I agree it seems to be too variable, one batch almost all accepted then a whole batch rejected for not suitable for stock. Seems a bit like a lucky dip to me.

I had exactly the same experience. The worst was that they accepted my borderline shots and they rejected my good sellers at other sites. I don't think it's their policy, I just think their reviewers are uneducated as to what the site really wants. I will just withhold uploads now till they streamlined their reviewers team.

It's normal Nebuto because your images aren't live yet. They are gathering the images and the second phase of VMP should launch later this month.

Well, I have been anxiously awaiting Veer going live...it looked like it was going to be a good place to be selling photos, for several reasons.

I finally got my first 10 approved and have been submitting more.

I am so disappointed now (again). I have as many rejected as approved. As I scanned through the rejection reasons, composition was one reason. Two photos were rejected because "The subject matter is outside of Veer Marketplace's current needs" and yet one of them I already submitted and it was approved. This second one is the same subject, just a whole different view of the object. The second one is the same subject as the first one submitted and approved, the first was in vertical format and the second in horizontal format. Same rejection reason "The subject matter is outside of Veer Marketplace's current needs".

I give up for now. I just don't think I'm good enough. 

My current rejection rate is about 25 percent which is not great but ok. What I don't like is the pattern I see. It seems like Veer employs two reviewers with distinctly different tastes. One of them loves my work and the other rejects almost everything.

A little more predictability would be great.

I give up for now. I just don't think I'm good enough. 

No, you should never think that way. Especially with Veer this being so new.
Just keep submitting and try to grasp the kind of shots Veer likes of your portfolio.
We all have our own site that "thinks we are not good enough", whether it's SS, IS, FT, or whatnot.
You know from your own experience with the Big 6 , one should never deem rejections from one as an indication of "truth" written in stone.
Keep going  cclapper 

Great advice, Perseus.

Not only that, I was just browsing the Veer site, and noticed Cathleen Clapper on the "Latest Portfolios" page: http://ideas.veer.com/portfolios

Doesn't seem like a site that doesn't want you, Cathleen. 

@whatalife...sorry to hear about your rejections.

Something is going on...I hope once the site is up and running and everything has settled in, we can give all those rejections another shot. Do they have a second chance department?

Doesn't seem like a site that doesn't want you, Cathleen.

I have a feeling that just shuffles through all the portfolios.

I like Veer a lot

I didn't have any problems with the upload process
I actually uploaded all my illustrations, and had 100% approval...0 rejection...

the point that OP and others have been making is that veer rejects images that the big  5 accept [and sell], yet they don't have the courtesy to give a decent review -- "not suitable for stock"  is BS  - my application was rejected without any meaningfull comments - and they expect i'll just send them another set w/o knowing what they're looking for?    i dont have time for guessing games with an unproven nano-stock site

 i'm willing to try new sites, and will give them awhile t meet their claims; i still have portfolios at cut, most,panther, albumo, tho none of them have sold much; i still upl to yay since the submission is easy, again, even tho sales are slow.

but it's nt worth spending a lot of time uploading when there are batch rejections.  i've stopped upl to FT for that reason, and 123 has been getting there

s

cascoly sorry, i have to disagree on 3 counts
in the first place, Veer is NOT an unproven nano-stock site.
in the second place, you just said you stopped upl to FT for the same reason. so maybe you should ditch the ego and start looking for valid reasons to the rejections.
finally, even if Veer is unproven nano-stock site as you incorrectly call them, i would prefer a new and unproven site to be strict so that they can indeed produce sales , rather than have them give every tom , dick and harry 100% approval like all the previous new sites. after all, it's sales we are looking for, not 100% approval.

Actually this is the full text of the rejection I believe cascoly is referring to....

Rejection comments
Not suitable for stock � lack of commercial appeal. Issues with composition, subject matter and technical quality- not quite suitable for Veer Marketplace.


I think if the rejected images were technically good then the reason should just be....not quite suitable for Veer Marketplace ............I believe I've seen one of the other agencies do something like (though your image is technically sound its not quite what we are looking for)

I just had 6 of 11 images rejected for the above reason and the same images were all accepted at the Big 6 and a number of them have had sales. (the other 5 disappeared somewhere, missing in action, sent an email)

I've had some batches with 90%+ approval and others with MUCH, much less. I've learned to just move on and submit the next batch and since I am submitting to about 10 or so agencies, the images they rejected are still out there selling at one place or another.

-Don

Quote from: cascoly on July 28, 2009, 16:48

the point that OP and others have been making is that veer rejects images that the big  5 accept [and sell], yet they don't have the courtesy to give a decent review -- "not suitable for stock"  is BS  - my application was rejected without any meaningfull comments - and they expect i'll just send them another set w/o knowing what they're looking for?    i dont have time for guessing games with an unproven nano-stock site

 i'm willing to try new sites, and will give them awhile t meet their claims; i still have portfolios at cut, most,panther, albumo, tho none of them have sold much; i still upl to yay since the submission is easy, again, even tho sales are slow.

but it's nt worth spending a lot of time uploading when there are batch rejections.  i've stopped upl to FT for that reason, and 123 has been getting there

s

in the first place, Veer is NOT an unproven nano-stock site.
in the second place, you just said you stopped upl to FT for the same reason. so maybe you should ditch the ego and start looking for valid reasons to the rejections.
finally, even if Veer is unproven nano-stock site as you incorrectly call them, i would prefer a new and unproven site to be strict so that they can indeed produce sales , rather than have them give every tom , dick and harry 100% approval like all the previous new sites. after all, it's sales we are looking for, not 100% approval.

ego is irrelevant -- if you read my posts you'd see i SPECIFICALLY said that the images in questions were accepted and sell at the other major sites.   my complaint was when a site declares those SALABLE images to 'not be stock worthy' , it's up to them to describe what makes their reviews so different -- therwise it's just a waste of time trying to guess what they want.  a great example was LO - their reviews were almost always personalized and were definitely wrth paying attention to.  generic rejects in bulk just show lazy or underpaid reviewers

i've got no problem if a site is restrictive, the proof is in the sales.   in veer's case, they just opened, so s they can hardly be said to have a proven record in this
 particular area

s