Jump to content
Richard Whitcombe

Fully human reviewed??

Recommended Posts

Im having issues believing every image is reviewed and by a real person.....

Ive just uploaded and submitted 20 images.  In the time it took my browser to reload the contributor page after clicking submit (4 or 5 seconds) every image has been "reviewed".  Im having a hard time believing each image is individually inspected and by a real person in that time frame.  That would be superhuman...

Anyone else seeing similar breathtaking speed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes yesterday it was very fast. A photo rejected focus (rightly, I had doubts about the picture) and a picture where in the distance showed a logo and a traffic sign, which I had overlooked) and some approvals.
I actually assumed that not everything is checked by a person. But I'm new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Primus1 said:

Me too. Send for review. In almost none time answered. Reviewed. Photos. Pretty happy with result, though!

Yeah, no complaints. Better than waiting for days to see if your shot is approved...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Maurice James Dawson said:

@Jeff De has stated repeatedly on the forums that all reviewing is done by humans, no AI.

Love to see how a human managed to scrutinise 20 images in under 5 seconds...  Or 45 images in 15 seconds.

Even if all 20 images went to different people and they all started the second it was sent, thats still only about 3 seconds actually looking at each image.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Richard Whitcombe said:

Love to see how a human managed to scrutinise 20 images in under 5 seconds...  Or 45 images in 15 seconds.

Even if all 20 images went to different people and they all started the second it was sent, thats still only about 3 seconds actually looking at each image.

 

I think they basically can push a button within 3 seconds. Maybe a reviewer that didn't checked and just directly pushed. How will AI know if a object is trademarked for example. I think AI can indeed see noise or blur BUT it can't check the legal issues. 

Next to this i would expect then that images always will be fast reviewed if it is really just AI. But sometimes it is 10 seconds, sometimes 5 minutes, sometimes days....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Richard Whitcombe said:

Im having issues believing every image is reviewed and by a real person.....

Ive just uploaded and submitted 20 images.  In the time it took my browser to reload the contributor page after clicking submit (4 or 5 seconds) every image has been "reviewed".  Im having a hard time believing each image is individually inspected and by a real person in that time frame.  That would be superhuman...

Anyone else seeing similar breathtaking speed?

Same here...submitted 5 and in the blink of an eye, 4 approved and one rejected for under/over exposure. IMO incorrectly but I almost never resubmit, effectively validating the rejection. I also have my doubts about this being a human process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, 1000 Words Images said:

I think they basically can push a button within 3 seconds. Maybe a reviewer that didn't checked and just directly pushed. How will AI know if a object is trademarked for example. I think AI can indeed see noise or blur BUT it can't check the legal issues. 

Next to this i would expect then that images always will be fast reviewed if it is really just AI. But sometimes it is 10 seconds, sometimes 5 minutes, sometimes days....

2 of them were rejected for similars.  Theres no way a human had time to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect SS are using both AI and humans. AI should be suitable for testing on similars. 
I think the use of AI doesn't have to be bad, on the contrary.

It is better to always get the same false judgements (with the hope that it will be better in the future) than the inconsistent false judgements of different people with problematic visual acuity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got a rejection stating that image was already submitted in the past. Now maybe someone can explain how a human will spot this within seconds ?

As I said my guess is that images went through a computerized screening looking at the technical aspect (noise, grain, focus) and if they do not fulfill the requirement they are immediately rejected and never make it through to an actual reviewer. This has positives and negatives. On the positive side the review process is faster but on the negative side lot of actually salable good images will not make it to a reviewer. Just my thought on this matter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shutterstock Greenhorn here, But how do you appeal a rejection? I don't see a process for that. Same issue. Images rejected for reasons that are clearly inaccurate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the system was fully computerized, resubmissions would not work. On submitting an image the result would always be the same. Instead, as we all know, resubmitting a previously rejected image often gets it accepted. So somewhere humans must come into play here. I would guess an AI filter will be in place for sure, as it is on AS, maybe pointing out potential issues to reviewers. Then a reviewer makes a final decision, as shown in the picture below:

humanoid-robot-cyborg-sits-workplace-600

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Aaron Lemay said:

So say if you have a BS review here for lots of nosie/gain when you are under 1000 iso or a little above.

It's possible to have too much noise in an image at ISO 100 if the conditions are not suitable.

The agencies can curate their content any way they wish, because it's their marketplace. You're either able to submit the quality they want or you're not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Richard Whitcombe said:

2 of them were rejected for similars.  There's no way a human had time to do that.

I've also had super fast rejections for similar content - I also find it hard to see a human looking through your port and spotting that within a few seconds - also had a few for previously submitted - which after checking my port I agree with - but it took me longer than a few seconds to find them ;o)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It can still be an automated process where the system checks for similars before the content is available for the reviewer to see, and brings them up with the submission. They don't have time to start looking for something with the same subject, they'd never get any pics reviewed.

Just compare how long it takes for google to bring up similar images when you do a reverse image search - you click the search and it's there. The agencies can easily use a system similar to that, and when it's limited to your content they have on their servers (should be all content, so the image thieves wouldn't have such an easy time).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I understand correctly, Shutterstock does provide an explanation for rejection, but does not explain how the photos are checked. Actually a bit strange. That Information Is a Trade Secret? 😕

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't really matter to me how the review process goes (with human and AI reviewers). I like the fact that they are done faster than ever and since I don't upload 100's at a time I get very few rejects. It gives them a chance of being seen faster.

Share this post


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...