Jump to content

Change to our Initial Review process


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 145
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

As the Shutterstock artist community grows, we are constantly looking for ways to better support, educate and empower our contributors to become successful in our marketplace. Just within this past ye

what are you doing...good Lord... and so the slag overflows the base, now what?? come to your senses before it's too late...turn on your mind...if it is you have left... Oh my God

Hold on a minute - 1 out of 10 to get in doesn't necessarily mean SS will be flooded with low quality images. It means there'll be more contributors with smaller ports, but all the images they submit after their first one has been approved will still have to get past the review process. We know how difficult that has become.

 

As I see it, it shouldn't make a lot of difference for anybody who's here already.

 

The thing is if people are struggling to hit the 7 out of 10 mark currently then it forces them to improve the quality of their images and rethink their approach which means when they do get accepted the quality of the work they are uploading is going to have improved and they are more likely to get acceptances.

 

Anyone can upload 10 images and get 1 accepted so there is no learning experience there at all. People can pass that test and then upload dozens of photos which are too poor to get accepted but tie up the reviewers all the same because they haven't actually learnt anything about the SS standards from the test. Reviewing hundreds of images which are just going to get rejected is wasted money for SS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As the Shutterstock artist community grows, we are constantly looking for ways to better support, educate and empower our contributors to become successful in our marketplace. Just within this past year we launched a contributor support center and relaunched our contributor forum on a more dynamic and user-friendly platform.

 

As the next step in improving the contributor experience we have decided to simplify the sign-up and onboarding process by changing the requirement  from 7 to 1 out of 10 images accepted for initial submission. We found that the "7 out of 10" rule is no longer an effective standard to evaluate if a contributor can be successful in our marketplace. We know that we can better educate and support our contributors once they are active on our platform and have access to our many resources and support tools.

 

As always, we will continue to evaluate all images we receive per our standards. This change will simplify the sign up process for any artist interested in joining the Shutterstock community and will improve the overall contributor experience!

 

Posted 13 November 2015 - 08:49 AM

Vincent from Shutterstock, Hi everyone,

 

Please note that due to unexpected high submission volume it will take a few days longer than usual for footage to be reviewed.

We expect to be caught up soon. Sorry for any inconvenience.

 

And now we have 1 from 10!

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a new member who has only been accepted since March of 2015, I also think this is a bad idea.

Shutterstock's stringent acceptance policy has been what has encouraged me to improve.

I have moved from what I consider myself as an amateur to more into the professional realm.

I had an inferior camera and got turned down 3x. This forced me to see if I wanted to be a hobbist or try to make money, so I

invested in better equipment,read alot, and read even more and watched many youtube videos and thanks to Shutterstock's tough

acceptance, I love my photos so much better now than 8 months ago. So, thank you Shutterstock for helping me to improve greatly.

 

On another note, when I was turned down, I got 2 of 10 approved. When I was finally accepted into Shutterstock I resubmitted

the 2 of each of 4 turned down batchs and all 8 where turned down. Photos were turned down that were originally accepted.

 

I do feel sorry for the reviewers. I also think it will make it harder for us since they will get into a mode of just clicking

decline and when they move to a better contributor they will not really "review" just keep clicking the declined button. I agree

that there are great inconsistencies in the reviewers.

 

This does seem very "WalMarty" as someone said above and just a way to say you have more "contributors."

 

Thank you Shutterstock for your tough standards, those tough standards have made me a better photographer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
We want to emphasize that we have not lowered the quality standards for any of our content. Every single image is reviewed by our review team and the review standards are the same as always for both new and approved contributors. This new contributor onboarding criteria will not result in Shutterstock publishing lower quality images as some of you inquired about.

 

As a reminder; we made this change as we found that the "7 out of 10" rule was no longer an effective standard to evaluate if a contributor can be successful in our marketplace. We know that we can better educate and support our contributors once they are active on our platform and have access to our many resources and support tools.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We want to emphasize that we have not lowered the quality standards for any of our content. Every single image is reviewed by our review team and the review standards are the same as always for both new and approved contributors. This new contributor onboarding criteria will not result in Shutterstock publishing lower quality images as some of you inquired about.
 
As a reminder; we made this change as we found that the "7 out of 10" rule was no longer an effective standard to evaluate if a contributor can be successful in our marketplace. We know that we can better educate and support our contributors once they are active on our platform and have access to our many resources and support tools.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm coming down on the side that thinks this will mostly result in more, smaller ports as new contributors find it difficult to build up. They are not being "screened", if you will, initially - but they do still have to pass review each time they upload. Rather than meeting the higher standard of regularly getting images accepted, they will probably lost interest as their subsequent submissions get the same 10% acceptance rate at best. Yes, SS may find a diamond in the rough here and there, which is great. But in many ways, it is in their interest to keep ports small and earning not quite enough for payout.

 

I agree with Barry that this will make the critique forum pretty much null and void. Too bad.

 

So glad I was able to reap the benefit of the wisdom of so many excellent photographers with the willingness to guide those who have sought their knowledge. I maintain that the critique forum has been better than any classes I could have ever taken!

Link to post
Share on other sites

We might see a difference in the way the critique forum is used. There'll be fewer people asking about what to include in their first ten, but there'll be more wanting to know why images were rejected.

 

Any advice they get will be just as helpful - like Perry, I'm also very grateful for the experts over there who take time to share their knowledge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We want to emphasize that we have not lowered the quality standards for any of our content. Every single image is reviewed by our review team and the review standards are the same as always for both new and approved contributors. This new contributor onboarding criteria will not result in Shutterstock publishing lower quality images as some of you inquired about.
 
As a reminder; we made this change as we found that the "7 out of 10" rule was no longer an effective standard to evaluate if a contributor can be successful in our marketplace. We know that we can better educate and support our contributors once they are active on our platform and have access to our many resources and support tools.

 

 

BS*

Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I read the more this is making me think about the reviews for the FT mobile app. I downloaded it thinking it was like the SS contributor one and would give me sales figures only to find it is for shooting and uploading directly from your phone... without any kind of editing or quality control. So naturally all the reviews are hilariously outraged people whining about how FT never accepts any of their poorly composed, unchecked, micro CCD mobile snapshots.

 

This review process change makes me think they might be trying to appeal to the same audience just to try and sell that one mobile shot out of ten that is actually worth anything...

Link to post
Share on other sites

We might see a difference in the way the critique forum is used. There'll be fewer people asking about what to include in their first ten, but there'll be more wanting to know why images were rejected.

 

Any advice they get will be just as helpful - like Perry, I'm also very grateful for the experts over there who take time to share their knowledge.

 

I joined this forum in March, then was another CF. A certain level below which was non comme il faut ask for advice. After the level of self-censorship began to fall. There were trash phone pictures...

The level of the request to the criticism is reduced and can kill a CF, I am more agree with Perry

Link to post
Share on other sites

O God, give us the serenity to accept what cannot be changed,

The courage to change what can be changed,

and the wisdom to know the one from the other.

 

 

One image membership is here. Personally I don't see it changing anything as far as acceptance quality, review standards, or sales. I think it's weak and cheapens the fact that many people worked hard to pass 7 of 10. But that's the way it is.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I too think it is a very bad idea. First it was 7 out of 10 and if we failed we had to wait 3 months to try again. Then it was dropped to a month wait, then a week, then I think it was two days. So people would just keep submitting hoping to get something to stick to the wall.

 

Getting multiple images accepted also to me does show whether or not someone has a good grasp of photography. Just about anyone can get one shot right and it could likely be by luck. Being able to repeat it shows whether or not they have an understanding of what they are trying to do.

 

As far as the point of the review process will still be the same well that subject is one that has been talked about for a long time now. Just doesn't make sense. To me the better idea and one that I have been talking about for over a year now is to keep the entrance exam as it was and after a person has a proven track record then the review process changes for them. It would then go to a spot check to make sure the quality remains the same. Those of us who do this mainly as a business want to submit good images because that can increase our sales. It is not in our best interest to submit crap.

 

Doing it this way assures that good photographers and artists are accepted and then once they prove their metal they are not subject to spotty reviews. Less time is wasted resubmitting images and the database grows which apparently is what SS wants.

 

Once again it just seems like we are the low people on the totem pole.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not really thinking that it will cause big changes. Sure, more contributors can get in, but it seems the review process has become much tougher in my experiences, so fewer mediocre images will get in. I abandoned the thought or desire for a small elite group of media makers a long time ago - we're in a crowded marketplace. I have accepted this, and I choose to focus on my little piece of the pie - what can I provide and do the best at that hasn't been done yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What part of this is everyone not understanding?

 

 

As a reminder; we made this change as we found that the "7 out of 10" rule was no longer an effective standard to evaluate if a contributor can be successful in our marketplace. We know that we can better educate and support our contributors once they are active on our platform and have access to our many resources and support tools.

All they are saying is that even someone that everyone thinks may not stand a chance at becoming good at this actually may be and this way they are giving those people the chance to see if they can do it, pretty self explanatory if you ask me which I know you wont.

 

What they are doing is giving someone a chance, a chance to say see I can do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that it's possible to get one out of ten good photos by accident.

 

Then, encouraged, the new submitter loads up everything they have...

 

and it all gets rejected.

 

 

The idea of the original requirements was to find submitters who could consistently provide good work.  This made less work for reviewers, who could take more time over their work. Making Shutterstock's portfolio one of the best.

 

Now, there's all sorts of crap on the site, because the reviewers are rushed.  (At least, I hope that's why the crap is there)

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...