MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: SS new world record: review time 15 ( fifteen) SECONDS  (Read 10293 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: September 17, 2016, 14:18 »
+1
SS new world record: review time 15 ( fifteen) SECONDS
And of course: Rejected (well known bull sh.. reasons)


Rinderart

« Reply #1 on: September 17, 2016, 15:12 »
+2
IT'S A BOT guys. video is not ,nor is Vectors.

« Reply #2 on: September 17, 2016, 15:24 »
+2
Yes it's obviously automated 'inspection', i.e. some simplistic and probably mis-tuned code that's supposedly saving them big money in inspectors's wages.

« Reply #3 on: September 17, 2016, 15:41 »
+3
Yes it's obviously automated 'inspection', i.e. some simplistic and probably mis-tuned code that's supposedly saving them big money in inspectors's wages.
Although bizarrely if you resubmit you often get acceptances I suspect a human pulls the final trigger.

« Reply #4 on: September 17, 2016, 15:44 »
+15
It's not record. I have a record, I got email that my photos were reviewed, before I even got that "Thanks for submission" email.
« Last Edit: September 17, 2016, 15:47 by Dumc »

Rinderart

« Reply #5 on: September 17, 2016, 15:50 »
+1
I;ve always said,,,,, And  being a reviewer for 3+ years myself in the early days. I would really rather have a pro/semi Pro review that took time than some Newbie laptop User that has no clue or a BOT. there is No Visable way in Hell they can know what every reviewer uses to see the work..

Qualifications..... "Needs to work In Pajamas" and have 500 accepted Files. But On the flip side I don't want some newbie Guggenheim Museum wanna be curator either. there has to be a balance for  Product Value or perceived Value. and what and how much value our work Ultimately has to us as per time spent. which Was and is my #1 dilemma since day One.

If I was new and just starting Out my Portfolio and calculated ALL COSTS associated with doing this from gear to Shooting to processing to submitting........Theres a very thin Line everyone is close to if it's a business. And if you spent that amount chasing Outside clients???? and other avenues for profit where would you be?

« Reply #6 on: September 17, 2016, 15:54 »
+5
Yes, I also got my pictures accepted in less than 1 minute time after uploading and only 9 rejections out of 99 photos. I resubmitted them and they were also accepted. Looks like someone in shutterstock is helping FT to become number 1 in poll results...  ;D

« Reply #7 on: September 17, 2016, 15:55 »
+2
It's not record. I have a record, I got email that my photos were reviewed, before I even got that "Thanks for submission" email.
Yep happens me all the time when I am getting images that were rejected 5 years ago accepted ;-).

« Reply #8 on: September 17, 2016, 16:04 »
+4
BOT inspection completely take the art & creativity out of photography.

« Reply #9 on: September 17, 2016, 16:40 »
0
Yes it's obviously automated 'inspection', i.e. some simplistic and probably mis-tuned code that's supposedly saving them big money in inspectors's wages.
Although bizarrely if you resubmit you often get acceptances I suspect a human pulls the final trigger.

Who knows what's really happening, but they could certainly be routing re-submissions to human reviewers. 

Rinderart

« Reply #10 on: September 17, 2016, 17:00 »
+1
BOT inspection completely take the art & creativity out of photography.

That started For a lot of folks the minute they decided to do stock. some Luckily can separate the 2 and now Possible BOT stuff??  Terrible decision If true.. Stock is a separate output and getting More so everyday. I have a pretty good Idea what sells for me. I sometime try to hard to mix it up with 30 Categories.and tough to stay "In the stock Box" I pretty Much run Hot and cold with deciding what to submit. as One Minute Im doing hard hitting emotion that touches on Racism or abstract expressionism then Good Boy and girl glamour/Fashion stuff, then a Month of Landscapes, then On to something completely different. If I was Just a Landscape Guy. I don't think I would have lasted in this Craft very Long. I know I wouldn't have. clients don't really look for that work. stock does at times. People account for 90% of all My sales. And as good as august was, sept is the opposite. Oh well.

I assume Jon is hell Bent on thinking More is better and Not a thing we can do about it.

Good Luck Guys and Gals.

« Reply #11 on: September 17, 2016, 17:13 »
+1
BOT inspection completely take the art & creativity out of photography.

but microstock is not exactly art or creative photography, mantis!!!

also, the day ss abolished the 7/10 application submission , we already know
it has nothing to do with quality or acceptability.
oh, and the lowering of payout to 35 bucks, we know gone are the days of higher
earnings.

« Reply #12 on: September 17, 2016, 17:57 »
+3
BOT inspection completely take the art & creativity out of photography.

but microstock is not exactly art or creative photography, mantis!!!

also, the day ss abolished the 7/10 application submission , we already know
it has nothing to do with quality or acceptability.
oh, and the lowering of payout to 35 bucks, we know gone are the days of higher
earnings.

My point was that setting up a shot like this, for example, can be easily rejected when it is in fact commercially viable and somewhat creative. I picked this particular image because it has shallow DOF and is one of my best sellers.  Granted I got this in before the BOTS, but I bet it would get rejected with a BOT today.  SS misses out and so do I. I think I have 300-400 DL's on this one.

« Reply #13 on: September 17, 2016, 18:17 »
+1
It's not record. I have a record, I got email that my photos were reviewed, before I even got that "Thanks for submission" email.

Yes that happens very often, I got the thank you email 1 hour later than the approval, which was instant.
What was even more strange is that I uploaded two sizes of the same image by mistake (I prepare some images in different sizes). Both sizes were approved, so it must be automatic.
Now I would like to delete one of them but I don't know which is which, I still can't figure out how to see their sizes.
Why must everything be so da-n complicated at SS?

« Reply #14 on: September 17, 2016, 18:34 »
+2
On the oder hand I'm waiting for more than 48h for two of my images to be aproved. Are they stuck somewhere?

« Reply #15 on: September 18, 2016, 05:03 »
0
On the oder hand I'm waiting for more than 48h for two of my images to be aproved. Are they stuck somewhere?

Upload a new image and find out. If this last one will be reviewed fast, than the older ones are stuck.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2016, 05:06 by Dodie »

« Reply #16 on: September 18, 2016, 06:09 »
+1
On the oder hand I'm waiting for more than 48h for two of my images to be aproved. Are they stuck somewhere?

Upload a new image and find out. If this last one will be reviewed fast, than the older ones are stuck.
I have some stuck too think I will wait a couple more days......


« Reply #17 on: September 18, 2016, 07:17 »
+1
SS new world record: review time 15 ( fifteen) SECONDS
And of course: Rejected (well known bull sh.. reasons)

It is not the world record.

I have got photos reviewed before than I uploaded them!!

« Reply #18 on: September 18, 2016, 10:04 »
0
BOT inspection completely take the art & creativity out of photography.

but microstock is not exactly art or creative photography, mantis!!!

also, the day ss abolished the 7/10 application submission , we already know
it has nothing to do with quality or acceptability.
oh, and the lowering of payout to 35 bucks, we know gone are the days of higher
earnings.

My point was that setting up a shot like this, for example, can be easily rejected when it is in fact commercially viable and somewhat creative. I picked this particular image because it has shallow DOF and is one of my best sellers.  Granted I got this in before the BOTS, but I bet it would get rejected with a BOT today.  SS misses out and so do I. I think I have 300-400 DL's on this one.

ah yes, gotcha!  and fully agree!
you see examples of "creative" images in ss editorial advice pages,
panning, critical focus with shallow dof in the foreground,etc..
all that too, would have been rejected by BOTS.

but i found a way pass that, ie. fool the BOTS into thinking it is sharp but
marquee that area and sharpen edge,  resubmit and approved instantly...
no, correct that as chichov laughingly pointed out, approved even before you finished editing LOL

« Reply #19 on: September 18, 2016, 11:10 »
+2
BOT inspection completely take the art & creativity out of photography.

but microstock is not exactly art or creative photography, mantis!!!

also, the day ss abolished the 7/10 application submission , we already know
it has nothing to do with quality or acceptability.
oh, and the lowering of payout to 35 bucks, we know gone are the days of higher
earnings.

My point was that setting up a shot like this, for example, can be easily rejected when it is in fact commercially viable and somewhat creative. I picked this particular image because it has shallow DOF and is one of my best sellers.  Granted I got this in before the BOTS, but I bet it would get rejected with a BOT today.  SS misses out and so do I. I think I have 300-400 DL's on this one.

ah yes, gotcha!  and fully agree!
you see examples of "creative" images in ss editorial advice pages,
panning, critical focus with shallow dof in the foreground,etc..
all that too, would have been rejected by BOTS.

but i found a way pass that, ie. fool the BOTS into thinking it is sharp but
marquee that area and sharpen edge,  resubmit and approved instantly...
no, correct that as chichov laughingly pointed out, approved even before you finished editing LOL

Totally agree.  The automation in my humble opinion shows a strong strategic pathway for SS. Others will follow.  The downward spiral continues. We will be here 1-2 years from now talking about 10 cent commissions versus that agency's 12 cent commissions. That 12 cent agency is a much better "fair trade" agency :'(

I was just telling my wife this morning that I haven't shot classic stock for about a year. Just been dabbling in video and getting into astro photography and 3 axis time lapses, not for stock but just because I want to do something new.

« Reply #20 on: September 18, 2016, 11:37 »
+3
When was the last time S Stocks subscription commission rate went down? While things don't look great I think you are being a little pessimistic. The end will come more slowly as total returns on images are drowned by the oversupply.

alno

« Reply #21 on: September 18, 2016, 18:21 »
+2
Yes it's obviously automated 'inspection', i.e. some simplistic and probably mis-tuned code that's supposedly saving them big money in inspectors's wages.

It's surely automated inspection. All they need now is some automated buying of all that crap accepted :)

Rinderart

« Reply #22 on: September 19, 2016, 15:24 »
0
BOT inspection completely take the art & creativity out of photography.

but microstock is not exactly art or creative photography, mantis!!!

also, the day ss abolished the 7/10 application submission , we already know
it has nothing to do with quality or acceptability.
oh, and the lowering of payout to 35 bucks, we know gone are the days of higher
earnings.

My point was that setting up a shot like this, for example, can be easily rejected when it is in fact commercially viable and somewhat creative. I picked this particular image because it has shallow DOF and is one of my best sellers.  Granted I got this in before the BOTS, but I bet it would get rejected with a BOT today.  SS misses out and so do I. I think I have 300-400 DL's on this one.

ah yes, gotcha!  and fully agree!
you see examples of "creative" images in ss editorial advice pages,
panning, critical focus with shallow dof in the foreground,etc..
all that too, would have been rejected by BOTS.

but i found a way pass that, ie. fool the BOTS into thinking it is sharp but
marquee that area and sharpen edge,  resubmit and approved instantly...
no, correct that as chichov laughingly pointed out, approved even before you finished editing LOL

Totally agree.  The automation in my humble opinion shows a strong strategic pathway for SS. Others will follow.  The downward spiral continues. We will be here 1-2 years from now talking about 10 cent commissions versus that agency's 12 cent commissions. That 12 cent agency is a much better "fair trade" agency :'(

I was just telling my wife this morning that I haven't shot classic stock for about a year. Just been dabbling in video and getting into astro photography and 3 axis time lapses, not for stock but just because I want to do something new.

That was a very good shot man.

Rinderart

« Reply #23 on: September 19, 2016, 15:44 »
+2
As most or some of you Know I spent 11 Years and 50,000 Posts  95% of the time on the critique side at SS. I sneak in now and The last 4 Months has been scary to say the least. Of course there were always a few that slid by and Improved But Looking at what folks are posting for critique Now is downright super scary By volume. It shows me without a doubt that this business has Not evolved One single Bit in 11 Years, It just cycles. It is just repeating itself and to think a bunch of this stuff is being approved.  To do nothing More than add more junk on top of junk, More tomatoes,OOF flowers,Crappy composition of family Pets.etc,etc thats what In My opinion a BOT should and could be used for. What we need is a spot chk team that has veto Power for approved Images. all Ya need is One for entrance??? My 8yr old next door neighbors Kid can do that. 7 out of 10?...Much More difficult. Who are these folks making these decisions?? when is 20,000 tomatoes by example enough??? I have 3. I'll delete 2 One is a 10 yr old rotten tomato and One of a kind LOL

It also seems like all we do Now is Vent.  We mean Nothing and account for nothing.

« Reply #24 on: September 19, 2016, 20:24 »
0
BOT inspection completely take the art & creativity out of photography.

but microstock is not exactly art or creative photography, mantis!!!

also, the day ss abolished the 7/10 application submission , we already know
it has nothing to do with quality or acceptability.
oh, and the lowering of payout to 35 bucks, we know gone are the days of higher
earnings.

My point was that setting up a shot like this, for example, can be easily rejected when it is in fact commercially viable and somewhat creative. I picked this particular image because it has shallow DOF and is one of my best sellers.  Granted I got this in before the BOTS, but I bet it would get rejected with a BOT today.  SS misses out and so do I. I think I have 300-400 DL's on this one.

ah yes, gotcha!  and fully agree!
you see examples of "creative" images in ss editorial advice pages,
panning, critical focus with shallow dof in the foreground,etc..
all that too, would have been rejected by BOTS.

but i found a way pass that, ie. fool the BOTS into thinking it is sharp but
marquee that area and sharpen edge,  resubmit and approved instantly...
no, correct that as chichov laughingly pointed out, approved even before you finished editing LOL

Totally agree.  The automation in my humble opinion shows a strong strategic pathway for SS. Others will follow.  The downward spiral continues. We will be here 1-2 years from now talking about 10 cent commissions versus that agency's 12 cent commissions. That 12 cent agency is a much better "fair trade" agency :'(

I was just telling my wife this morning that I haven't shot classic stock for about a year. Just been dabbling in video and getting into astro photography and 3 axis time lapses, not for stock but just because I want to do something new.

That was a very good shot man.

Thank you, Lauren.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
11 Replies
4127 Views
Last post May 02, 2011, 14:52
by daveh900
41 Replies
7091 Views
Last post May 03, 2012, 17:21
by luissantos84
11 Replies
2889 Views
Last post May 28, 2012, 03:34
by fotografer
1 Replies
1512 Views
Last post March 18, 2014, 07:01
by nicku
2 Replies
968 Views
Last post July 23, 2018, 17:42
by increasingdifficulty

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results