MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Sutterstock Super Fast reviews!!  (Read 15440 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: October 01, 2008, 15:39 »
0
Looks like shutterstock is at it again!  Super fast reviews!


« Reply #1 on: October 01, 2008, 22:24 »
0
I concur. Shutterstock have been super-fast for me too over the past month.

I actually find many agency review times vary depending on what I've submitted. If they're people shots they get reviewed a lot quicker than isolated objects and landscapes. Not all agencies, but some.

« Reply #2 on: October 01, 2008, 22:44 »
0
I don't know if it is because I have submitted people images, but it took them about 4 hours to review my 24 images batch today. I am impressed. :o :o :o

« Reply #3 on: October 02, 2008, 00:56 »
0
Not only people. I sent a small batch of objects and it took them less than 24 hours (much of which were during the night). That's absolutely great!

Xalanx

« Reply #4 on: October 02, 2008, 02:06 »
0
Yea they reviewed in a few hours my batch of 40 photos and they're online now. Mostly people, but also some fruits. Very fast indeed.

« Reply #5 on: October 02, 2008, 02:53 »
0
Sometimes they take on new reviewers and the review times speed up.  I don't think it has anything to do with having people photos.  I don't do people photos and my reviews are a few hours at the moment.

« Reply #6 on: October 02, 2008, 09:15 »
0
Shutterstock added roughly 276,000 photos last month. That's 50,000 more than any microstock agency has done in a single month over the past year. If they're reviewing faster it makes sense that they get more into the portfolio in the month, but to do that something must have changed. Extra reviewers is a logical assumption.

Fotolia and Dreamstime also added a high quantity (relative to their usual quantities) this month, but iStock only added just over 30,000 !! 

Interesting stuff.

« Reply #7 on: October 02, 2008, 09:23 »
0
wow, that is crazy.  Istock only added 30,000 and shutterstock 276,000  That is a BIG difference.  Interesting numbers and interesting to think about where this will end up in another year.

Seems like istock is the first to say that they are more interested taking less photos and being picky, whereas it seems shutterstock is trying to get as many photos as possible.

I don't know that iStock is actually any more strict in their quality control, at least not much more strict - but their strict upload limits in a way, (perhaps hopefully for iStock) make people choose their top images first and upload only those.

« Reply #8 on: October 02, 2008, 12:43 »
0
Must be my day not to complain..   with SS...  I'm almost always reviewed in 24 hours or less.   Can't complain about them.  8)=tom

...then again, I never upload large batches there. with SS  it's less, more often for me.

« Reply #9 on: October 02, 2008, 15:59 »
0
Superfast alright. Superfast REJECTIONS. So far maintaining 95% rejection rate of late. Don't know what . is going on. Very frustrating.

« Reply #10 on: October 02, 2008, 16:05 »
0
Fotolia and Dreamstime also added a high quantity (relative to their usual quantities) this month, but iStock only added just over 30,000 !! 

Reading it again I need to clarify: iStock did add only 30,000 last month (according to my observations of the figures on their front page) but that's unusual for them. Their average over the previous 12 months is 120,000. Last month was unusually low (or they forgot to update the figure on the front page).

« Reply #11 on: October 02, 2008, 19:23 »
0
What . is going on at SS? Have they got some new software that rejects everything.

I cannot believe what they are rejecting, it is insulting.

« Reply #12 on: October 03, 2008, 01:22 »
0
Superfast, thanks SS!

« Reply #13 on: October 03, 2008, 02:54 »
0
Fotolia and Dreamstime also added a high quantity (relative to their usual quantities) this month, but iStock only added just over 30,000 !! 

Reading it again I need to clarify: iStock did add only 30,000 last month (according to my observations of the figures on their front page) but that's unusual for them. Their average over the previous 12 months is 120,000. Last month was unusually low (or they forgot to update the figure on the front page).

or maybe they emptied out a bunch of non sellers.  Perhaps this month is 1 year since the dollar bin started and all the non-sellers got kicked out.

« Reply #14 on: October 03, 2008, 08:20 »
0
ShutterStock's great with their reviews. I've been impressed with the speed there over the years since in general reviews take no longer than 3-4 days, and often it's less than 2. Sometimes it's even less than a day. A week is considered unusual... (but I usually chalk it up to something unexpected on their end) but then on other sites you can expect a week or two. Or in the case of BigStock 3-4 weeks and and bizarre rejections.

graficallyminded

« Reply #15 on: October 03, 2008, 08:24 »
0
They must have just hired more reviewers - I'm loving the speed.  I now have to calculate my uploads more carefully, as to figure when the images are going to be live (for the best exposure)

Xalanx

« Reply #16 on: October 03, 2008, 14:05 »
0
What . is going on at SS? Have they got some new software that rejects everything.

I cannot believe what they are rejecting, it is insulting.

That's strange, my approval rate is as always at SS, around 90%. Even more I would say. And most of the rejections are for "similar photo".


RacePhoto

« Reply #17 on: October 03, 2008, 23:42 »
0
Superfast alright. Superfast REJECTIONS. So far maintaining 95% rejection rate of late. Don't know what . is going on. Very frustrating.

I had noise rejections, focus rejections, or not focused where they thought it should be. Then I read on the forums that downsizing the images would make them more likely to be approved. Since then I started following that advise and pictures passed. No rejections for noise or focus anymore. They still reject crap and if I tried to get something through that I should have kept at home, they bounced it.  :D

Try downsizing to 2100 x 1600 Aprox, which is just over 4MP and maybe you'll get a surprise.

My mistake, read my notes wrong, and entered my DT minimum 3MP size. Thanks for the correction Tazzy. It should read 2460 x 1640!  Which means just use 2500 for the longest side on landscape photos. It does help to reduce the size if you are getting noise and soft image rejections.

Of course if they are rejecting for lighting and the subject matter, no one can help.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2008, 01:06 by RacePhoto »

« Reply #18 on: October 04, 2008, 06:43 »
0
Superfast alright. Superfast REJECTIONS. So far maintaining 95% rejection rate of late. Don't know what . is going on. Very frustrating.

I had noise rejections, focus rejections, or not focused where they thought it should be. Then I read on the forums that downsizing the images would make them more likely to be approved. Since then I started following that advise and pictures passed. No rejections for noise or focus anymore. They still reject crap and if I tried to get something through that I should have kept at home, they bounced it.  :D

Try downsizing to 2100 x 1600 Aprox, which is just over 4MP and maybe you'll get a surprise.

Of course if they are rejecting for lighting and the subject matter, then no one can help.

If you size to 2100 x 1600, that is 3,360,000 or 3.36MP which would not be big enough if the minimum requirement is 4MP  To get 4MP, you need to make the longest side 2500 which would make the other side around 1667, at least for my files.  That would give you 4,167,500 or 4.16MP


RacePhoto

« Reply #19 on: October 19, 2008, 20:43 »
0
They must have just hired more reviewers - I'm loving the speed.  I now have to calculate my uploads more carefully, as to figure when the images are going to be live (for the best exposure)

And when you do, they will take until Monday and be in with the rest of the people who wanted that day.  ;D  Love the speed also.

Uploaded Saturday, rejected on Saturday, no wasting time.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2008, 00:12 by RacePhoto »

« Reply #20 on: October 20, 2008, 00:13 »
0
If I'm not mistaken, reviews were super quick for few days at the beginning of October and have since returned to usual 2 day period.

« Reply #21 on: October 20, 2008, 01:29 »
0
Seems like istock is the first to say that they are more interested taking less photos and being picky, whereas it seems shutterstock is trying to get as many photos as possible.

That doesn't mean that SS takes anything. They singled out the borderline cases (noise-wise) flawlessly in my recent stuff.

I don't know that iStock is actually any more strict in their quality control, at least not much more strict - but their strict upload limits in a way, (perhaps hopefully for iStock) make people choose their top images first and upload only those.

Not sure about that. I was thrown back to 15 per week and I gave up synchronizing my batches at IS with other agencies long ago. They don't like my "creative" shots that do well elsewhere and I got many rejects lately for keywords too. Bottom line is I'm not going to keyword and reduce vibrance especially for IS since it takes too much time. My earnings at IS fell below those at BigStock so I just cash in now and then and leave them in their blissful opinion that they are God's gift to stock. I do stock for fun, and IS is no fun any more.

They should watch out if SS adds a tenfold of photos per month as they do. SS might beat them by sheer volume, especially since most upload the same stuff to SS and to IS. Perhaps IS relies more and more on its exclusives.

« Reply #22 on: October 20, 2008, 01:35 »
0
Superfast at reviewing may they be, but the sales are going to hell. I did not sell a single photo for the whole weekend. Never have I had two zero sales days before! And I have had sales almost everywhere else over the weekends recently.

« Reply #23 on: October 20, 2008, 01:52 »
0
Superfast at reviewing may they be, but the sales are going to hell. I did not sell a single photo for the whole weekend. Never have I had two zero sales days before! And I have had sales almost everywhere else over the weekends recently.

One single download this weekend :(

« Reply #24 on: October 20, 2008, 02:49 »
0
I haven't noticed a change in the number of rejections lately.  However, I have noticed a decrease in the number of downloads as well.  I haven't been with SS for very long, but I had several days of double digits downloads (some even more than 20) in August, which was supposed to be a slow month.  This month, I haven't had more than 14 downloads in one day, even though I have been uploading a few new illustrations and photos each week. 

I'm glad to see it's not just me.

Inge

« Reply #25 on: October 20, 2008, 05:13 »
0
Exactly - August which is said to be a slow month was much better than either September or October. In September SS even was not my best earner.

RacePhoto

« Reply #26 on: October 22, 2008, 13:03 »
0
If I'm not mistaken, reviews were super quick for few days at the beginning of October and have since returned to usual 2 day period.

Must be depending on the flow of uploads. More files to review, because some people like to upload on "special" days  :D and less on the other days?

I did something I've never done at any site before. I re-submitted a photo to SS yesterday. I made a note about why it was rejected, that I checked the white balance and pointed out that the "uneven lighting" was because it was an isolation! Less than 24hrs and it's up for sale. I fully expected that I was wrong and it would be rejected again, and that's that.

Nice to see that explaining the picture does make a difference.

Edit: Not going to quit my day job, or my night job, or my weekend work, but... the photo has sold four times this week. Nice that the second review was acceptable.  ;D
« Last Edit: October 29, 2008, 16:14 by RacePhoto »


« Reply #27 on: October 25, 2008, 09:58 »
0
Dont you know that? ;)

lagereek

« Reply #28 on: November 08, 2008, 06:42 »
0
Yes very fast turns, editing etc.  Funny! everything SS does seem to come out on top and good, must be a very great Admin running this.

Compared to some others, who cant even punch their way out of a paper bag.

« Reply #29 on: November 19, 2008, 05:15 »
0
Usually my app. rate on SS is about 90 %...

But last batch of 13 images, they rejected me all 13...

Similar experience these days...?

« Reply #30 on: November 19, 2008, 06:47 »
0
Usually my app. rate on SS is about 90 %...

But last batch of 13 images, they rejected me all 13...

Similar experience these days...?


This was rejected for "lighting or WB?"  I know it is trite but lighting and white balance look fine to me - only place I could add light is to the stems and leaves and that would only detract from the shot!)

http://eu.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/lffile/lffile0811/lffile081100011/3852319.jpg

fred

RacePhoto

« Reply #31 on: November 19, 2008, 11:45 »
0
Monday: Confirmation of upload in 30 minutes by email. Email notice of all files accepted in 30 hours.

Two things that SS does right besides fast reviews, they send email notices of received and reviewed.

CofkoCof

« Reply #32 on: November 20, 2008, 15:26 »
0
Just had a batch rejected in less than 2 hours :D Seems like you have to tick the illustration check box and select illustrations category for renders now. Something new I guess, never got this rejection reason before.

« Reply #33 on: November 20, 2008, 16:55 »
0
Me too. Superfast reviews = superfast rejections for me.

shank_ali

« Reply #34 on: November 23, 2008, 14:24 »
0
wow, that is crazy.  Istock only added 30,000 and shutterstock 276,000  That is a BIG difference.  Interesting numbers and interesting to think about where this will end up in another year.

Seems like istock is the first to say that they are more interested taking less photos and being picky, whereas it seems shutterstock is trying to get as many photos as possible.

I don't know that iStock is actually any more strict in their quality control, at least not much more strict - but their strict upload limits in a way, (perhaps hopefully for iStock) make people choose their top images first and upload only those.
eh, i can't agree with your last paragraph.Why would any artist  not upload there best work to any of their respective agencies.
Istockphoto is guilty of letting far to many files from the same shoot into the library and perhaps 2 might sell and 5-8 just sit there doing "sweet fanny adam"
I was surprised when i saw the size of SS library and if it continues i see only problems from the buyers perspective in regards of searching the library for the correct image.

shank_ali

« Reply #35 on: November 23, 2008, 14:26 »
0
BTW Many exclusives on istock can upload and get their files accepted within 24 HRS  and sell !


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
13 Replies
5893 Views
Last post June 25, 2008, 17:29
by pieman
12 Replies
7137 Views
Last post March 17, 2010, 02:53
by hofhoek
4 Replies
3708 Views
Last post May 27, 2012, 14:28
by sam100
2 Replies
2379 Views
Last post May 02, 2014, 04:08
by ruigsantos
1 Replies
2968 Views
Last post July 14, 2014, 08:38
by mojaric

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors