Jump to content
BublikHaus

Huge issues with Noise Rejections

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Doug Jensen said:

No, all commercial in this batch.

I've got 9 more commercial clips waiting for review right now, and 170 more 4K clips uploading now so I'll have more data in week or two to see what makes it what doesn't.

Fortunately, sales for the month are doing well so far.

Thanks, keep us updated if you can :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Sari ONeal said:

This, IMHO, would  mean that they're using faulty equipment and/ or software that doesn't play the footage correctly.

I think you are correct.  I believe the human reviewers work from home (even before corona) and there is no way they could possibly be looking at full-resolution clips.  My clips average .7 to 1.2 GB per file.   I'm uploading about 200GB worth of files right now and there is no way they could be looking at those files remotely.  As we know, the SS preview files all look like crap and I'm kind of surprised customers even take a chance that the real file lthey download will ook worth a damn based on the awful previews they are shown.  This could go to the heart of the recent rejections, especially if SS has changed the resolution or bitrate of the files reviewers look at. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, CH Digital Media said:

Thanks, keep us updated if you can :)

Will do.  I just checked and the the number is closer to 270 - 300 clips that are in my backlog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Doug Jensen said:

Will do.  I just checked and the the number is closer to 270 - 300 clips that are in my backlog.

Cheers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Doug Jensen said:

Oh God, that is 20 hours worth of metadata writing.  Ugh.

Yep, I hope ShutterStock realise how much effort most of us put into this stock footage thing we do!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shooting is fun and I'd do it for free.  But metadata is drudgery and I'd rather be digging a ditch or working at Walmart. But nobody is going to pay me over $200 per hour to dig a ditch, so it has to be done.  And you have to do it yourself if you want it done right.  Crank up the tunes and try to stay focused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/22/2020 at 3:28 PM, oleschwander said:

I've never - until now - questioned the verdict of the reviewers, but now it's being rediculous regarding noise, artifacting and blurs. Seems like they are accepting or rejecting totally random. Must be some kind of AI - no matter what Alex says.

Just had 21 of 23 images all rejected for noise/grain after waiting 5 days. If this isn't AI they must have noise/grain rejections on autopilot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All photos and videos are currently being rejected due to "noise". This is ridiculous. Unfortunately, no one at SS is going to do anything since they don't have any support staff, for either customers or contributors. Infuriating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vesperstock said:

All photos and videos are currently being rejected due to "noise". This is ridiculous. Unfortunately, no one at SS is going to do anything since they don't have any support staff, for either customers or contributors. Infuriating.

Just got another patch rejected. It's crazy. 

Taking into account how much money we are making them monthly in sales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/23/2020 at 11:49 AM, Doug Jensen said:

I believe the human reviewers work from home (even before corona) and there is no way they could possibly be looking at full-resolution clips.  My clips average .7 to 1.2 GB per file.   I'm uploading about 200GB worth of files right now and there is no way they could be looking at those files remotely.  As we know, the SS preview files all look like crap and I'm kind of surprised customers even take a chance that the real file lthey download will ook worth a damn based on the awful previews they are shown. 

In order to become a video reviewer one has to prove having an internet line capable of 100 MB/sec download speed, so I'm pretty sure they are looking at the actual clips. I don't think the preview files are even created until the clip is accepted. Why do you think it is impossible for someone looking at the clips at home?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Milo J said:

In order to become a video reviewer one has to prove having an internet line capable of 100 MB/sec download speed, so I'm pretty sure they are looking at the actual clips. I don't think the preview files are even created until the clip is accepted. Why do you think it is impossible for someone looking at the clips at home?

Who has 100MB/sec internet?    Are you sure you don't mean 100Mbps? Not nearly fast enough to judge hundreds of 4K files.  I stand by my original post until proven false from someone at SS who knows for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Milo J said:

In order to become a video reviewer one has to prove having an internet line capable of 100 MB/sec download speed, so I'm pretty sure they are looking at the actual clips. I don't think the preview files are even created until the clip is accepted. Why do you think it is impossible for someone looking at the clips at home?

100MB/sec is a gigabit connection.  Available to a tiny fraction of the population even in first world developed countries.

A few thousand people at most.  So no, its not that.  They'd have no reviewers.

100mbits is more available, you might get 5% or so of a developed country with that.

With that at its theoretical best (and none is) you're looking at about 90 seconds for a 1Gb file.  Not feasible.

Reviewers are also meant to have correctly calibrated and profiled displays but is fairly sure some dont.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, sorry, I meant 100 Mbits / sec. And the reason I know that is because I actually applied once to be a footage reviewer for SS. Didn't make the cut - my line, according to the test, tapped out at 97 Mbps, even though my provider claims we get 150. Maybe did it at the wrong time of day.

Anyway, there would be no reason to demand such a high connection speed unless the footage reviewers were actually downloading the clips to watch them on their end. 90 seconds for a reviewer to download a file - why is that not feasible?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

90 seconds a gig.

Could be 4x times that for a full length file.

100mbits is also very fast and far ahead of what pretty much anyone can get even in first world western countries.

Ultimately if you need consistent speeds like that, you need to be in an office with a dedicated link.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I uploaded over 300 clips in a day once to Pond5 some were 4K files, I submitted the whole batch and they were all reviewed within 2 hours by one reviewer and they were reviewed correctly because they knocked back some footage with this image of the Queens head on some coins which nobody can accept, no way are P5 reviewers looking at the original files remotely on their desktop at home, I don't see how ShutterStocks reviewers are looking at the original files either, unless AI is filtering the list down to bare minimums. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It only cost $40 a month here in Bangkok, Thailand to own a 1000/1000 Mbps connection. The cost goes as low as $19 a month if you don't want high upload (1000/100 Mbps in that case) So, anyone with a bit of spare money can become a reviewer. That being said, just have my footage rendered in After Effect in ProRes 422 HQ rejected for "Noise and Artifact." I'd guess It's not worthing submit your best shot here because SS doesn't learn how to respect people's work.

image.png.1292403d026dfc2e73c5037d54791d9b.png

image.png.97897454640dd954898c295ba840d7e1.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Videos from Mavic 2 PRO 1 inch sensor at 100 ISO. All rejected because of noise. Something is terribly wrong with reviews for the last month. Too many agree that there must be something new not properly communicated to contributors. Maybe I should buy a Inspire 2 for 25k and sell those videos for 1.5$ to 15$ and see in how much time I recover my costs.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/23/2020 at 11:50 PM, Sari ONeal said:

Images? Or videos?

Images. Taken with 3 different cameras in different environments/settings. The only thing that's the same is the rejection given. 

 

_CDSC7641.thumb.jpg.ca76de57c0e42641498f9fd89e4f3e35.jpg

 

I can completely understand if SS is just overwhelmed and under staffed by a lack of reviewers due to the epidemic. But to carpet bomb submissions en masse with the same rejection reason is just ridiculous. 

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...