Jump to content

Resubmission Conspiracy


Recommended Posts

I, like everyone else, am fed up with the inconsistent, arbitrary reviews. I had one photo accepted and the very next one (of the exact same location and building) rejected because they said it needed a property release.

 

With the next batch of submissions, I included three previously rejected photos. One had been rejected for focus (a photo of a weathered 2000+ year old fortress), the 2nd of the same fortress and wall rejected for lighting. The third (a completely different subject) had been rejected for lighting as well but I forgot to note it as previously submitted. I "corrected" the problem in each of these photos and reduced them to the minimum size when I resubmitted with my other new photos.

 

The photo which I failed to note as a resubmission was accepted but the two resubmissions were rejected. This time for no property release. This sounds pretty suspicious as I have two photos which were accepted without property releases of the exact same wall and fortress.

 

Is it just me or have other people experienced similar rejection "stupidity". It almost seems like once rejected they are going to reject it no matter how inane the reason.

 

I will be away from my computer for a while, so pardon me if I don't respond timely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I had one photo accepted and the very next one (of the exact same location and building) rejected because they said it needed a property release.

 

Going through the same thing right now.

The building is owned by the state, in my case. So I asked who, which authority should sign the property release.

 

Still waiting for an answer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Talking about rejections, take a look at some new photos being accepted, wow.. Look at the animals page and see the new ones. How some of those got accepted, go figure.

 

More like WOW!!!. I've seen some rjections for too many similar images with only 3 slightly different images and this guy has hundreds that look exactly the same...and all accepted. Go figure!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked about this port of 35,000 and got zero answer. Name is Doug Shutter....??? Hmmmm How does this happen. We need to know.I will continue to post this till I get an answer. A Favor?? If so...who made this a favor.

 

http://www.shutterstock.com/portfolio/search.mhtml?gallery_landing=1&gallery_id=1256674&page=1&safesearch=1&sort_method=newest

Link to post
Share on other sites
I asked about this port of 35,000 and got zero answer. Name is Doug Shutter....??? Hmmmm How does this happen. We need to know.I will continue to post this till I get an answer. A Favor?? If so...who made this a favor.

 

http://www.shutterstock.com/portfolio/search.mhtml?gallery_landing=1&gallery_id=1256674&page=1&safesearch=1&sort_method=newest

 

That is a disgrace. I stopped skipping through by the time I hit page 100. All the same stuff, slight tweaks and keywords more or less identical for every single. Are all 35k images the same stuff? Jeez

Link to post
Share on other sites
Talking about rejections, take a look at some new photos being accepted, wow.. Look at the animals page and see the new ones. How some of those got accepted, go figure.

 

The first 9 pages in his port under "new" are all the same images in all colors or without colors.

That is how some contributors have 30,000 images in port and others get rejections for all stupid reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Talking about rejections, take a look at some new photos being accepted, wow.. Look at the animals page and see the new ones. How some of those got accepted, go figure.

 

The first 9 pages in his port under "new" are all the same images in all colors or without colors.

That is how some contributors have 30,000 images in port and others get rejections for all stupid reasons.

 

I guess someone found the right dog to stroke.

Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW, I have nothing more to add as you guys have said it all - unfathomable how or why this can happen?

 

Actually, when reviewers are paid by the image (not by performance) and they get a lot of images like this, it is easier to accept them all and get a fat pay check rather then having to look at them all and decide which are the best.

Think about it, if you get 10 images that are similar, it is not so time consuming to eliminate half of them, but when you get 100 similar images, it is easier just to let them all pass.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Talking about rejections, take a look at some new photos being accepted, wow.. Look at the animals page and see the new ones. How some of those got accepted, go figure.

 

Quite distressing. Seems like there's a trend to accept stuff that doesn't look like 'traditional' stock but a number of those new photos just look like poorly composed (amateur) snapshots.And let's not mention heavy shadows/poor lighting and WB. Not only would I think that I would not get them past review, I wouldn't submit them in the first place. But that must just be me!

 

Edit: The new photo's I saw under 'animals' have now dropped out of the first pages and my comment is no longer relevant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I asked about this port of 35,000 and got zero answer. Name is Doug Shutter....??? Hmmmm How does this happen. We need to know.I will continue to post this till I get an answer. A Favor?? If so...who made this a favor.

 

http://www.shutterstock.com/portfolio/search.mhtml?gallery_landing=1&gallery_id=1256674&page=1&safesearch=1&sort_method=newest

 

That's another one. I think the one Gualberto is talking about is http://www.shutterstock.com/portfolio/search.mhtml?gallery_landing=1&gallery_id=83138&page=1&safesearch=1&sort_method=newest

Laurin, you can add that one in your questions. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

What amazes me is the fact that everyone is calling out ports of contributors and the contributor has no say because they don't frequent the forms, while having been said many times over by the likes of Laurin, Dave, Jeff and many others that the forums is not a place for this!

 

So now why are the ones that say this should not be done on the forums doing the opposite of what they tell everyone else not to do?

 

Notice that Dave is not saying anything so he apparently is the only one sticking to what has been said many many many times over before.

 

No one here wants anyone to call their ports out in the public in this way do they?

 

Just saying because this is not a good thing to be doing as has been said before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Mr Shutterstock.LOL Normally I would agree, this is quite different.I don't care how many this submitter has or sells, It is very curious in todays scene here how all these were accepted when so many very talented people cannot. maybe this person submitted 70,000 and half were accepted ? have no idea But thats a lot of Images for nearly 3 years. he goes by another name elsewhere with very few Images.

 

Yes, I've said before that calling anyone out [That your actually doing also] isn't cool But this is, as was before a question as to how this can happen when Others have Problems. Favors?? I actually Hope he makes a fortune, Thats not the issue.Never was.

 

What if I took 35,000 Images of a strawberry and all were accepted? Or can I shoot a rolled Joint 5000 Times and have no problems? Bottom Line.....If admin says this is cool...then It's cool and the reason we ask.Looks like good weed. lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
What amazes me is the fact that everyone is calling out ports of contributors and the contributor has no say because they don't frequent the forms, while having been said many times over by the likes of Laurin, Dave, Jeff and many others that the forums is not a place for this!

 

So now why are the ones that say this should not be done on the forums doing the opposite of what they tell everyone else not to do?

 

Notice that Dave is not saying anything so he apparently is the only one sticking to what has been said many many many times over before.

 

No one here wants anyone to call their ports out in the public in this way do they?

 

Just saying because this is not a good thing to be doing as has been said before.

 

You are right about this, Barry. I hesitated before posting the link but in this case, I'm not faulting the contributors or critisizing their work, it's to blame SS and the reviewers. How can they accept dozens if not hundreds of images in the same batch that are almost identical?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The key here is "almost identical" and since they are not then that is why they are accepted this is not DT, chit over there only one would have made it through review.

 

Here's an idea!

 

Just do the same thing as they are and see what happens.

 

Then if yours aren't accepted like these then complain but until then don't worry about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The key here is "almost identical" and since they are not then that is why they are accepted this is not DT, chit over there only one would have made it through review.

 

Here's an idea!

 

Just do the same thing as they are and see what happens.

 

Then if yours aren't accepted like these then complain but until then don't worry about it.

 

Actually a very good idea.Funny that when Calif went legal in 2006 I uploaded a few shots of bud. It felt weird.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you Mr Shutterstock.LOL Normally I would agree, this is quite different.I don't care how many this submitter has or sells, It is very curious in todays scene here how all these were accepted when so many very talented people cannot. maybe this person submitted 70,000 and half were accepted ? have no idea But thats a lot of Images for nearly 3 years. he goes by another name elsewhere with very few Images.

 

Yes, I've said before that calling anyone out [That your actually doing also] isn't cool But this is, as was before a question as to how this can happen when Others have Problems. Favors?? I actually Hope he makes a fortune, Thats not the issue.Never was.

 

What if I took 35,000 Images of a strawberry and all were accepted? Or can I shoot a rolled Joint 5000 Times and have no problems? Bottom Line.....If admin says this is cool...then It's cool and the reason we ask.Looks like good weed. lol

 

Maybe it's a training port SS '' '' team

 

Some reviewers photographed pills. Others define white balance, lighting, focus, composition. Are approved for sale. Not disappear as good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you Mr Shutterstock.LOL Normally I would agree, this is quite different.I don't care how many this submitter has or sells, It is very curious in todays scene here how all these were accepted when so many very talented people cannot. maybe this person submitted 70,000 and half were accepted ? have no idea But thats a lot of Images for nearly 3 years. he goes by another name elsewhere with very few Images.

 

Yes, I've said before that calling anyone out [That your actually doing also] isn't cool But this is, as was before a question as to how this can happen when Others have Problems. Favors?? I actually Hope he makes a fortune, Thats not the issue.Never was.

 

What if I took 35,000 Images of a strawberry and all were accepted? Or can I shoot a rolled Joint 5000 Times and have no problems? Bottom Line.....If admin says this is cool...then It's cool and the reason we ask.Looks like good weed. lol

 

Maybe it's a training port SS '' '' team

 

Some reviewers photographed pills. Others define white balance, lighting, focus, composition. Are approved for sale. Not disappear as good.

 

what?

did you eat some of those candies?

LOL

 

on ports like the one mentioned, that is total horseshite how that gets accepted

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

what?

did you eat some of those candies?

LOL

 

on ports like the one mentioned, that is total horseshite how that gets accepted

 

there are so many sadshit, million pictures "sale", such as candy

 

when the artist came up with a successful character or background, and cloning this infinite number of times, it does not bother anyone?

 

It's norma

Link to post
Share on other sites

While I really appreciate the opportunity to provide a platform for the discussion of the latest hot topic, I was really hoping to get a couple of responses addressing my original question "the rejection of previously rejected photos for irrelevant reasons" (see original post).

 

Thanks for your consideration and relevant response.

Link to post
Share on other sites
While I really appreciate the opportunity to provide a platform for the discussion of the latest hot topic, I was really hoping to get a couple of responses addressing my original question "the rejection of previously rejected photos for irrelevant reasons" (see original post).

 

Thanks for your consideration and relevant response.

 

Resubmission Conspiracy is that previously rejected the image more carefully considered again. Ie reviewer looking for defects, and find more and more.

 

Most likely this is due to the fact that reviewer in new submission sees an image labeled as previously loaded, but does not know the reasons for the previous rejected.

Link to post
Share on other sites
WOW, I have nothing more to add as you guys have said it all - unfathomable how or why this can happen?

 

Actually, when reviewers are paid by the image (not by performance) and they get a lot of images like this, it is easier to accept them all and get a fat pay check rather then having to look at them all and decide which are the best.

Think about it, if you get 10 images that are similar, it is not so time consuming to eliminate half of them, but when you get 100 similar images, it is easier just to let them all pass.

 

I'm going to get a 4K camera, shoot scenes at 24p (any scene will do), then export each 10 second clip I shoot as a JPG sequence: 240 8MP stills per clip. The added bonus of this is I can pad my video port at the same time. ;)

 

Seriously, though, I question how many art directors are going to wade through 358 pages of the same material, especially when someone inside GTY told me most people never search past the first 4 or 5 pages of any port.

 

And yes, paying reviewers "piece-work" wages is the problem behind a lot of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
While I really appreciate the opportunity to provide a platform for the discussion of the latest hot topic, I was really hoping to get a couple of responses addressing my original question "the rejection of previously rejected photos for irrelevant reasons" (see original post).

 

Thanks for your consideration and relevant response.

 

Whilst I normally never resubmit for the reasons already discussed (they'll just find something else wrong/invent something else to reject on), I have 3 images of an antique (19th century) Chinese/Japanese vase that were rejected for lack of a property release. On the submit forum, I complained that I was expected to give myself permission to photograph my own vase! However, it appears that I didn't understand the rejection reason...it was because the reviewer thought there might be some sort of artistic/design trademark/patent on the way the vase was decorated. That never occurred to me because it is at least 150 years old!

 

Vincent said that I should resubmit with the info in the description field that this was a mass-produced, factory-made item and painted by decorator employees rather than an artist.

 

Resubmitted on Friday with the info in the description field, telling the reviewer that this is no artistic product and does not require a release (although I cannot tell the reviewer that as the notes for reviewer no longer allow it and I didn't ask for a 'ticket/case' to be opened.

 

So far not 're-reviewed'. If it is again negative, I will open a case because I followed the advice of Vincent although the reviewer doesn't know that! Vee shall see. Keep you updated.

 

Edit: All 3 passed this morning.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...