Author Topic: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots (Read 39430 times)

cascoly · « **Reply #200 on:** December 13, 2019, 09:16 »

Quote from: martinrichard on December 03, 2019, 10:51

....

All the agencies probably have a rating system on a per image basis. Higher rated images show up first in searches. The lowest rated images never show up unless the client search produces 0 results. The standards are just hidden from contributors in the form of better search algorithms.

yet another random guess with nothing to back it up.... just as likely they read unicorn droppings to decide

cathyslife · « **Reply #201 on:** December 13, 2019, 10:01 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on December 09, 2019, 07:20

Reviewers are most likely paid per image, so they make twice as much money by mass rejecting everything and then mass accepting when you resubmit.

I checked into this 7 or 8 years ago. At that time they paid $.05 per image reviewed. I think you are right on...they mass reject/accept to make more money. That’s why there’s so much crap on the sites now.

georgep7 · « **Reply #202 on:** December 13, 2019, 10:22 »

Quote from: pixel86 on December 13, 2019, 10:01

Quote from: Shelma1 on December 09, 2019, 07:20
Reviewers are most likely paid per image, so they make twice as much money by mass rejecting everything and then mass accepting when you resubmit.

I checked into this 7 or 8 years ago. At that time they paid $.05 per image reviewed. I think you are right on...they mass reject/accept to make more money. That’s why there’s so much crap on the sites now.

Assuming I have a $0,00000005 return for all content uploaded, I must consider becoming a reviewer instead of a contributor any more!

jonbull · « **Reply #203 on:** December 13, 2019, 10:50 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on December 12, 2019, 11:39

Quote from: jonbull on December 11, 2019, 08:41
Quote from: YadaYadaYada on December 11, 2019, 07:27
Quote from: jonbull 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.

You don't make progress by standing on the sidelines, whimpering and complaining. You make progress by implementing ideas. Shirley Chisholm

you not even earned one tenth of what i earned...so why talking? i complain not cause i not earn 300 dollar months like you ,you understand? i'm taking of earning 50 60K, not 3 4....you understand?
Perhaps you could invest some of your earnings in an anger management course.

maybe or maybe people wit h minimal knowledge of stuff and minimal earning should begin stopping doing the expert...not your case...wee maybe your case too.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #204 on:** December 13, 2019, 12:46 »

Yes lets just have self proclaimed "expert" views only.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #205 on:** December 17, 2019, 11:23 »

Quote from: Stock4Me on December 12, 2019, 07:05

Quote from: jonbull on December 11, 2019, 08:41
Quote from: YadaYadaYada on December 11, 2019, 07:27
Quote from: jonbull 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.

You don't make progress by standing on the sidelines, whimpering and complaining. You make progress by implementing ideas. Shirley Chisholm

you not even earned one tenth of what i earned...so why talking? i complain not cause i not earn 300 dollar months like you ,you understand? i'm taking of earning 50 60K, not 3 4....you understand?

Who are you can I see your photos link please. I want to see what earns 50K in Micro.

You will notice at this point jonbull goes silent.

Wouldn't we all like to see how someone earns 50K on Microstock? Or claims to? Wouldn't you and everyone like to see who he is and what he uploads to make that? I'll bet you a million dollars, that he doesn't make $50K a year on microstock! Or near that, and probably not $300 a month either. But we don't know who he is and can't look at his work, so it's all as empty as air.

No credible, proof or answers forthcoming, I promise you that.

Snow · « **Reply #206 on:** December 18, 2019, 11:25 »

I can't count the times anymore that they rejected my plain photos for not tagging them as illustrations and even mistaken my Photoshop composites for 3D so rejecting them for not tagging as 3D rendering

I don't know if they are that dumb (incompetent) or that smart (trying to eliminate competition)

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #207 on:** December 18, 2019, 16:01 »

Quote from: Snow on December 18, 2019, 11:25

I can't count the times anymore that they rejected my plain photos for not tagging them as illustrations and even mistaken my Photoshop composites for 3D so rejecting them for not tagging as 3D rendering
I don't know if they are that dumb (incompetent) or that smart (trying to eliminate competition)

Frustrating isn't it, some days? Vector rejected for no reference image. I go again, add, no reference image used. Rejected again. I take a photo that was the original idea, and the vector passes. I mean this is something so simple, that someone competent could draw it in ten minutes. Black and white! But they want a reference image?

I found something on the hard drive while I was backing up 2019. Uploaded. Rejection for the ever mysterious "Title must be descriptive of the subject matter and must be in English. Titles cannot contain special characters, spelling/grammar errors, or repeat words/phrases in excess." I had no repeating words, no foreign words, but maybe grammar?

So somewhere in a steaming sweat shop for reviewers in India, someone decided to correct my sentence structure because I left out a conjunction or adverb?

Well at least it wasn't rejected for similar, or accepted and then three days later rejected for "accepted in error".

wordplanet · « **Reply #208 on:** December 18, 2019, 19:26 »

I just uploaded the same group of images to both Adobe and SS - Groups of images that coordinate with each other but where I did my best to keep any similars to 4 or fewer. Adobe took 72 out of 75, rejecting three as similar.

I uploaded 51 from that group to Shutterstock, they accepted 27 and rejected 24 as "similar," in some cases taking a leaderboard but rejecting the cover/banner I noted in the description was sized to work on mobile and laptop screens, or vice versa. They have very different proportions. They also rejected some backgrounds and frames haphazardly, some where the concept was similar to another, but both the color combination and the design itself were different.

Adobe only rejected a few covers that were similar enough to others to make the rejection reasonable.

Frustrating, but hopefully sales on Adobe will make up for whatever I miss on SS.

Snow · « **Reply #209 on:** December 19, 2019, 03:34 »

What I never understood is that if we get tight and mostly wrong reviews like this then how come others can pretty much upload whatever they want?
Spamfolios, duplicates (stolen), extreme low quality (noise, lighting, composition) and the list goes on.
That I do not get unless like I mentioned before, reviewers are helping their own while trying to eliminate others. I can’t see any other explanation

Reviewers should actually be the ones that get tight reviewing by admins because in a way they are killing off this business. We get fed up and stop re-uploading or even stop uploading new work completely and SS loses a couple of hundred thousand good images. Meanwhile the spam and stolen images multiplies, yup good business strategy!

Snow · « **Reply #210 on:** December 19, 2019, 04:44 »

And now an illustration and 3D rendering being rejected for "incorrect illustration designation" and a rejection for 3D that it requires phrase 3D blabla while it was tagged in such a way. So another incompetent review. They are really taking the piss now aren't they.

Shutterstock get these clowns in check!

rinderart · « **Reply #211 on:** December 19, 2019, 23:57 »

+1000. Guys Im around since the beginning Of MS and Years before that and the Internet when we sent slides to a office In Chicago..

I was also a reviewer In MS for 3 years In the Very beginning. 2004 -2007. Todays reviewers Have NO CLUE whatsoever what there doing. We had to because the Boss checked everything we did. And If we were wrong, He made us go Back [On Our Time] and change it and apologize. I know what Im doing........Period I send 5 Original art Drawings and they go through with Illustration releases. I send 3 More Of the exact same subjects and releases that Have the Image embedded Like when The Others were approved and they get rejected. Im sick of it. I do this to make Money. This is not some hobby. I will NOT submit Them again. It makes no sense to do so. I have copies Of every MR and every PR they have ever used.

Every other site takes all of them with zero problems. And SS has these So Called "Special People To Chat with" To ask for help. "YA RIGHT" Tried that...No thanks. I forgot More than they Know....been there and done that with the Most Useless help you can Imagine.
Who are these people??? Im not some newbie Kid that Just bought a camera and needs help.
This is Professionally disgraceful on their part.

Snow · « **Reply #212 on:** December 20, 2019, 10:08 »

Whats with the tagging as 3D render anyway if their reviewers don't know the difference? Why not implement a simple system such as Adobe and Alamy (and probably many others)

I highly doubt a buyer would be displeased if they knew their bought image was actually a very realistic composite or render. They buy it because they like it and it helps perceive the message.