Author Topic: StockXpert nightmare (Read 13273 times)

sam100 · « **on:** January 06, 2008, 12:06 »

Hi,

This is a rant, a big rant.

Almost 70 % of about 200 of my latest batches rejected for :
Background not white
noise

checking in photoshop at 100 % magnification i can't see any noise.. and i mean NO noise.
We all know how picky SS is on noise issues... they haven't rejected a single one from those batches.
checking background color it shows perfect 255/255/255 white.

If they want me to take my business elsewere, than just say so... don't let me spend hours uploading for nothing.

Patrick.

lobby · « **Reply #1 on:** January 06, 2008, 12:17 »

agreeeeeee

hi patric

i agree with stupid rejections from StockXpert

that's why i repost this i've just posted in StockXpert section....

"This is my LAST mail to StockXpert

"hi

I think there is a big problem with your rewiers is there any one checkig them or what??

rejecting images with "not isolated as stated" what's that new???

Why don't you check first your data base with the word "isolated" to find images from your rewiers that are not isolated or on white background at all.

You can't have reviers that are also photographers in your site to judge others people work.

be serious for a while

I'm waiting my images to be
rewied again....

OK??
"

I've been arouny in StockXpert forum and i find out that there are photographers that are rewiers also.!!!

My last batch was 92 images witch were waiting from 20 december to reject them in 6 of january

In this batch i have about 80% percent acceptance in all 18 sites i submit my images, even in

istock i had the best acceptance ever with this batch of images, but for StockXpert were't ok for "bull crap"

reasons.

Well dear fellows some time we have to think about bad behavor of some sites like StockXpert.

They forget that they are getting money from others people work so the first think they have to

do is to respect those from whom they are getting their money from"

cathyslife · « **Reply #2 on:** January 06, 2008, 12:24 »

I posted this on the Microstock forum also.

I too have experienced rejections for noise when I know there is none.
Not only at StockXpert but at all the microstock sites.

I understand your frustration. Did you upload a whole bunch at one
time? In my experience, I have had better luck uploading smaller
batches at a time. 5 or 10 photos, maybe. I know it takes much longer,
but there have been nightmare tales from many contributors where
reviewers will find fault with one or two photos, get lazy and hit the
reject button for all of the batch.

Just a suggestion.

sam100 · « **Reply #3 on:** January 06, 2008, 12:26 »

I agree, they are biting the hand that feeds them.

I don't handle mass rejections well, so i am considering closing my account there if this behavior doesn't change.

Patrick.

CCK · « **Reply #4 on:** January 06, 2008, 12:37 »

Eleven of my 36 rejected, including my SS and IS bestsellers. IMHO some of the rejections without merit, some perhaps with merit. Rejections you don't agree with is unfortunately part of the microstock business, we have to live it, but a microstock site where the reviewers make a mess of things will certainly do a lot of harm to the site.

sam100 · « **Reply #5 on:** January 06, 2008, 12:40 »

I haven't been uploading there for months due to the same problems.

About 2 months ago i restarted uploading and until 4 days ago there weren't any problems, just the occasional reject... and then, mass rejections.

I was in the process of updating my gallery over there with the picture also submitted on other sites.

But i have the strong feeling they won't be seeing any more from me until this issue is solved and handled properly.

ps : even Laurin Rinder is a victim of them, whole batches rejected, just read it on another forum.

jorgeinthewater · « **Reply #6 on:** January 06, 2008, 13:32 »

I have tried 4 times to be accepted and keep getting rejected. That is
4 months waiting!!

I mean come on I got into SS on my first try and they
are supposed to be the toughest! $:-\$ I used my best sellers on SS and IS
DT and BigStock everything including the kitchen sink and they still say that
my images are not WORTHY of their great site.

If I ever try again and
get in they better guarantee 100 downloads a day for all this trouble.

vphoto · « **Reply #7 on:** January 06, 2008, 14:04 »

I am not happy about StockXpert too. I have applied on 24 of December (3rd try). On 29th got message I need to send to them 5 more images (they could not decide on first 5) and that
they will be back in a few days. Not heard from them since. I got accepted everywhere except them.

vphoto

Kngkyle · « **Reply #8 on:** January 06, 2008, 14:23 »

I have had no real problems with StockXpert reviews. Hell they even accepted some of my sunset pictures. I thought for sure those were going to get the "thanks, but we're not looking for such images at this time" rejection. I suppose you could always just resubmit ones that you think have been rejected in error.

dbvirago · « **Reply #9 on:** January 06, 2008, 16:27 »

KK, I think that's part of the problem, the extreme disparity in results in peoples submissions. Some are getting fast reviews, others take weeks. Some get high acceptance and others get slammed.

Here's what I think happened. Back when this roller coaster started, one guy went on vacation and another got sick. Then reviews stopped and were backed up for months. This tells us they had 2 people doing all or most reviews. Then they quickly brought in a lot of people to pick up the slack and the backlog got cleared quickly - mostly by mass rejections. This tells us they had a lot of new inexperienced people whose mission was simply to clean up the mess asap.

There are many people on many threads on many forums making the same complaints, including SXs own. SteveOh drops in occasionally and says he'll look into it, or post your image on the critique forum, but the problem continues.

Right now I am doing very few submissions there and am getting above average acceptance, but I am also not submitting anything with a building visible. Even so, I got a rejection for a row of chairs for no property release. I'm sure the owner of these chairs could identify them, but as I said in another post, that could be said for almost all shots on all stock sites. How many images have nothing in them that no one owns or could identify.

There is something else going on here. If they had these policies from day one, they wouldn't have anything to sell.

DanP68 · « **Reply #10 on:** January 06, 2008, 17:04 »

There is an extreme disparity, and that is the problem. A few very good photographers on the Micropayment Yahoo group also were recently burned by mass rejections - like several hundred if I remember correctly. These are advanced photographers with established track records, simply moving proven portfolios over to StockXpert - or trying to.

They denied 2/3 of my initial uploads after I was accepted, and all of those files were either on IS, SS, or both. It ticked me off, but I stuck with them. Since then, they have been accepting most of what I send to them. So there you go - no consistency.

But the biggest problem I have with them is, despite so many people telling me they are a great site for contributors, I cannot make a sale with them. They are something like 2% of my total income the last 60 days, and I have not made a single sale there in almost a month. I'm quickly closing in on the $500 mark at SS, and I blew past the 500 dl mark at IS a month ago. StockXpert - $10. They are way behind FT, BigStock, and DT in my portfolio income. Well, they are ahead of Lucky Oliver at least.

dbvirago · « **Reply #11 on:** January 07, 2008, 06:09 »

Barely ahead of LO for me. Only canstock and FP doing worse. That's why I'm not willing to go to much trouble there.

steve-oh · « **Reply #12 on:** January 07, 2008, 11:10 »

Hi guys,

First the isolation issue.

If in your keywords or description you say the image is isolated against white and it isn't, then it will be rejected. You need to make sure the whole white isolated background is pure white (255, 255, 255). Make sure there are no off-white spots any where, no matter how small.

Second, noise.

Still trying to iron this one out. Seems noise is legitimate in some but perhaps not others.

Third, mass rejection.

There is no mass rejection button. They have to review one image at a time. The fact that they can reject an image where there is a minute area of non white or that they might be a little strict on noise means they are looking closely at each image. Maybe too closely ...

Fourth, everything else:

Ok. Here's the deal. When the site first started we had two reviewers. The great thing about this is that it yields extreme consistency. The bad thing about it is that when one goes down and then two, images don't get reviewed.

Of course we had to hire new reviewers. We did so. We trained them, but experience is always the best teacher.

Unfortunately, there is no microstock image reviewer university that we can just recruit reviewers from and drop into place at full speed. When ever a new reviewer comes onto the team, there is a learning process that involves training and gaining experience. It's about trying to balance their innate subjective tendencies with objective guidelines.

Yes. We've tightened up our property release policy. This is new to our old reviewers and new reviewers. They are learning the new policy. Training cannot account for every possible scenario, so again, the must learn through experience. Unfortuantely, there will probably be some inconsistencies in the review process because of this.

And people make mistakes. Don't take the rejections personally. Just let us know about it.

The site is growing so fast, unfortunately, learning and gaining experience can't happen as fast.

And I must say, as for the number of images we review in a day versus the number of complaints we get, I'd say we are doing pretty good, but we always strive to be better.

Thanks!
-Steve

Fred · « **Reply #13 on:** January 07, 2008, 12:04 »

Quote from: steve-oh on January 07, 2008, 11:10

...And I must say, as for the number of images we review in a day versus the number of complaints we get, I'd say we are doing pretty good, but we always strive to be better...

Do you track the number of complaints against the number of images reviewed? Can you give us some numbers? fred

mangia · « **Reply #14 on:** January 07, 2008, 12:23 »

This image was rejected by StockXpert and it is sold more than 500 times on other stock agencies.

Look that on this way - Reviewers are humans and they can make mistakes. Unfortunately they made mistake in my case and I believe in yours.

Best regards

pixelbrat · « **Reply #15 on:** January 07, 2008, 14:56 »

Steve-Oh -

If a file has technical flaws, such as not properly isolated or excessive noise, fine. But to get mass rejections on numerous files with a reason of "we don't think this would be good stock" just doesn't make much sense to me. Images that have already been great sellers at other sites are getting rejected. IMHO, reviewers should stick with reviewing images on a technical level and let the consumer decide if it's worth downloading or not.

Again, just my opinion.

mangia · « **Reply #16 on:** January 07, 2008, 15:49 »

^^^ Good idea. maybe they should announce some kind of trial period. For example if image hasn't been downloaded in last 12 months they can decrease price to 1$ for all sizes and it should also be limited for example 2 months. After that time it should go to history - DELETE.

anonymous · « **Reply #17 on:** January 08, 2008, 09:03 »

Quote from: pixelbrat on January 07, 2008, 14:56

Steve-Oh -

If a file has technical flaws, such as not properly isolated or excessive noise, fine. But to get mass rejections on numerous files with a reason of "we don't think this would be good stock" just doesn't make much sense to me. Images that have already been great sellers at other sites are getting rejected. IMHO, reviewers should stick with reviewing images on a technical level and let the consumer decide if it's worth downloading or not.

Again, just my opinion.

...and a great opinion it is. Once again, let the "buyers" determine what is "stock" and what is not. Out of 18 images submitted 6 weeks ago (and yes I understand the wait period), 2 were accepted, the rest "weren't stock". The irony is that most were from the same shoot...slight differences on angles. The two that were accepted were rather cheesy "Olan Mills" type portraits, while the others explored a bit more creative angles. Perhaps I've answered my own question (shoot cheesy portraits

).

Needless to say, as a result, I'm holding back uploading very much until the "problem(s)" gets straightened out. And to boot, not 1 sale in the past 3 1/2 weeks...all other sites started rocking the day after Christmas.

anonymous · « **Reply #18 on:** January 08, 2008, 09:05 »

Quote from: mangia on January 07, 2008, 12:23

This image was rejected by StockXpert and it is sold more than 500 times on other stock agencies.

Look that on this way - Reviewers are humans and they can make mistakes. Unfortunately they made mistake in my case and I believe in yours.

Best regards

..by the way, love this shot. Doing a piece for NOAA and may use your "not stock" image for the site...will let you know if I do.

LanaLanglois · « **Reply #19 on:** January 08, 2008, 13:21 »

I was very surprised to read this about StockXpert !

For me StockXpert is a site where I get very few rejections since the start and it has not changed for me. I cannot say neither that my sales are lower than before, but you know... little less than just a little is less noticeable than less than much... lol

photojay · « **Reply #20 on:** January 24, 2008, 15:31 »

Well, this was an enlightening thread... I just got accepted to StockXpert (first try) and currently have 150 images in the queue and at least that many in my briefcase waiting to be transferred at 50 per day. It will be interesting to see what happens when they get reviewed. I think I will continue to upload what I currently have until I see what happens and take it from there. I see that StockXpert is in the "big 6", which is strange! I figured BigStock or Fotolia wout be above it, but I only have about 500 images in my portfolios.

Phil · « **Reply #21 on:** January 24, 2008, 23:33 »

Quote from: photojay on January 24, 2008, 15:31

Well, this was an enlightening thread... I just got accepted to StockXpert (first try) and currently have 150 images in the queue and at least that many in my briefcase waiting to be transferred at 50 per day. It will be interesting to see what happens when they get reviewed. I think I will continue to upload what I currently have until I see what happens and take it from there. I see that StockXpert is in the "big 6", which is strange! I figured BigStock or Fotolia wout be above it, but I only have about 500 images in my portfolios.

they are 2nd-3rd worst for rejections for me, and of course review times are a joke, I've had faster reviews at alamy.

But re big 6. some people rave about how well they do and how it is up and coming, it is their number 3 etc. Personally it has been declining since september and it will be continue to be number 7 for me in january with less than 3% of earnings.

sgraphics · « **Reply #22 on:** February 04, 2008, 09:01 »

Strange hearing all these complaints about StockXpert... I've been with them since early 2006, and I'm at 98% approval rate - each month I have a BME with them - things just get better and better.

Peter · « **Reply #23 on:** February 05, 2008, 06:34 »

Hm.....

I am totaly new to StockXpert, and I uploaded only 1 image, to test it:

http://stockxpert.com/browse.phtml?f=view&id=9213092

I did not isolate this with any isolation tool, only I adjusted levels. So there must be areas at the bottom of the image that are not exacltly white. And it is aproved, so I do not know what to think? I have about 2000 images, so I am thinking should I upload them to StockXpert or not. If there will be 1000 rejected, than I would not. I should try another one for test.

massman · « **Reply #24 on:** February 05, 2008, 06:41 »

Chode

If you don't upload your images you will have only 1 image in your StockXpert gallery.

If you you upload 2000 and have a 50% rejection rate, you will have 1000 images in your StockXpert gallery.

What have you got to loose? Nothing except $$$.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: StockXpert nightmare (Read 13273 times)

sam100

lobby

cathyslife

sam100

CCK

sam100

jorgeinthewater

vphoto

Kngkyle

dbvirago

DanP68

dbvirago

steve-oh

Fred

mangia

pixelbrat

mangia

anonymous

anonymous

LanaLanglois

photojay

Phil

sgraphics

Peter

massman

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors