Author Topic: Lesson to unknown Shutterstock reviewer (Read 27773 times)

panicAttack · « **on:** July 20, 2015, 10:27 »

Dear unknown Shutterstock reviewer

I can't send you note anymore or contact you so this is the only way to try it.

Christian Louboutin trademark is about red soles and it is not applicable if the shoe itself is in the same (red) color.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2198741/Christian-Louboutin-CAN-trademark-signature-red-soles-winning-appeal-unless-shoe-colour.html

So, completely red shoes with red soles are fine and Shutterstock is selling hundreds of those.

But... even if this all is not correct please try to understand that what you see is not red sole (crop for my rejected image because of trademark) image attached:

PZF · « **Reply #1 on:** July 20, 2015, 10:42 »

Irritating - but you can actually email support and explain...get a ticket.
It has worked for me on occasions.
Good luck!

panicAttack · « **Reply #2 on:** July 20, 2015, 10:56 »

Quote from: PZF on July 20, 2015, 10:42

Irritating - but you can actually email support and explain...get a ticket.
It has worked for me on occasions.
Good luck!

Oh, sorry, and that is the worst part-

I contacted them, they told me all is okay so I can resubmit and I did that, and because we dont have option "note to reviewer" where we can write "Attn reviewer: see an admin about this batch case" reviewer can't see it anymore (I only checked what I can, that contest is resubmitted) so it was again rejected.

After my second rejection I contacted support again and they told me it was about red soles... even there is no red soles.

cobalt · « **Reply #3 on:** July 20, 2015, 11:10 »

their photo review system is beyond me. they are such a big agency, it has to be possible to improve the upload experience. a note for the reviewer box is really useful, don´t understand why it was killed.

panicAttack · « **Reply #4 on:** July 20, 2015, 11:16 »

Quote from: cobalt on July 20, 2015, 11:10

their photo review system is beyond me. they are such a big agency, it has to be possible to improve the upload experience. a note for the reviewer box is really useful, don´t understand why it was killed.

I understand there were probably many spam messages like "thank you" etc, but they should leave field to put admin ref number or something like that.

This way is getting less and less professional

skyfish · « **Reply #5 on:** July 20, 2015, 11:41 »

Just don't forget what you mentioned: they sell mass of the same, but not you. The same situation with many buildings, parcs, objects, which are public, but not for all contributors

PZF · « **Reply #6 on:** July 20, 2015, 11:52 »

And you quoted the Ticket reference number when you resubmitted?

panicAttack · « **Reply #7 on:** July 20, 2015, 12:30 »

Quote from: PZF on July 20, 2015, 11:52

And you quoted the Ticket reference number when you resubmitted?

it is not possible to do anymore

noodle · « **Reply #8 on:** July 20, 2015, 12:36 »

Nevermind the broken review system - they just upgraded their forums!!!!
YAY!!!

kmlPhoto · « **Reply #9 on:** July 20, 2015, 12:39 »

It is hard to accept some rejections. I try to just keep going. When you factor your total image earnings for that batch against the damage to your health and creativity it really isn't worth it. My wife always tells me just keep shooting.... Good Luck! BTW, it is a great shot!

panicAttack · « **Reply #10 on:** July 20, 2015, 12:46 »

Quote from: kmlPhoto on July 20, 2015, 12:39

It is hard to accept some rejections. I try to just keep going. When you factor your total image earnings for that batch against the damage to your health and creativity it really isn't worth it. My wife always tells me just keep shooting.... Good Luck! BTW, it is a great shot!

thanks but it is just a crop, photo is full body length portrait and shoes are not important at all.

I keep going, already submitting other photos, (btw those photos were accepted to all other agencies) but I am not okey with double standards. Especially when I see this: http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?people_number=&commercial_ok=&searchterm=sexy+legs+high+heels&search_cat=&people_ethnicity=&prev_sort_method=popular&anyorall=all&color=&searchtermx=&search_source=search_form&photographer_name=&lang=en&version=llv1&search_group=&orient=&people_gender=&show_color_wheel=1&people_age=&safesearch=1&prev_sort_method=newest&sort_method=popular&page=1

PixelBytes · « **Reply #11 on:** July 20, 2015, 13:54 »

Quote from: kmlPhoto on July 20, 2015, 12:39

It is hard to accept some rejections. I try to just keep going. When you factor your total image earnings for that batch against the damage to your health and creativity it really isn't worth it. My wife always tells me just keep shooting.... Good Luck! BTW, it is a great shot!

I wish I had a wife that gave such good advice.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #12 on:** July 20, 2015, 14:03 »

your wife is wise. but it's not just about killing yourself and killing your inspiration to make photographs
... it's also silly to kill yourself over an unknown commodity. for all we know, we may end up with a whole batch of new works that are never seen.
as already said, most ppls work of the past year are buried and dead with little or no downloads.
so why gives yourself any more hardship to try to convince the reviewer(s) you are right???

in reality, the said reviewer(s) would do excatly what all telemarketing ppl or complaint dept do...
make a ball out of the paper and play basketball with the trash.
and the more they receive the same complaint the louder they laugh at "this idiot"

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #13 on:** July 20, 2015, 15:10 »

I know it's frustrating dealing with the idiotic review system at SS, (and I'm not trying to invalidate your complaint in any way) but you could just change the color of the shoes in Photoshop and resubmit. If it's anything other than red, you'll be fine.

If the shot is more important than the shoes, just work around the challenged reviews if you want to get it for sale there.

panicAttack · « **Reply #14 on:** July 20, 2015, 17:23 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on July 20, 2015, 15:10

I know it's frustrating dealing with the idiotic review system at SS, (and I'm not trying to invalidate your complaint in any way) but you could just change the color of the shoes in Photoshop and resubmit. If it's anything other than red, you'll be fine.

If the shot is more important than the shoes, just work around the challenged reviews if you want to get it for sale there.

I can do it but I really would like to have some things cleared. Why so many contributors can have images of red shoes (some of them have even red soles) but me or someone else cant have red shoes even without red soles and not only that, but shoes are not main subject in photo (full body portraits). and there are images selling at shutterstock where only legs and shoes can be seen so we can say that those are main subject in the image.

I'm not asking too much... I hope.

If we contributors need to make progress in quality, we need to expect same with reviewers and support, or at least constant quality not declining in quality over time.

Elenathewise · « **Reply #15 on:** July 20, 2015, 18:38 »

panicAttack, it could be just a simple case of a reviewer himself having a similar shot in his/her portfolio and not wanting the competition. It's a huge conflict of interest but everyone knows reviewers can and do have their own portfolios with agencies. Some of the rejections I had recently made as much sense as yours - they give completely absurd reason, you try to resubmit, they just bounce it back. I tried to get some help from my old contacts there, the result was the same - it looks like resubmitted image goes to the same reviewer who rejected it in the first place, and no matter how ridiculous the reason is the file stays rejected. It's either not letting in competition or could be that they have some new system that tracks reviewer's statistics and if the rejection/acceptance is invalid it affects their ratings or something like that.
You're not the only one dealing with this, take comfort in this:) Plus, your image will sell on other agencies, no real loss.

Quote from: panicAttack on July 20, 2015, 17:23

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on July 20, 2015, 15:10
I know it's frustrating dealing with the idiotic review system at SS, (and I'm not trying to invalidate your complaint in any way) but you could just change the color of the shoes in Photoshop and resubmit. If it's anything other than red, you'll be fine.

If the shot is more important than the shoes, just work around the challenged reviews if you want to get it for sale there.

I can do it but I really would like to have some things cleared. Why so many contributors can have images of red shoes (some of them have even red soles) but me or someone else cant have red shoes even without red soles and not only that, but shoes are not main subject in photo (full body portraits). and there are images selling at shutterstock where only legs and shoes can be seen so we can say that those are main subject in the image.

I'm not asking too much... I hope.

If we contributors need to make progress in quality, we need to expect same with reviewers and support, or at least constant quality not declining in quality over time.

De · « **Reply #16 on:** July 21, 2015, 04:07 »

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on July 20, 2015, 14:03

your wife is wise. but it's not just about killing yourself and killing your inspiration to make photographs
... it's also silly to kill yourself over an unknown commodity. for all we know, we may end up with a whole batch of new works that are never seen.
as already said, most ppls work of the past year are buried and dead with little or no downloads.
so why gives yourself any more hardship to try to convince the reviewer(s) you are right???

in reality, the said reviewer(s) would do excatly what all telemarketing ppl or complaint dept do...
make a ball out of the paper and play basketball with the trash.
and the more they receive the same complaint the louder they laugh at "this idiot"

Quote from: Elenathewise on July 20, 2015, 18:38

panicAttack, it could be just a simple case of a reviewer himself having a similar shot in his/her portfolio and not wanting the competition. It's a huge conflict of interest but everyone knows reviewers can and do have their own portfolios with agencies. Some of the rejections I had recently made as much sense as yours - they give completely absurd reason, you try to resubmit, they just bounce it back. I tried to get some help from my old contacts there, the result was the same - it looks like resubmitted image goes to the same reviewer who rejected it in the first place, and no matter how ridiculous the reason is the file stays rejected. It's either not letting in competition or could be that they have some new system that tracks reviewer's statistics and if the rejection/acceptance is invalid it affects their ratings or something like that.
You're not the only one dealing with this, take comfort in this:) Plus, your image will sell on other agencies, no real loss.

Quote from: panicAttack on July 20, 2015, 17:23
Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on July 20, 2015, 15:10
I know it's frustrating dealing with the idiotic review system at SS, (and I'm not trying to invalidate your complaint in any way) but you could just change the color of the shoes in Photoshop and resubmit. If it's anything other than red, you'll be fine.

If the shot is more important than the shoes, just work around the challenged reviews if you want to get it for sale there.

I can do it but I really would like to have some things cleared. Why so many contributors can have images of red shoes (some of them have even red soles) but me or someone else cant have red shoes even without red soles and not only that, but shoes are not main subject in photo (full body portraits). and there are images selling at shutterstock where only legs and shoes can be seen so we can say that those are main subject in the image.

I'm not asking too much... I hope.

If we contributors need to make progress in quality, we need to expect same with reviewers and support, or at least constant quality not declining in quality over time.

Sad but all very true!

I know of one person that made a difference for me on SS for reviews but he left the agency

But that's the only person I know of. One that actually took an effort to try to help out. Others just quote some text, tell you to f... off in a nice way or don't bother to reply at all. That's just what we're worth to them.
Reviews on FT are a blast. There's one reviewer who's got an obsessive-compulsive disorder where he/she must reject 1 image out of a batch of 5 every single time

panicAttack · « **Reply #17 on:** July 21, 2015, 05:39 »

Istock that has much strict trademark rejections accepted all of them.

Conflict of interest doesn't sound good or even legal...

I remember, not so long time ago, when I submitted some train photo, reviewer wrote to me (in rejection field) that I need to delete some numbers and I did that, resubmit and it was accepted. Now reviewers don't write any explanation, we can't note them admin case ref, and we all depends of their mood, incompetence or even interest.

It is not only one shot, I have about 30 or 40 shots with same model in same clothes and those are already starting to sell on other sites.

skyfish · « **Reply #18 on:** July 21, 2015, 07:06 »

I see that something similar is happening with different agencies. Doing mostly travel, i noted already rejections related to presence of the same files on other sites, and just changed order of submission. Once forget - then this story repeated. Quality of images or how exotic is a location does not play big role. Generic direction, city was more important. Shortly - if file competes by generic keywords with interest of inspection or manager.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #19 on:** July 21, 2015, 08:53 »

Quote from: Elenathewise on July 20, 2015, 18:38

panicAttack, it could be just a simple case of a reviewer himself having a similar shot in his/her portfolio and not wanting the competition. It's a huge conflict of interest but everyone knows reviewers can and do have their own portfolios with agencies. Some of the rejections I had recently made as much sense as yours - they give completely absurd reason, you try to resubmit, they just bounce it back. I tried to get some help from my old contacts there, the result was the same - it looks like resubmitted image goes to the same reviewer who rejected it in the first place, and no matter how ridiculous the reason is the file stays rejected. It's either not letting in competition or could be that they have some new system that tracks reviewer's statistics and if the rejection/acceptance is invalid it affects their ratings or something like that.
You're not the only one dealing with this, take comfort in this:) Plus, your image will sell on other agencies, no real loss.

makes sense +10. i remember during the istock days when exclusives were reviewers for non.
many of what i saw to be the best images were strangely rejected for something like i think this is not what we're looking for , can't remember , but it was absurd like you say.

coming into present tense, my guess is that same exclusive(s) are now those buggers reviewing your work for ss

Rinderart · « **Reply #20 on:** July 21, 2015, 11:53 »

PanicAttack, heres the bottom Line and it's very sad. "THEY DON'T CARE" period And they don't even pretend to care. This SS review issue has been going on for over a year with no response whatsoever from them. Im sure the higher ups sit back and say. "Were accepting 400K a week or whatever" thats all that matters. we as individuals do not matter!!!! Bottom Line. I know it hurts when we try our best especially the folks that have experience and know better. It is rude and silly. Im sorry.

SS has Completely Lost any Soul that it once had concerning Issues that affect the people who got them where they are and...Many More.

Elena said it best.

"You're not the only one dealing with this, take comfort in this:) Plus, your image will sell on other agencies, no real loss."

Maybe someday they will get this also. But, I doubt it. WE, are simply dispensable. When The day comes that Curators are held to the same standards as us. That will be the perfect Day. That day Is a long way Off Im afraid. And..They will NEVER...EVER admit there is a problem.

panicAttack · « **Reply #21 on:** July 21, 2015, 12:54 »

I got new reply from Shutterstock that gives me hope!

I knew they can be professional as they were before, they apologies for double incorrect rejection and gave me case number for those images to resubmit.

Even it takes some time to "fight", it is worth it.

Thanks everyone and thanks Shutterstock support team, looks like they DO listens to their contributors if we are demanding some kind of justice.

PixelBytes · « **Reply #22 on:** July 21, 2015, 13:11 »

Quote from: panicAttack on July 21, 2015, 12:54

I got new reply from Shutterstock that gives me hope!

I knew they can be professional as they were before, they apologies for double incorrect rejection and gave me case number for those images to resubmit.

Even it takes some time to "fight", it is worth it.

Thanks everyone and thanks Shutterstock support team, looks like they DO listens to their contributors if we are demanding some kind of justice.

Congratulations! Glad your images were finally accepted. I think this thread maybe had something to do with it.

Elenathewise · « **Reply #23 on:** July 21, 2015, 13:21 »

Glad you've got a new reply from them - still, one shouldn't NEED to fight for things like that! In your case the rejection reason was complete nonsense, it shouldn't have happened in the first place. My time should be spent on creating new images not on having to fight to resolve the problem that isn't mine - it's the agency's responsibility to control the quality of their reviews.

Quote from: panicAttack on July 21, 2015, 12:54

I got new reply from Shutterstock that gives me hope!

I knew they can be professional as they were before, they apologies for double incorrect rejection and gave me case number for those images to resubmit.

Even it takes some time to "fight", it is worth it.

Thanks everyone and thanks Shutterstock support team, looks like they DO listens to their contributors if we are demanding some kind of justice.

panicAttack · « **Reply #24 on:** July 21, 2015, 13:58 »

Quote from: Elenathewise on July 21, 2015, 13:21

Glad you've got a new reply from them - still, one shouldn't NEED to fight for things like that! In your case the rejection reason was complete nonsense, it shouldn't have happened in the first place. My time should be spent on creating new images not on having to fight to resolve the problem that isn't mine - it's the agency's responsibility to control the quality of their reviews.

Quote from: panicAttack on July 21, 2015, 12:54
I got new reply from Shutterstock that gives me hope!

I knew they can be professional as they were before, they apologies for double incorrect rejection and gave me case number for those images to resubmit.

Even it takes some time to "fight", it is worth it.

Thanks everyone and thanks Shutterstock support team, looks like they DO listens to their contributors if we are demanding some kind of justice.

You are completely right Elena and also to PixelBytes, it is very possible that this thread had something to do with that.

I agree that our job is to create images, not to fight with reviewers but it is also nice to see that we can be heard if we need to be, even if this is small example. My only hope is because of things like that, it would be nice to give us all back note for reviewer if we have admin case number. Just blank field for number, so no more spamming "thank you, you are nice person" messages. I will be very glad if topics like this one can lead to that.

I don't ask for anything more or less.

Btw. images are not approved yet, just got positive reply that I can resubmit them again and this time with case number.

Thanks again

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Lesson to unknown Shutterstock reviewer (Read 27773 times)

panicAttack

PZF

panicAttack

cobalt

panicAttack

skyfish

PZF

panicAttack

noodle

kmlPhoto

panicAttack

PixelBytes

etudiante_rapide

Jo Ann Snover

panicAttack

Elenathewise

De

panicAttack

skyfish

etudiante_rapide

Rinderart

panicAttack

PixelBytes

Elenathewise

panicAttack

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors