Author Topic: SS: Best Microstock agency with the worst reviewers (Read 8367 times)

Wim · « **on:** July 27, 2012, 02:12 »

Well, it's that time again, they were doing a lot better lately but now they're even worse.
Got a bored reviewer rejecting most of my batch for focus/lighting.
I don't know if I should actually care or not. I do care because they are my biggest earner, on the other hand I have had an image rejected by them for whatever absurd reason that is selling like candy on IS (and a few others) so maybe it's a good thing.

I'm up every month, selling my latest work which means I know what I'm doing yet they still pull stunts like this? This so called "slummer slump" is my BME.
I have mailed support a dozen of times about this being my only gripe in microstock (SS and DT) yet they defend their incompetent staff like it's their family, why?
I could write a whole blog about these so called reviewers and some day I will.
I know some of you have a different experience with them, even 100% AR even and that makes it even worse, I would love to know what's going on behind the scenes.
When will this end SS?

Take care all

sharpshot · « **Reply #1 on:** July 27, 2012, 02:50 »

I had some problems last year, going from near 100% acceptance to mass rejections. That's improved this year though. It's frustrating but there's nothing we can do about it. They should be able to spot when a reviewer gets lazy and rejects almost everything. If someone who has near 100% acceptance suddenly gets most of their batch rejected, it's obviously a reviewer problem. I don't care anymore, if one site rejects a lot, the other sites usually accept them all. It's annoying that they don't sell as well as SS but there's no point wasting energy on something I can't change.

Wim · « **Reply #2 on:** July 27, 2012, 03:27 »

True mate but it's still hard for me to let this one go. Why do they let their staff rob us and their agency from our money? makes no sense at all.
I cannot let these kids get in the way of my progress, nor should the rest of us. I've said it before, to these reviewers we're all a bunch of hobbyists celebrating every buck we make.
Maybe some here have influence on them, who knows. I will keep digging to find out what is really going on.
Shutterstock could perform so much better without this mess and that is what frustrates me the most.
Over time they will lose contributors over this, there are already plenty of people that are fed up with this and stopped uploading along time ago, I'm not talking small potatoes either but people with 40 years of experience in stock that had a clean record and get hammered with absurd rejections lately.
If SS wasn't my biggest earner I would have left them a long time ago because of this. Since other agencies are catching up that day might eventually come.

People like Yuri (sorry to drag you into this bro) tell us to act professionally and learn from this but what is to learn from incompetent reviews? A few rejections on batches with hundreds of images won't do much harm but on small batches this is disastrous to our income.

Anyway, as hard as I try I cannot let this one go Sharpshot

ShadySue · « **Reply #3 on:** July 27, 2012, 05:36 »

Quote from: Wim on July 27, 2012, 03:27

People like Yuri (sorry to drag you into this bro) tell us to act professionally and learn from this but what is to learn from incompetent reviews?

"... Meet with triumph and disaster, and treat these two imposters both the same" (Kipling)

You have my sympathies. Now that the date rejector on iS's editorial team is at last in line, I randomly get the main collection inspector who removes random keywords like 'nobody', when there's nobody in the image, 'horizontal' on a horizontal image, or 'hauled out', when, presumably, they aren't familiar with the expression.

cidepix · « **Reply #4 on:** July 27, 2012, 05:50 »

I once saw a thread started by a newbie on SS forum.. He was trying to have his initial 10 approved but get rejected every time..

He blamed SS for not knowing the photography.. According to him people who run SS did not understand quality images

Sure, a newbie knows more about photography than a world leading stock photo agency for nearly a decade..

spike · « **Reply #5 on:** July 27, 2012, 06:23 »

Same here.

My AR is around 80%, the last batch od 20 images - all 20 rejected. Lol.

Wim · « **Reply #6 on:** July 27, 2012, 07:27 »

Quote from: cidepix on July 27, 2012, 05:50

I once saw a thread started by a newbie on SS forum.. He was trying to have his initial 10 approved but get rejected every time..

He blamed SS for not knowing the photography.. According to him people who run SS did not understand quality images

Sure, a newbie knows more about photography than a world leading stock photo agency for nearly a decade..

Yup we're all noobs, case closed

cidepix · « **Reply #7 on:** July 27, 2012, 07:43 »

Quote from: Wim on July 27, 2012, 07:27

Quote from: cidepix on July 27, 2012, 05:50
I once saw a thread started by a newbie on SS forum.. He was trying to have his initial 10 approved but get rejected every time..

He blamed SS for not knowing the photography.. According to him people who run SS did not understand quality images

Sure, a newbie knows more about photography than a world leading stock photo agency for nearly a decade..

Yup we're all noobs, case closed

I didn't say you or anybody else is a noob.. I am not that rude

I just gave an extreme example so it may lead to self-criticism.. I know the frustration.. I understand you.. You would like every single one of your images approved by SS because it is a good selling marketplace..

I had times when I felt similar to what you described but I corrected the issues and the very same vectors were approved.. I know it is more possible to re-edit vectors over and over again while there is not much you can do about a photo's lighting after it is taken..

You mentioned Yuri, but there is a reason the guy has an "all-white" studio

Don't take me wrong.. I have no bad intentions.. But these are my opinions and I am a very aggressive critic in many subjects

ruxpriencdiam · « **Reply #8 on:** July 27, 2012, 08:15 »

You can post us an example over in the forums like Anthony says to do and if it passes you can do a resubmit and link to that thread explaining that everyone saw nothing wrong with it if that is the case and hope it makes the cut.

Otherwise you were hit by Attila!

Anthony stands behind his reviewers and the team he has working for him.

Wim · « **Reply #9 on:** July 27, 2012, 08:46 »

@cidepix

There are no issues to correct, that's just the whole point of my post, please read carefully.
I know you desperately want to justify this but this is a totally different situation from the so called noobs wanting all their stuff online.
Shall I give you an example:
Simple isolation, rejected for composition/cropping, adding an inch of useless white space to an already perfect isolation got the image accepted.
Images previously rejected for not needed and resubmitted are now selling on a daily base, small mistake there, no biggie right.
This issue is not about getting the quality up to par, this is about the inconsistency and incompetence of some reviewers out there. I know you think you got it all figured out but it doesn't relate to what I'm trying to say here mate, no offence.
IS rejects almost all my composites for overfiltering, I'm not happy about that but do not complain, it's the way it is and they will always be consistent about this, I can understand that.
With SS it's a bingo game. One day they accept a batch while on another they would reject the exact same batch. what does that tell you?
DT isn't any better but at least they also let us know about their (silly) similar policy.
To me, SS truly is the worst out there where reviewing is concerned and having a few batches accepted will not change my mind about that.
Now, what is so hard to understand in what I have just said?
I still wonder why I bother with threads like this, which could make my issue even worse and I have said I wouldn't complain about this anymore but this affects my progress/income so there's just no way around it.
A normal person would tell me to stop wasting my time and focus on those who deserve it but the thing is I have no issues with the agency itself, only their reviewing staff.
Anyway, same old story right, I will keep posting about this from time to time, that's just the way I am, maybe I can even dig a little deeper to see what is truly going on behind the scene.
All I know for certain is this, reviewers must adore me by now

if you're out there, you're not getting rid of me just yet!

Wim · « **Reply #10 on:** July 27, 2012, 08:49 »

Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on July 27, 2012, 08:15

You can post us an example over in the forums like Anthony says to do and if it passes you can do a resubmit and link to that thread explaining that everyone saw nothing wrong with it if that is the case and hope it makes the cut.

Otherwise you were hit by Attila!

Anthony stands behind his reviewers and the team he has working for him.

Yup, been in contact with him and already figured that one out Barry

ruxpriencdiam · « **Reply #11 on:** July 27, 2012, 09:06 »

And wanna know how bad reviewers are

??

I would love to be able to shoot Williamsburg Virginia!!!!!!!!!!!!

But it is on the "KNOWN IMAGE RESTRICTION" list so it is a no go period right?

Not really because someone on SS just had shots of WILLIAMSBURG accepted and already selling!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And they are not editorial.

So how in the HAIL did the reviewer not know this?

what!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

EDIT: To add.

And the Keyword WILLIAMSBURG VIRGINIA should have given it away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wim · « **Reply #12 on:** July 27, 2012, 09:17 »

Hey hold on Barry haha, my eyes hurt reading your posts, I don't know where to look first

Lottery game mate, nothing more to it. Well that and some contributors being favoured of course.

Tryingmybest · « **Reply #13 on:** July 27, 2012, 09:25 »

Have you tried staggering your submissions? I'm assuming you are turning in entire batches. One reviewer has to go through all of them. If you get one that is intolerant, in a bad mood or biased, you'll get a mass rejection. Send a handful, wait for the review, then send another.

Frankly, I think iStuck deserves "worst reviewers." But anyway...

Quote from: Wim on July 27, 2012, 02:12

Well, it's that time again, they were doing a lot better lately but now they're even worse.
Got a bored reviewer rejecting most of my batch for focus/lighting.
I don't know if I should actually care or not. I do care because they are my biggest earner, on the other hand I have had an image rejected by them for whatever absurd reason that is selling like candy on IS (and a few others) so maybe it's a good thing.

I'm up every month, selling my latest work which means I know what I'm doing yet they still pull stunts like this? This so called "slummer slump" is my BME.
I have mailed support a dozen of times about this being my only gripe in microstock (SS and DT) yet they defend their incompetent staff like it's their family, why?
I could write a whole blog about these so called reviewers and some day I will.
I know some of you have a different experience with them, even 100% AR even and that makes it even worse, I would love to know what's going on behind the scenes.
When will this end SS?

Take care all

Wim · « **Reply #14 on:** July 27, 2012, 09:39 »

Quote from: TheBlackRhino on July 27, 2012, 09:25

Have you tried staggering your submissions? I'm assuming you are turning in entire batches. One reviewer has to go through all of them. If you get one that is intolerant, in a bad mood or biased, you'll get a mass rejection. Send a handful, wait for the review, then send another.

Frankly, I think iStuck deserves "worst reviewers." But anyway...

Quote from: Wim on July 27, 2012, 02:12
Well, it's that time again, they were doing a lot better lately but now they're even worse.
Got a bored reviewer rejecting most of my batch for focus/lighting.
I don't know if I should actually care or not. I do care because they are my biggest earner, on the other hand I have had an image rejected by them for whatever absurd reason that is selling like candy on IS (and a few others) so maybe it's a good thing.

I'm up every month, selling my latest work which means I know what I'm doing yet they still pull stunts like this? This so called "slummer slump" is my BME.
I have mailed support a dozen of times about this being my only gripe in microstock (SS and DT) yet they defend their incompetent staff like it's their family, why?
I could write a whole blog about these so called reviewers and some day I will.
I know some of you have a different experience with them, even 100% AR even and that makes it even worse, I would love to know what's going on behind the scenes.
When will this end SS?

Take care all

Yup, already doing that, mate, splitting up batches, DT loves that btw, I've been working 12h a day for the last year, submitting small batches on a daily base, after all this time you'll start to notice a thing or two about what's going on over there and it doesn't look very promising

To me IS has the best reviewers out there, to me they are the close to macrostock reviewers.
If you pass their inspection you know you have the quality that is required for stock. I just wish they would relax a bit on the composite rejections.

Thanks for the heads-up though mate, much appreciated!

Lagereek · « **Reply #15 on:** July 28, 2012, 00:51 »

Its a great shame, after all these years to see the MSG forum, slowly deteriorate into nothing but noobs complaining about rejections here and there. When are these ppl going to realize they have entered into a field normally associated with professionals and just accept it?

Wim · « **Reply #16 on:** July 28, 2012, 02:00 »

Quote from: Lagereek on July 28, 2012, 00:51

Its a great shame, after all these years to see the MSG forum, slowly deteriorate into nothing but noobs complaining about rejections here and there. When are these ppl going to realize they have entered into a field normally associated with professionals and just accept it?

ya gotta love this guy.

heywoody · « **Reply #17 on:** July 28, 2012, 06:31 »

Dunno.. Have seen lots of threads here and on SS where lots of non-noobs complain about rejections, a MSG noob or a stock noob may not be a photography noob an the SS review fairy can be quite good to some of us (i can see where they're coming from when they do reject something whether I agree or not). Basic advice is sound though, sites accept what they accept and reject what they reject and the only benefit in complaining is the getting it off your chest factor.

cidepix · « **Reply #18 on:** July 28, 2012, 07:12 »

Quote from: Wim on July 28, 2012, 02:00

Quote from: Lagereek on July 28, 2012, 00:51
Its a great shame, after all these years to see the MSG forum, slowly deteriorate into nothing but noobs complaining about rejections here and there. When are these ppl going to realize they have entered into a field normally associated with professionals and just accept it?

ya gotta love this guy.

Well, if you are starting a thread complaining about rejections (even if we assume you are totally right about your concerns) you are bound to get some replies that you don't like..

Just think what would happen if all of us started a thread everytime we get rejected at any given agency? Nope! I don't like it..

You may be "right of the rightest"

but believe it or not, we have all had enough of people complaining about rejections on these forums.. Noob or pro.. it doesn't matter..

Wim · « **Reply #19 on:** July 28, 2012, 07:50 »

Quote

Just think what would happen if all of us started a thread everytime we get rejected at any given agency? Nope! I don't like it..

If it would mostly be related to the same agency then it would get us somewhere no? One would conclude there is definitely something going on? Nah keep your mouth shut and just take everything, that's what I should do right.
I'm sure i could dig up a few posts from the both of you that would prove you're not the silent type either regarding reviews and sales.
So while we're at it let's stop talking about sales too, and bugs, and everything else that has been complained about. Let's just talk about how good some of you are at stock and how rich you have become.

As for Lagereek's post, no comment

Anyway, like heywoody said, I needed to get this of my chest and I'm done so Im' going to let this thread fade out (hopefully)

Thanks for your input guys, much appreciated

cathyslife · « **Reply #20 on:** July 28, 2012, 07:54 »

Quote from: Wim on July 27, 2012, 09:17

Hey hold on Barry haha, my eyes hurt reading your posts, I don't know where to look first

Lottery game mate, nothing more to it. Well that and some contributors being favoured of course.

And this happens at ALL the agencies.

ShadySue · « **Reply #21 on:** July 28, 2012, 07:55 »

Quote from: Lagereek on July 28, 2012, 00:51

Its a great shame, after all these years to see the MSG forum, slowly deteriorate into nothing but noobs complaining about rejections here and there. When are these ppl going to realize they have entered into a field normally associated with professionals and just accept it?

Physician, heal thyself.

suwanneeredhead · « **Reply #22 on:** July 28, 2012, 10:05 »

Wim, where are your port links?

Lagereek · « **Reply #23 on:** July 29, 2012, 00:05 »

By the sound of it, most noobs here are not even qualified to judge their own pictures, let alone acceptance or rejection reasons! however, there is an alternative!............., yep! turning burgers at Mcdonalds! fixed wages, free food,

JPSDK · « **Reply #24 on:** July 29, 2012, 00:54 »

Can we see some of the rejected pictures?

Anyway these rejection threads serve some good purposes:
The rejected photographer can rant and whine.
Other photographers can share his frustration.
Other again can brag about their own high acceptance rate.
Earnings can be mentioned.
Conspiracies can be mentioned.
Agencies can be compared.
Newbies can be mentioned. (Whoever they are, its not us, is it)

That kind of talk forms a dynamic forum, apperantly.

Problem is that it might all based on false premises, such as:
Acceptance of an image has to do known parameters such as quality.
The review process is just and constant.
The review process is important to the agencies.

My point is that the agencies get such an oversupply of images and photographers that it doesnt matter:
How they treat the single photographer.
If they miss some potential well selling pictures.
If they accept some potential not selling pictures.
If review is consistant.

Only in the long run, like a year ot so, it would begin to matter, if the reviewers were too random in their review. In such a case the picture pool would begin too deteriorate to a degree that it influenced the customers.
Shutterstock is not there at all, as it is now, the customers can easily find what they are happy to buy.

That is the agencies focus, happy customers. They give a crap, if some photographer feels he is badly treated.
And the agencies love these threads, because it takes focus away from is really going on.

That we are crowdsourced by big moneymachines, we have no rights, and no hopes for ever being treated just or have a reasonable share.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: SS: Best Microstock agency with the worst reviewers (Read 8367 times)

Wim

sharpshot

Wim

ShadySue

cidepix

spike

Wim

cidepix

ruxpriencdiam

Wim

Wim

ruxpriencdiam

Wim

Tryingmybest

Wim

Lagereek

Wim

heywoody

cidepix

Wim

cathyslife

ShadySue

suwanneeredhead

Lagereek

JPSDK

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors