MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: SS strict rejection policy  (Read 13058 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: September 15, 2022, 14:55 »
0
Just wanted to see if anyone had any insight on this - there's a photo I recently submitted - let's say it's a photo of a flower. I submit it, along with about 30 other photos (mix of commercial and editorial). Only THIS photo gets reviewed immediately - and immediately gets swiftly rejected due to "noise" (uh huh....  ::) ) The other photos stay in the queue and are later reviewed.

I see the rejection and get irritated lol, so I re-submit the photo of the flower. Again, immediately rejected for noise. For kicks, I submit some more photos. Those photos sit in the queue as they should.

I try it a third time - again, immediately rejected.

Anyone know what's going on here? It's so weird. It's just this one particular photo.


« Reply #51 on: September 16, 2022, 01:55 »
0
Just wanted to see if anyone had any insight on this - there's a photo I recently submitted - let's say it's a photo of a flower. I submit it, along with about 30 other photos (mix of commercial and editorial). Only THIS photo gets reviewed immediately - and immediately gets swiftly rejected due to "noise" (uh huh....  ::) ) The other photos stay in the queue and are later reviewed.

I see the rejection and get irritated lol, so I re-submit the photo of the flower. Again, immediately rejected for noise. For kicks, I submit some more photos. Those photos sit in the queue as they should.

I try it a third time - again, immediately rejected.

Anyone know what's going on here? It's so weird. It's just this one particular photo.

This kind of review behavior started already a few months ago: My images now always get reviewed in 2 "batches". I can submit for example 10 images and 4 will be reviewed at one point, and the other 6 at another time. Some think that the faster review is an AI review, though I doubt that. An AI review would still not take hours. But maybe there is still an AI involved in the review, by pre-sorting the images for rerview and there are two different review teams. Maybe a standart one that gets the images where the AI can't auto-detect any problems with things like focus or noise and the ones where the AI fails to make an assessment go to a more experienced review team? This is of course all pure speculation. All I can say for sure is that commercial images submitted get devided into two different review processes now, like it has always been for editorial and commercial images, but now there is a second commercial images category.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #52 on: September 16, 2022, 11:35 »
+1
Just wanted to see if anyone had any insight on this - there's a photo I recently submitted - let's say it's a photo of a flower. I submit it, along with about 30 other photos (mix of commercial and editorial). Only THIS photo gets reviewed immediately - and immediately gets swiftly rejected due to "noise" (uh huh....  ::) ) The other photos stay in the queue and are later reviewed.

I see the rejection and get irritated lol, so I re-submit the photo of the flower. Again, immediately rejected for noise. For kicks, I submit some more photos. Those photos sit in the queue as they should.

I try it a third time - again, immediately rejected.

Anyone know what's going on here? It's so weird. It's just this one particular photo.

Yes, AI makes the fast rejections, before the image gets to the next possible level. We don't know and there could be a second level of AI, or something that makes suggestions to human reviewers, so they can work faster, and make fast rejections.

Does the image pass anywhere else? Post the image here and get some answers when people can see the actual question. Otherwise we're just making generalized guesses. It's a flower. For all we know, the AI says, "It's another flower, just reject it for noise."

As far as I know and all the way back into the early years, clicking submitted before does nothing. Why should I tell them? Their image intake is easily hundreds of thousands a day. The cost of having someone look again at a rejected image, because it has a box checked, would be a constant recycling of the same images, which makes no sense. That's why they used to have a rule about not uploading the same images again, or there was a potential for the account to be locked. Now they just say, send it in again.

Suggestion, if the image is large, downsize to 6MP and upload again. Many of us have found that reducing an image to that, will suddenly make it not noisy or pixelated. The dumb AI will pass it.

Here's the complete rejection reason - Noise / Artifacts: Content contains noise, film grain, compression artifacts, pixelation, and/or posterization that detracts from the main subject.

Unless you get something special that just says NOISE, there are a number of reasons included in that.

« Reply #53 on: September 16, 2022, 12:43 »
0
Just wanted to see if anyone had any insight on this - there's a photo I recently submitted - let's say it's a photo of a flower. I submit it, along with about 30 other photos (mix of commercial and editorial). Only THIS photo gets reviewed immediately - and immediately gets swiftly rejected due to "noise" (uh huh....  ::) ) The other photos stay in the queue and are later reviewed.

I see the rejection and get irritated lol, so I re-submit the photo of the flower. Again, immediately rejected for noise. For kicks, I submit some more photos. Those photos sit in the queue as they should.

I try it a third time - again, immediately rejected.

Anyone know what's going on here? It's so weird. It's just this one particular photo.

Yes, AI makes the fast rejections, before the image gets to the next possible level. We don't know and there could be a second level of AI, or something that makes suggestions to human reviewers, so they can work faster, and make fast rejections.

Does the image pass anywhere else? Post the image here and get some answers when people can see the actual question. Otherwise we're just making generalized guesses. It's a flower. For all we know, the AI says, "It's another flower, just reject it for noise."

As far as I know and all the way back into the early years, clicking submitted before does nothing. Why should I tell them? Their image intake is easily hundreds of thousands a day. The cost of having someone look again at a rejected image, because it has a box checked, would be a constant recycling of the same images, which makes no sense. That's why they used to have a rule about not uploading the same images again, or there was a potential for the account to be locked. Now they just say, send it in again.

Suggestion, if the image is large, downsize to 6MP and upload again. Many of us have found that reducing an image to that, will suddenly make it not noisy or pixelated. The dumb AI will pass it.

Here's the complete rejection reason - Noise / Artifacts: Content contains noise, film grain, compression artifacts, pixelation, and/or posterization that detracts from the main subject.

Unless you get something special that just says NOISE, there are a number of reasons included in that.

When I get a noise rejection, I usually just run it through the Denoise filter in Affinity and, seven times out of ten, that does the trick.

« Reply #54 on: September 16, 2022, 12:50 »
0
on noise rejection, i upsize in ai giga, then reduce & it's usually accepted.  SS is anal about sky noise that others accept.  sometimes applying a mild blur to sky will be accepted

« Reply #55 on: September 16, 2022, 13:04 »
+1
Just wanted to see if anyone had any insight on this - there's a photo I recently submitted - let's say it's a photo of a flower. I submit it, along with about 30 other photos (mix of commercial and editorial). Only THIS photo gets reviewed immediately - and immediately gets swiftly rejected due to "noise" (uh huh....  ::) ) The other photos stay in the queue and are later reviewed.

I see the rejection and get irritated lol, so I re-submit the photo of the flower. Again, immediately rejected for noise. For kicks, I submit some more photos. Those photos sit in the queue as they should.

I try it a third time - again, immediately rejected.

Anyone know what's going on here? It's so weird. It's just this one particular photo.

This kind of review behavior started already a few months ago: My images now always get reviewed in 2 "batches". I can submit for example 10 images and 4 will be reviewed at one point, and the other 6 at another time. Some think that the faster review is an AI review, though I doubt that. An AI review would still not take hours. But maybe there is still an AI involved in the review, by pre-sorting the images for rerview and there are two different review teams. Maybe a standart one that gets the images where the AI can't auto-detect any problems with things like focus or noise and the ones where the AI fails to make an assessment go to a more experienced review team? This is of course all pure speculation. All I can say for sure is that commercial images submitted get devided into two different review processes now, like it has always been for editorial and commercial images, but now there is a second commercial images category.

I can confirm that it is an AI doing this.  When they first started the roll out, I had notifications that literally say "AI - Noise" or "AI - Exposure".  When I sent the screenshots of these denial reasons to a shutterstock expert, they said that AI review was part of a soft roll out that I've been so lucky (insert sarcasm here) to be a part of.  The only work around I've found so far is to submit as editorial.  They do get accepted as editorials, but it's ridiculous and frustrating.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #56 on: September 17, 2022, 09:48 »
0
When I get a noise rejection, I usually just run it through the Denoise filter in Affinity and, seven times out of ten, that does the trick.

Thank You, I bought Affinity and don't use it, but there are some other features that looked like they could be useful. I don't have Dx0 or any of the others, and I've never used noise reduction, ever, in the past. But now I'm going to give it a try.

I didn't know that Affinity had that!  8) 

« Reply #57 on: September 17, 2022, 14:33 »
0
"I notice there is a difference with rejections for me, compared to a few weeks ago. In my experience I have not gotten the instant rejections until now.  I had an image that had some light flares in it on a bike frame. I had intentionally enhanced the flares liking the effect.  It was rejected for noise. I resubmitted and it was rejected again for noise. I got rid of the flares in case they were the noise. Still rejected for noise. I reduced the size, ran it through noise software and always got the immediate noise rejection."

I'm not looking for a critique, just making a comment.  I uploaded 7 times, and got instant rejections. In the past, it was not instant unless the Qs were empty.  It doesn't seem to be getting a new look,  but just rejected for the same thing over and over.

I realize they have 80 gazillion images, but if a submitter is not able to ever correct an error or get another look.....
« Last Edit: September 18, 2022, 00:26 by beanstock »

« Reply #58 on: September 17, 2022, 19:14 »
+1
When I get a noise rejection, I usually just run it through the Denoise filter in Affinity and, seven times out of ten, that does the trick.

Thank You, I bought Affinity and don't use it, but there are some other features that looked like they could be useful. I don't have Dx0 or any of the others, and I've never used noise reduction, ever, in the past. But now I'm going to give it a try.

I didn't know that Affinity had that!  8) 

It's under the Filters tab, then "Noise". You can adjust the settings as how you want it to work.

« Reply #59 on: September 18, 2022, 07:18 »
+1
Actually, to prevent rejections, a good tip is to ADD noise to your photos (Gaussian 0.7).
Some tools (e.g. DXO) are too good at cleaning all noise and SS doesn't like it.
Moreover, other small imperfections (e.g. banding) can be masked with a bit of extra noise.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2022, 07:21 by Zero Talent »

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #60 on: September 18, 2022, 11:20 »
0
Actually, to prevent rejections, a good tip is to ADD noise to your photos (Gaussian 0.7).
Some tools (e.g. DXO) are too good at cleaning all noise and SS doesn't like it.
Moreover, other small imperfections (e.g. banding) can be masked with a bit of extra noise.

I'm so confused now, in order to pass and not get rejected for "focus" I need to add blur?  :o

Seriously I used the setting Auto on the new FUJI W3 and I don't even know what ISO the camera decided was right. Didn't look. Just learning and getting to know the camera.

The f/stops are limited on that model, f/3.7 f/5 and f/8, which if I choose ISO 100, will be interesting? Tripod will be involved. Also that camera has an option of ISO (Auto 400) which means the highest it will use is 400. The lowest setting is (Auto 200) if I don't go to fixed 100 ISO, which one of the settings I now have that as the default. Fine, I can do that.

Shutter speeds are different on Manual (if I should want to go to that) than they are on Night. Normally 1/4 to 1/1000, on a tripod night 3 seconds is the longest available shutter speed.

Toy Camera but it should be fun to make 3D images with a two lens camera.

« Reply #61 on: September 26, 2022, 08:48 »
0
Is anyone else having trouble getting horizontal and vertical versions of same subject approved? Many of my vertical images have been rejected for similar content lately.

« Reply #62 on: September 26, 2022, 10:35 »
+2
Is anyone else having trouble getting horizontal and vertical versions of same subject approved? Many of my vertical images have been rejected for similar content lately.

No, but what exactly are you trying to submit? It's not allowed to submit the same image as both vertical or horizontal image. (https://support.submit.shutterstock.com/s/article/Why-was-my-content-rejected-for-Similar-Content?language=en_US)  If you want to have them approved you have to re-arrange the scene, change the angle, etc. on both vertical and horizontal shoot and best not submit them at the same time. That usually works for me, but just shooting the same scene vertically and horizontally is not allowed on Shutterstock. Though I remember there was a time when they suggested doing exactly that in some of their older blog posts.  🤷

« Reply #63 on: September 26, 2022, 13:04 »
+3
Is anyone else having trouble getting horizontal and vertical versions of same subject approved? Many of my vertical images have been rejected for similar content lately.

No, but what exactly are you trying to submit? It's not allowed to submit the same image as both vertical or horizontal image. (https://support.submit.shutterstock.com/s/article/Why-was-my-content-rejected-for-Similar-Content?language=en_US [nofollow])  If you want to have them approved you have to re-arrange the scene, change the angle, etc. on both vertical and horizontal shoot and best not submit them at the same time. That usually works for me, but just shooting the same scene vertically and horizontally is not allowed on Shutterstock. Though I remember there was a time when they suggested doing exactly that in some of their older blog posts.  🤷

I think it's even adviced by some stock agencies to provide both horizontal and vertical image of same subject to offer options to byer, as long as it is two different exposures and not just cropped version of the same image.
Usually both versions are accepted, but now couple of those vertical versions keep getting rejected even if I resubmit them.

Actually if you scroll down the page in the link you provided there's:

Exceptions
* For photos and footage, 1 horizontal and 1 vertical orientation of the same unmoved subject is allowed.

« Reply #64 on: October 18, 2022, 09:20 »
0
Per an SS "expert" AI is being used...

"it appears that the use of AI has been extended and includes exposure. However, this review process is still not balanced well. We have made this clear to the Shutterstock technical team who should be working in the issue.

In your case the images will have been tagged once they are rejected by AI so if you want to resubmit again firstly you need to make a small edit which will remove the tag. Then you should check the Previously Submitted box in Notes to Reviewers on the Submit Content page."


I followed his advice and they still got rejected within seconds.  So far today, I've spent two hours going through rejected photos to re-submit.  Not sure it's worth it at this point. Other agencies are accepting the same images.

Here's something interesting; same image different file name (see attached)...




Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #65 on: October 18, 2022, 14:30 »
+3
Hogwash and BS alert, the "Experts" know no more than we do. I thought that program had ended? Too bad, it's a waste of time.

Hopefully people here will explain to you about resubmitting without changing anything, without checking some fools box and still having images accepted on the second or third attempt. What's the mythology behind that fact? One regular here has used the brute force approach  :) just keep uploading, up to five times, until they pass.

Yes you are correct AI of some sort, is used for an intake review, before anything gets anywhere near a review, that's not a secret it's obvious when the rejections take seconds and the reviews take days. AI and it was in the annual reports years ago, how SS uses a proprietary computerized review system for image intake.

My way of getting something accepted if the first time is a quick AI rejection, hasn't changed since the first images I uploaded for review in 2008, to pass the admissions test. Downsize and send it up again.



No changes to anything, except the size, renamed to the same name plus SS added to the end. No other changes or editing and I used Irfanview, not some fancy software.

"Experts" just make up answers the same as some people here, based on what they think they see. (me too) No one knows and SS hasn't been talking.

« Last Edit: October 19, 2022, 10:25 by Uncle Pete »

« Reply #66 on: October 18, 2022, 14:38 »
0
May be SS running out of space in AWS?


« Reply #67 on: October 20, 2022, 11:51 »
0

Personally, I am annoyed about the discussion of the technical quality of images anyway. What do buyers expect for the pennies they pay?

I think it's a huge mistake to worry about this as a contributor. If shutterstock doesn't want the images, then just sell them somewhere else - for more money.
I have to agree wholeheartedly with this post.
I have uploaded to SS, DT and AS quite a few images I took with my Apple 11 phone. They get accepted and they sell.
I now use the Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max with excellent results.
No, the phones will never replace professional grade cameras but they are excellent for stock.
Phones make the best cameras because they are always with you.
In today's environment good phone cameras make perfect sense and totally replace those not so cheap DX cameras. Why buy a Nikon Z30 for instance when your phone can already to the same job and probably better?
Of course opinions vary and this is my view.
So now I shoot with the Z9, Z7 II and the Apple Iphone. I think the other brands of phones and cameras are just as good but I'm used to Apple and Nikon.

I no longer use Wirestock. I recently submitted about 100 images with 90 of them rejected for "Poor aesthetic quality: Image aesthetics don't meet our requirements and the image cannot be accepted."
Well, poo, poo and stink on you. These images were accepted by the stock agencies I mentioned before.

The way I judge agencies is in how easy they are to work with.
Shuttertock ranks tops with me because they have the best seller support of all.
The best and about 90% of my sales are from SS.
A lot of people in this group have been really stupid, stupid for deleting their ports on SS.
If you think you are hurting SS because they gave you a bit of butt hurt then you are stupid!
SS does not even know you are gone and other people are making money that you could be making.

But to each his or her own, do as you have to do for yourself and ignore opinions that don't make sense.
The thing about Wirestock is why should I pay someone to sell my pictures when other stock agencies sell more for more?
Do as you have to do, and good luck to you.
If you don't like my opinions then block me. I don't care.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2022, 11:55 by UPLOAD-UPLOAD-UPLOAD »

« Reply #68 on: October 20, 2022, 15:35 »
0
...

I no longer use Wirestock. I recently submitted about 100 images with 90 of them rejected for "Poor aesthetic quality: Image aesthetics don't meet our requirements and the image cannot be accepted."
Well, poo, poo and stink on you. These images were accepted by the stock agencies I mentioned before.
...

i've basically stopped uploading to WS too - the biggest problem is when they reject for stupid reasons, i then need to weed out from the submission what they rejected so that i can submit them to other agencies.  combined with their incredibly slow review, what began as an intriguing alternative to adding metadata (worth the % they took) deteriorated

another reason was their refusal to admit their system had bugs. users were unwitting beta testers. plus they release (unanounced) 'upgrades' that trashes what previously worked.

« Reply #69 on: October 20, 2022, 16:10 »
0
Phones make the best cameras because they are always with you.

The best part is that the security will never chase the stock photographer when you take photos indoor with a phone.

« Reply #70 on: October 21, 2022, 01:59 »
0
I think SS is actively trying to cut down on the number of images. I just had an image rejected four times for four different reasons. Have had zero approvals this week. Maybe it's time to give up (even though I have said this many times and at this moment, this feels more like an addiction!)

« Reply #71 on: October 21, 2022, 02:19 »
0
There's an image of an illuminated cave. I submit. Gets rejected in one second because "Content is underexposed, overexposed, or is inconsistently exposed." It's a cave, it's meant to be dark with only the illuminated section exposed correctly (which it is) but try telling the AI that. Anyway, I take it on the chin and up the exposure and resubmit. Again - "Content is underexposed, overexposed, or is inconsistently exposed." I guess there's no winning.

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #72 on: October 21, 2022, 06:32 »
0
Just resubmit ad nauseum.

Usually takes about 3 or 4 times, my record is 7 times, which is all a waste of my time.

« Reply #73 on: October 21, 2022, 10:54 »
0
I think SS is actively trying to cut down on the number of images. I just had an image rejected four times for four different reasons. Have had zero approvals this week. Maybe it's time to give up (even though I have said this many times and at this moment, this feels more like an addiction!)

I agree, Shutterstock has gotten more critical in their image acceptance.
The way I see it you have two choices. Quit or learn.

Take the subject of grocery shoppers. It's popular today because of rising prices and shortages.
There are almost 80,000 images in this category. About typical for any category you chose.
Look at the images and compare them to yours. SS is not arbitrary in their rejections.
Yeah, the AI makes some real boners at times. Live with it.
Like I stated before SS could not care less if they lose you as a contributor, there are dozens eager and ready to take your place.
Learn from your rejections and roll with the blows.
Stock has become a real killer of a game.
Learn to compete  or lose out. Nobody but you cares.
Think about it. You are competing with thousands of images in any category you chose to submit.
Good luck

« Reply #74 on: October 21, 2022, 11:19 »
+2

Think about it. You are competing with thousands of images in any category you chose to submit.
Good luck

Wow, amazing, I never thought about it in over 10 years of selling images. I have to thank you for your infinite wisdom I guess   ::)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
12 Replies
5075 Views
Last post March 07, 2007, 11:39
by Lizard
21 Replies
5803 Views
Last post October 16, 2007, 12:56
by Beckyabell
14 Replies
5287 Views
Last post October 22, 2007, 14:07
by Dr Bouz
9 Replies
4328 Views
Last post March 14, 2008, 12:05
by madelaide
18 Replies
9305 Views
Last post August 03, 2010, 10:54
by lefty

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors