Just wanted to bring up this topic after reading the contributor who was banned... reading some posts here in these forums, I read that user Slovenian had also a warning, and I wonders are... how does this work? do you believe that all users who resubmit their rejections get warnings? do you remove rejected files from your SS account? do you wait some months to resubmit. No intention to create arguments, just bring up this matter into an independant forum to see people's opinion.

I'm not in SS so have no axe to grind, but I'm not sure everyone, except the totally anonymous, are going to post this info on an open forum.

Excuse me for being a complete retard but how/where do I add a note?

Thx lads

lol, doh, thx m8

Hey, I've been following you to see if it's still possible to make a living from this and you seem to be going in the right direction. I'm only 6 months in so still have a long way to go.
I still envy those who were in it from the start.

Thx again and take care

I received warning once, then I sent them explanation why I was doing that and after that I haven't problems with warnings..

I've received 2 warnings and never resubmitted after that. Anyone doing that after reading the thread regarding the ban must be insane (those that are resubmitting with a note with 100% certainty that their photo is technically acceptable are of course excluded)

Believe me, they'd never delete a great port, that's bringing them thousands of dollars monthly

That's the thing with SS though, as they make their money mainly from subs it's very difficult to pin down how much a contributor is making for them.  Just because you get a lot of downloads, doesn't mean they will lose any income if you are no longer on the site. The subscriber may just download from someone else. There's probably a tipping point somewhere where if enough images disappear it will be a problem for them, but any one contributor is a drop in the ocean. The moral being, play it by the book.

I'm quite sure SS appreciate contributors whose work is popular with buyers. That's why they reward them with higher commissions. With OD sales becoming ever more significant and now expanding into 'single image' sales the work of top-selling contributors will become even more valuable to them. They need to impress potential new customers as well as satisfy the needs of existing subscribers with the best collection of images they can present.

I did resubmit some stuff they rejected, even double resubmit, but only after a batch of new stuff and no warning here. I have a very high acceptance ratio tho... they probably do have some inside rankings system that might make a difference on how they relate to you. I remember reading the post of someone who has been a reviewer for years, saying that most photographers tend to be very consistent in their quality. Who has been submitting questionable stuff, usually goes on like that forever, the ones who have been uploading high quality stuff tend to do so consistently. It might save them time to be less thorough with the latter, and they are often very-very fast, it takes just a couple of hours even for bigger batches to be up for sale. That never happened when I was new there.

Do they have recognition software?

If this is leading to Bots doing reviews, please don't. 

If you meant do they know when people resubmit, it appears that's a yes. IS does also. Seems I made an error and sent in a shot, (to IS) that I thought had be removed for "new rules" Copyright issues, visible logo... the second time with the logo removed. Got a reply from Scout that I should not re-submit refused images that are marked "No Resubmit"

I know this is contrary to what they tell us, but up until a month ago, things that were refused to SS were still getting accepted on BS. Some days I wish they would open the bridge and end that game. I don't have high volume and not a big contributor, so I get to keep playing along with the split system, even though they claim the standards are identical?

When StockXpert added files to ThinkStock and then IS did a merge, a funny thing happened. If the file was a different size, the software didn't see it as the same. I have a stack of dupes on ThinkStock. No problem. I'm closing the StockXpert account (fingers crossed?) next month and after asking a few different ways, never got an answer how to add files that were excluded by the original merge. But it did tell me that they were looking at more than text matches, and since I was dumping reduced size images on StockXpert, because of the ruduced size payments, many were missed. That will all go away before next year. Done with StockXpert...

Don't know about others, but those two appear to have an archive of refused images. Also someone might keep in mind, that we can delete refused images and I'd guess that would mean the database no longer knows. Personally I think it's too much fooling around to put up refused images, considering it means risking a warning or account suspension, for what? A picture that might make a couple of bucks? Are we that starving and needy that it's worth risking a whole account over some crummy refused image that may never sell anyway?

SS:

Note:  Rejected photos will be automatically deleted after 7 days. But I see the Caption saved with the thumbnail, going back to the last time I cleaned house, and that's January 2010, who knows what else is saved, but with 15 million images, I'd think they purge now and then?

The focus thing isn't just "out of focus" here's what it says... Focus--Your image is not in focus or focus is not located where we feel it works best. So it might be tack sharp in spots and still get get refused, rejected or the one that seems kinder, Not Approved: Which brings up a small tip, for shallow depth of field on SS, focus to the front with the main subject sharp. For some reason they don't like soft focus in front of the subject and going back? Don't ask why, that's what they do...

See it's not as negative, it's not rejected, it is just Not Approved: 

Quote from: RacePhoto on October 05, 2011, 12:27

If you meant do they know when people resubmit, it appears that's a yes. IS does also. Seems I made an error and sent in a shot, (to IS) that I thought had be removed for "new rules" Copyright issues, visible logo... the second time with the logo removed. Got a reply from Scout that I should not re-submit refused images that are marked "No Resubmit"

If they do have that software, I'm not sure how good it is. I just notice I have in my port the same image twice. It has different sizes and one is editorial and the other's not. I don't know how that happened and don't know I they didn't noticed it either.

Just what I wrote, but I babble and go on and on sometimes.

They look at size and keywords in the caption. It's also possible that since it was accepted, there's no reason for them to monitor re-submits, only when someone is wasting their time sending the same failures, over and over.

If you make changes as a result of a refusal and re-submit with a note, I don't believe there is an issue.  Trying to sneak in a previously rejected file as a new submission is asking for trouble.

If you make changes as a result of a refusal and re-submit with a note, I don't believe there is an issue.  Trying to sneak in a previously rejected file as a new submission is asking for trouble.

I won't help people plug the reviews with 2nd and 3rd time rejected files. Whats wrong with them can't they understand, no? Then my reviews take longer when all the rejected submitts come back in.