Quote from: Zero Talent on December 02, 2015, 14:47

Why being afraid of some newbie competition?
Let everyone try it.

I don't think anybody is afraid of newbie competition.

The problem is� it was already hard enough to break through the cacophony of many millions of images vying for attention. Once it's several bazillion images, how will anybody's work stand out long enough to be bought?

ETA: As a contributor who got in on the first crack, I'm very disappointed in SS.

I'm surprised they are doing this. I just applied to Alamy and they want 4/4 correct and I got accepted on the first time, I felt pretty good about myself. I can't imagine newbies feeling good about getting accepted with a 1/10 ... No confidence booster there ...

Quote from: Zero Talent on December 02, 2015, 19:02

so you are actually afraid of competition.

If you say so, fine.

I don't see it as "fear of competition."  I see it as disappointment in a quality agency that has been good to me for years but now seems to have lost its way.

It will end up as an all-you-can-eat buffet of junk food. All the lukewarm day-old French Fries you can eat, for one low price.  I haven't seen that business concept tried yet, but personally, I would not invest. :-).

Does this mean they are going to lower their review standards or why would they let people that can only get 1/10 submit? 

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on December 02, 2015, 22:21

Quote from: Zero Talent on December 02, 2015, 20:47

...However, as far as this forum is concerned, the main complaint against SS is the excessive rejection rate.

So, a high rejection rate is OK when applied to a beginner, but not OK when applied to an established contributor. Hmm.....

I can't speak for anyone else, but my complaints are not about the quantity of rejections, but the inconsistency and ignorance (white balance rejections for sunrise or sunset shots, for example).

Shutterstock's review process is seriously flawed and it's the flaws, not the rejection numbers, that are the problem.

Fine, I get that.
But then what makes you believe that the same flawed rejections are not applicable to the first 10 photos, denying access to some really good photographers?
Following the same logic as in the previous post, are the flawed rejections only applicable to established contributors?

 I guess not.

Then the talk should be about flawed rejections in general, be it for the first 10 or the next 990 and not about removing the admission test, which is flawed by your definition, therefore irrelevant.

So, a high rejection rate is OK when applied to a beginner, but not OK when applied to an established contributor. Hmm.....

Quote from: Zero Talent on December 02, 2015, 20:47

So, a high rejection rate is OK when applied to a beginner, but not OK when applied to an established contributor. Hmm.....

I don't understand the need you have to distort what others are saying.

Getting upset for having a good image lost in the middle of tenths of thousands of poor quality images is not fearing the competition, like you said, because in fact we're not facing competition in that sense, just fighting an avalanche. Even the most experienced Everest and K2 climbers fear avalanches, since they have nothing to do with their skills, except for the fact that they may know that they should stay away from where they are more likely.

And I like many others, are not upset about the rejections since we dealt with them since day one. I only get upset when they are illogical, make no sense and especially for the wrong reasons.

Their criteria are changing. Now not only in title of the image should not be "foreign" text, they rejected image of a church with latin text on the external wall. Which language is not foreign for this reviewer? In the same time they send e-mail that they want a free image and requested personal data from photographer. Thanks, ss, your e-mail is in trash.

I think that their next step will be to accept any crap, like did iStock about one year ago�

Quote from: Chichikov on December 03, 2015, 01:21

I think that their next step will be to accept any crap, like did iStock about one year ago�

You mean this crap?
http://www.shutterstock.com/portfolio/search.mhtml?gallery_landing=1&gallery_id=1256674&page=1&safesearch=1&sort_method=newest

Quote from: Chichikov on December 03, 2015, 01:21

I think that their next step will be to accept any crap, like did iStock about one year ago�

You mean this crap?
http://www.shutterstock.com/portfolio/search.mhtml?gallery_landing=1&gallery_id=1256674&page=1&safesearch=1&sort_method=newest

I will also say that since mediocracy sells, the problem of being found is exacerbated.