MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock Reviewers Beating Me Up.... Anyone Else?  (Read 167794 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #700 on: April 30, 2015, 05:27 »
+10
Reviews have become a frustrating , unfair, and unpredictable



« Reply #701 on: April 30, 2015, 10:58 »
+3
Within the last month or two I have noticed a huge problem with the consistency of the reviewers at Shutterstock.  Sometimes I will slip in an image I know has been approved or is flawless as a litmus test and I can tell you that if they reject several they will reject that one also.

I think part of the problem is that photography is so subjective and the reviewers show that in their review process. They have always been picky about noise of any kind but I find any noise at all now is not tolerated.  In my mind a little shadow noise is fine if it only shows up at 100%, but I will get rejected often with even small amounts of noise. 

I wrote an article on my blog recently I was so disgusted.  I think the blog entry is somewhat overly critical but I think I also made some valid points.

http://mattcuda.com/index.php?/essays/2015/03/shutterstock-inconsistancy/

« Reply #702 on: April 30, 2015, 13:00 »
+2
Got an image rejected as it wasnt marked as 'illustration'
Possibly fair point as it was heavily manipulated photographic image.

Checked with SS support and yes should have been 'illustration' (even though similar images have been accepted as non illustration for years)

So resubmitted as illustration, and guess what, rejected as incorrectly submitted as illustration!!

How are we supposed to get it right when support and reviewers cant even agree!!
(copied from SS boards)

maybe we call a closure on this issue...
and everyone submit images of someone banging his/her head on a brick wall with the words ss on it.
the answer from ss is pretty writing on the wall by now after so many pages on this issue here and on ss own forum...


admin edit: edited for language
« Last Edit: May 20, 2015, 15:55 by leaf »

Semmick Photo

« Reply #703 on: April 30, 2015, 13:19 »
+4
Let's keep it civil before Leaf closes this thread.

« Reply #704 on: April 30, 2015, 13:30 »
+2
Well 29 pages in and SS have not chipped in - what usually happens is this goes on and on until they notice a rise in staff turnover at [email protected] or some twit with a 6 sigma bent finally earns his badge by attaching an efficiency cost to the rejection/review/rejection/review metrics. But that could take months.

Rinderart

« Reply #705 on: April 30, 2015, 14:45 »
+1
Well 29 pages in and SS have not chipped in - what usually happens is this goes on and on until they notice a rise in staff turnover at [email protected] or some twit with a 6 sigma bent finally earns his badge by attaching an efficiency cost to the rejection/review/rejection/review metrics. But that could take months.

And 40,023 views. Thats Huge.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #706 on: May 01, 2015, 10:34 »
+2
Rinderart - So we can assume it's not an isolated incident or favoritism?  :)

Yes Red Dove, some of us have pointed this out, year after year. They have to review the same images, over and over, it's churning, and just makes more work and money for the reviewers, costs money for the company. Some bean counter will eventually figure this out.

The added expense of inconsistent reviews hurts the profits.

Well 29 pages in and SS have not chipped in - what usually happens is this goes on and on until they notice a rise in staff turnover at [email protected] or some twit with a 6 sigma bent finally earns his badge by attaching an efficiency cost to the rejection/review/rejection/review metrics. But that could take months.

And 40,023 views. Thats Huge.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #707 on: May 07, 2015, 05:24 »
+3
Submitted 93 images yesterday morning, 100% approval. Including 25 images previously rejected. I am happy with the result but it still feels like a lottery. I know the images are good, so I shouldnt have to feel like that.

Lets hope that things may have changed now. It seems this thread has gone quiet. Anybody else see an improvement on acceptance?

« Reply #708 on: May 07, 2015, 11:58 »
+4
Anybody else see an improvement on acceptance?

I went through a couple of weeks when everything I submitted while on a recent photo trip got rejected. Whole batches.

Then suddenly, this week, I'm back home and getting my normal 80-85% acceptance rate. Same cameras and lenses. Same processing. Same subjects. Same locations. Same early-morning light. Same photographer.

No clue what happened, but it's better for sure while it lasts.

« Reply #709 on: May 07, 2015, 12:09 »
0
I stopped submitting photos for nearly three months, I sent them only videos. I will slowly try again in the coming weeks. But most of my income is from video, so if they dont want my photos I can live with it. The inconsistency in the rejections was the biggest problem. Hope it has improved. And whatever they dont like sells elsewhere, so it is not a big drama.

« Reply #710 on: May 07, 2015, 15:48 »
+2
For me it is still about 75 % rejections or 100 % acceptance - depending on the day. You can't predict which will happen.

« Reply #711 on: May 07, 2015, 21:18 »
0
Yes today I was beat up very bad--All rejected (20 plus images).  All had 100% views and very much in focus.  The issues were poor lighting where (3) from another batch with the same scene , background and lighting were approved.  I will not resubmit and waste my time--.

PZF

« Reply #712 on: May 19, 2015, 01:50 »
+1
Terrible. So few accepted, especially outdoor shots. Accepted by others (yes I KNOW they aren't as strict BUT....).
Virtually all outdoor shots rejected for light, focus and/or composition ie fairly much EVERYTHING! And it's not true, though some of it is fairly shallow dof to separate object from background!
Back to the studio shots then.....or maybe not given how low sales in SS have become....
:(

« Reply #713 on: May 19, 2015, 02:03 »
0
My "best"  rejection just 2 days ago:

- uploaded around 10 iceberg pictures to SS
- used only the keywords from SS' own keyword guessing tool
- get all 10 rejected because "too many irrelevant keywords"

maybe they test some kind of new artificial intelligence there ...

dpimborough

« Reply #714 on: May 19, 2015, 05:48 »
+8
Submitted 93 images yesterday morning, 100% approval. Including 25 images previously rejected. I am happy with the result but it still feels like a lottery. I know the images are good, so I shouldnt have to feel like that.

Lets hope that things may have changed now. It seems this thread has gone quiet. Anybody else see an improvement on acceptance?

I stopped uploading so now I have 100% acceptance :D

« Reply #715 on: May 19, 2015, 09:09 »
+3
My "best"  rejection just 2 days ago:

- uploaded around 10 iceberg pictures to SS
- used only the keywords from SS' own keyword guessing tool
- get all 10 rejected because "too many irrelevant keywords"

maybe they test some kind of new artificial intelligence there ...

It's doesn't matter whether you use SS keyword tool or not, it's your responsibility to filter out irrelevant keywords. We can get a better idea if you can show us a sample picture and the keywords that you used.

« Reply #716 on: May 20, 2015, 04:21 »
0
I was not affected by rejection problem but didn't upload several months. Returned from new trip and will try to send some images which i can share to micros. Had before near 100% acceptance. Will see what changed. Time is very expensive thing


Quasarphoto

« Reply #717 on: May 20, 2015, 15:41 »
+8
Well, I went from over 90% approval to 90% rejection. Since Shutterstock went on NYSE is playing hardball. If anybody else remembers this is exactly what happened few years back to iStock. For now I just avoid to upload to SS. iStock got down to earth again and approvals and sales picked up lately, same with Fotolia. It's just a bug what goes around these agencies. SS went from the most friendly to screw you guys.

« Reply #718 on: May 20, 2015, 15:55 »
+2
Let's keep it civil before Leaf closes this thread.

yes - quite agreed.  one post edited for language.

« Reply #719 on: May 22, 2015, 07:12 »
+2
They accepted an image and in the next batch they rejected the vertical version (on tripod same light, same focus, same aperture, same shutter etc.) I can give many similar stupid rejection examples. They rejected the almost whole batch three in a row, even reuploads. Enough is enough. Not uploading for a while  >:(

ultimagina

« Reply #720 on: May 22, 2015, 10:43 »
-1
They accepted an image and in the next batch they rejected the vertical version (on tripod same light, same focus, same aperture, same shutter etc.) I can give many similar stupid rejection examples. They rejected the almost whole batch three in a row, even reuploads. Enough is enough. Not uploading for a while  >:(

While I understand what you say, I just want to comment that "same light, same focus, same aperture, same shutter etc" doesn't always mean "same quality" even on a tripod. A stronger wind can make your tripod vibrate, hence ruining your vertical version, especially during long exposures.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #721 on: May 22, 2015, 10:45 »
0
If it's all the same it actually does mean it's the same quality

« Reply #722 on: May 22, 2015, 10:49 »
0
Another 1.9 million files accepted in the last month and they are rejecting too much?

Semmick Photo

« Reply #723 on: May 22, 2015, 12:35 »
+6
That's not the point anyone is making. No need to read all pages but the gist is that perfectly good images are rejected. Not that they reject too much.

« Reply #724 on: May 22, 2015, 12:54 »
-1
It looks like they are letting a lot of stuff through to me.  I just did a couple searches and I have a hard time believing they are rejecting anything at all, the few searches I did and sorted by new have basically 1 shot done 100 times (literally more than 100 shots of what could be covered in at most 3 or 4 shots with dozens of identical images just converted to black and white).


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
25 Replies
17628 Views
Last post April 04, 2015, 16:03
by stuttershock
22 Replies
6950 Views
Last post April 04, 2015, 18:37
by shudderstok
85 Replies
43864 Views
Last post April 04, 2015, 16:02
by stuttershock
10 Replies
6709 Views
Last post June 22, 2015, 14:07
by Freedom
212 Replies
34128 Views
Last post December 20, 2019, 10:08
by Snow

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle