame reviewers so much. Its an entirely predictable outcome from opening the floodgates by allowing anyone to be a contributor with only one accepted photo. You could have a monkey press the shutter and do that. I doubt SS invest more than a tiny amount in training and probably give reviewers seconds to review each image. Along with that either by design or lack of control we seem to have some contributors able to contribute anything without inspection. I am amazed that they still remain by far the most succesful agency. Their marketing to buyers must be absolutely world class.

Tk113 · « **Reply #10 on:** October 14, 2019, 13:33 »

Quote from: stockman11 on October 14, 2019, 09:57

Pard my French, but I just have to let it out.

They reject left and right even images with good selling potential for being "similar", and when something gets rejected, there is no use to resubmit because 100% of rejected images just keep getting rejected for the same reason.

I don't think this is that much due to SS's policy itself, I think it's more about incompetent reviewers. They are not just incompetent, they are f*cking idiots.

I feel better now, but these idiots will remain being idiots and they'll just keep rejecting left and right without using their brain even a little.

Some of them don’t know what bokeh is

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

mj007 · « **Reply #11 on:** October 14, 2019, 14:11 »

Keep in mind what reviews get paid. I am not sure what it is now but a few years back it was 5 cents per image to review or reject. To make money in an hour at that rate you can't put much judgement into reviewing.

stockman11 · « **Reply #12 on:** October 14, 2019, 14:46 »

Some posts about reviewers don't having time and training do have a point, but 1 second and a common sense is enough to see when images are not even close to being too similar.

candidcruiser · « **Reply #13 on:** October 14, 2019, 15:39 »

Quote from: stockman11 on October 14, 2019, 09:57

Pard my French, but I just have to let it out.

They reject left and right even images with good selling potential for being "similar", and when something gets rejected, there is no use to resubmit because 100% of rejected images just keep getting rejected for the same reason.

I don't think this is that much due to SS's policy itself, I think it's more about incompetent reviewers. They are not just incompetent, they are f*cking idiots.

I feel better now, but these idiots will remain being idiots and they'll just keep rejecting left and right without using their brain even a little.

I could not agree with you more and you are not the only one feeling this way. Just today I sent a series of three views of a interesting boating locks. One closed, one half way and one fully open to show the operation. One was accepted and the other two rejected for similar content. Is the reviewer blind and does not read the title. Others have been rejected for Out of focus (not) and after submitting them elsewhere, they sold instantly. I don't know what has happened to reviewers at SS but it very annoying since I hardly even had a rejection in the past couple years and now it is common.

Tk113 · « **Reply #14 on:** October 14, 2019, 15:48 »

Quote from: candidcruiser on October 14, 2019, 15:39

Quote from: stockman11 on October 14, 2019, 09:57
Pard my French, but I just have to let it out.

They reject left and right even images with good selling potential for being "similar", and when something gets rejected, there is no use to resubmit because 100% of rejected images just keep getting rejected for the same reason.

I don't think this is that much due to SS's policy itself, I think it's more about incompetent reviewers. They are not just incompetent, they are f*cking idiots.

I feel better now, but these idiots will remain being idiots and they'll just keep rejecting left and right without using their brain even a little.
I could not agree with you more and you are not the only one feeling this way. Just today I sent a series of three views of a interesting boating locks. One closed, one half way and one fully open to show the operation. One was accepted and the other two rejected for similar content. Is the reviewer blind and does not read the title. Others have been rejected for Out of focus (not) and after submitting them elsewhere, they sold instantly. I don't know what has happened to reviewers at SS but it very annoying since I hardly even had a rejection in the past couple years and now it is common.

Just had one rejected because Title didn’t match photo. The title “Wooden fishing pier” photo wooden fishing pier. Same photo was excepted by 4 other agencies. Something fishy going on at SS.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

candidcruiser · « **Reply #15 on:** October 14, 2019, 15:55 »

Quote from: Tk113 on October 14, 2019, 15:48

Quote from: candidcruiser on October 14, 2019, 15:39
Quote from: stockman11 on October 14, 2019, 09:57
Pard my French, but I just have to let it out.

They reject left and right even images with good selling potential for being "similar", and when something gets rejected, there is no use to resubmit because 100% of rejected images just keep getting rejected for the same reason.

I don't think this is that much due to SS's policy itself, I think it's more about incompetent reviewers. They are not just incompetent, they are f*cking idiots.

I feel better now, but these idiots will remain being idiots and they'll just keep rejecting left and right without using their brain even a little.
I could not agree with you more and you are not the only one feeling this way. Just today I sent a series of three views of a interesting boating locks. One closed, one half way and one fully open to show the operation. One was accepted and the other two rejected for similar content. Is the reviewer blind and does not read the title. Others have been rejected for Out of focus (not) and after submitting them elsewhere, they sold instantly. I don't know what has happened to reviewers at SS but it very annoying since I hardly even had a rejection in the past couple years and now it is common.
Just had one rejected because Title didn’t match photo. The title “Wooden fishing pier” photo wooden fishing pier. Same photo was excepted by 4 other agencies. Something fishy going on at SS.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just had to add this one more example. I sent a close up of a turret from a British castle, nothing identifiable, could belong to any castle and rejected for No Property Release. Seriously, for a corner of roof?

Tk113 · « **Reply #16 on:** October 14, 2019, 15:56 »

Quote from: candidcruiser on October 14, 2019, 15:55

Quote from: Tk113 on October 14, 2019, 15:48
Quote from: candidcruiser on October 14, 2019, 15:39
Quote from: stockman11 on October 14, 2019, 09:57
Pard my French, but I just have to let it out.

They reject left and right even images with good selling potential for being "similar", and when something gets rejected, there is no use to resubmit because 100% of rejected images just keep getting rejected for the same reason.

I don't think this is that much due to SS's policy itself, I think it's more about incompetent reviewers. They are not just incompetent, they are f*cking idiots.

I feel better now, but these idiots will remain being idiots and they'll just keep rejecting left and right without using their brain even a little.
I could not agree with you more and you are not the only one feeling this way. Just today I sent a series of three views of a interesting boating locks. One closed, one half way and one fully open to show the operation. One was accepted and the other two rejected for similar content. Is the reviewer blind and does not read the title. Others have been rejected for Out of focus (not) and after submitting them elsewhere, they sold instantly. I don't know what has happened to reviewers at SS but it very annoying since I hardly even had a rejection in the past couple years and now it is common.
Just had one rejected because Title didn’t match photo. The title “Wooden fishing pier” photo wooden fishing pier. Same photo was excepted by 4 other agencies. Something fishy going on at SS.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Just had to add this one more example. I sent a close up of a turret from a British castle, nothing identifiable, could belong to any castle and rejected for No Property Release. Seriously, for a corner of roof?

Could be something you wrote in the description

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

cascoly · « **Reply #17 on:** October 14, 2019, 18:07 »

or 'similars' for 2 images, one horizontal, other vertical, and zoom different

particularly annoying is rejection of 2 images as 'similar' w/o approving either one!

lostintimeline · « **Reply #18 on:** October 14, 2019, 18:21 »

you can shout, get ungry, upset, cursing all you want but in the end of the day there is nothing you can do about it.just submit new content and dont let it bother you.if they accept it FINE if not THEIR LOSS their site their rules.at site.
My only guess is that these people who review the photos they are lookin at the photos theme.
some bored reviewer hating his life and job and wanna shoot himshelf for scrolling thousant of images and his head starts to go loco and says
nope
nope
nope
nope
ye em nope
nope
or some reviewer with no experience in photography
Nope
nope
nope
ye emm NOPE
nope
noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooope

or some 18 reviewer who likes trolling
nOPE
NOPE
NOPE
ye NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPE
nope
no
NO WAY HOSE

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #19 on:** October 14, 2019, 18:38 »

Quote from: cascoly on October 14, 2019, 18:07

or 'similars' for 2 images, one horizontal, other vertical, and zoom different

particularly annoying is rejection of 2 images as 'similar' w/o approving either one!

There you are, some paid offshore review who's just way to full of rejection power and following the rules without thinking. Rejected both, there's perfect for rejection happy reviewers, I bet he's proud of his work.

Quote from: mj007 on October 14, 2019, 14:11

Keep in mind what reviews get paid. I am not sure what it is now but a few years back it was 5 cents per image to review or reject. To make money in an hour at that rate you can't put much judgement into reviewing.

We'll never know, but I'm willing to wager that they aren't getting 5¢ an image now. Just like people in lesser economies, who can live off microstock, there are probably reviewers who can work for really low pay, contracted, who are happy to make what they do, as they can survive on that.

Example, 50% of the people in Indonesia earn $10,000 a year or less. 25% under $5,000 USD a year. Cost of living is very different. But someone who works hard at Microstock and many agencies, can make $12,000 a year or $1,000 a month.

Paying some hypothetical reviewer $12,000 a year, no benefits, would be much less expensive for the company than paying someone Minimum wage or a minimal living wage in New York. Thus my suspicion and guess that most of the reviewers now are offshore, getting paid a salary and have a minimum quota of reviews per week. I've seen the job application, it says, must work weekends.

Some people care about weekends, personally I've never had them off and even now I work more on weekends than weekdays. I'll work when someone pays me the most.

georgep7 · « **Reply #20 on:** October 15, 2019, 02:14 »

Idiocity is not ...transferable!

Reviewers are doing what they are payed and ordered to do.
Perhaps some of them are kind more or alot aggressive but again.
They follow orders and move within boundaries of company's policy.
Just an opinion. Maybe wrong

Cider Apple · « **Reply #21 on:** October 15, 2019, 03:32 »

I've been getting stupid rejections too. A clip for Brexit and the other for Bremain. Both rejected for similar. they couldn't be polar opposites. Madness.
When I asked why? the support guy said just upload again and leave a re-submitted note. You cant leave a note though just the tick box of re-submitted (so you cant explain why they are so different).
To rub salt in the wound more is the fact you have to re-upload the clips as they can't go back to the reject bin and just take them from there. When you're talking 4K clips over 2GB in size each it's just a waste of time and resources.
So annoying.

qunamax · « **Reply #22 on:** October 15, 2019, 07:20 »

I assumed they have a software that does the reviews and maybe a handful of reviewers that get get images sent by software when it runs into some kind of problem it can't solve.

jonbull · « **Reply #23 on:** October 15, 2019, 08:25 »

rejections are not a problems..the problems is the collapsing of sale over 38 cent...rpd is collapsing...i don't care if they reject something....all in all most new content don'tsell at all because nobody is so idiot to search for new files...make any search first with new then with relevant...who in the world would mess looking for a usable file using the new tabs?...the problem is 99 % of sale are sub. and not only here in general...i'm up 35 % sale in all agency down 200 % in terms of dollar so far...i need 10 times more images sold than last year to match the dollar. time to ficus n rm for agency like westend and offset...microstock is collapsing.

m · « **Reply #24 on:** October 15, 2019, 09:21 »

Quote from: George_ on October 15, 2019, 02:14

Idiocity is not ...transferable!
Reviewers are doing what they are payed and ordered to do.
Perhaps some of them are kind more or alot aggressive but again.
They follow orders and move within boundaries of company's policy.
Just an opinion. Maybe wrong

I agree with George_

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots (Read 28341 times)

stockman11

Clair Voyant

jonbull

jonbull

Visualab

stockman11

jonbull

stockman11

Uncle Pete

Pauws99

Tk113

mj007

stockman11

candidcruiser

Tk113

candidcruiser

Tk113

cascoly

lostintimeline

Uncle Pete

georgep7

Cider Apple

qunamax

jonbull

m

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors