Shutterstock Photographer Forum :: View topic

smileus · Joined: 07 Oct 2008 Posts: 134 Location: Germany

Lol, this was a fun read. I hope most of the reviewers don't suffer that much, though. It must still be possible to submit good shots of some of those subjects, no? Or do I have to feel half ashamed when I get a strawberry shot accepted? ;-) Maybe every time I get a photo accepted the reviewer's thought has been something like "damn, not another one of these... well, I take it since it's only one!" instead of "okay, not bad, it'll sell."

But I fully understand the reviewer's frustration as well. Those described shots must be horrible. Apparently the reviewers recieve so many bad shots of easy-to-shoot subjects that they suffer every time they see one. Must be a challenge to remain objective on each shot. People shouldn't submit large series if they are not certain about the quality of the shots. If they have to shoot their keyboard then their best two or three shots have got to be more than enough and I'm sure the reviewer wouldn't feel the urge to run away from the room, so why submit a whole series? Even if they were accepted they'd only make the person's gallery more boring.

soctober · Joined: 15 Sep 2006 Posts: 320 Location: Trinidad & Tobago

amazing read but well need to exercise empathy in all that we do. Big up the reviewers, it reminds me of reading an article on the life a prostitute, same set of disgusts that always get endured because of livelihood.

themightyshrub · Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:09 pm

I'm gonna give this a little bump, just for the hell of it.

cjloncki · Joined: 09 Apr 2009 Posts: 1

i, too, shall bump this up.

*edit*
my 1st post was put to good use.

marident · Joined: 29 Jul 2009 Posts: 33 Location: Massachusetts

Nice piece giving us a different perspective on our images. I just had several autumn images accepted. Hope I didn't put off the reviewer on autumn.

ktgraphics · Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Posts: 420 Location: Ont, Canada

Entertaining and funny read. Thanks for posting.
I wonder what the reviewer who had to review illustrations has on his/her mind. :D

henrikl · Joined: 23 Aug 2008 Posts: 261

Great fun! :) I guess im guily on the gagging. Sorry. :)

pharm · Joined: 09 Jul 2006 Posts: 6131 Location: Contemplating

Here's your bump, Laurin.

frankljr · Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:29 pm

LCV advice taken. Bump #2.

rinder99 · Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:44 pm

Thanks. Time for a little reality chk here for a few folks.

marsaz · Joined: 01 Apr 2009 Posts: 123 Location: Lithuania

LOL. This is hilarious. God give reviewers strenght.

zsooofija · Joined: 03 May 2009 Posts: 204 Location: Transylvania

karimala · Joined: 04 Sep 2005 Posts: 2116 Location: Sacramento, CA

The reemergence of this thread always brings back horrifying memories of my first 48 hours as a reviewer on another site. LOL

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15953&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=17

+++++++++++++++++++++++

Tales from a Newbie Reviewer -- The First 48 Hours

Un-freakin'-believable the amount of CRAP people send in. I had no idea it was that bad.

Ever wonder why queues get backed up? Some people don't know when to stop uploading. Last night...and I'm not kidding...I couldn't sleep, because my mind kept replaying images of seagulls and cemeteries. Why on earth would anyone submit 100 photos with 70+% of the images of seagulls and rows and rows of tombstones? An Alfred Hitchcock wannabe? What's even more amazing about that submission is they were all shot in San Francisco near the Golden Gate Bridge. Out of all of them, only one photo of the Golden Gate. One. Two of cable cars...all with advertising logos, of course. Only 16 out of 100 images accepted. And then there was the guy who uploaded 441 images, half of which were photos of the Grand Canyon and the other half the Grand Canyon pushed through a motion blur filter for use as a background. After a while, I couldn't tell the difference between any of the images, and just left them for another reviewer. My eyes and objectivity couldn't take it anymore. And then there are the people who resubmit huge batches of images that I rejected only hours before. If they were crappy a few hours ago, they are still crappy now.

That's why.

"What is that person thinking?" A parent sent in photos of his naked children. Hello!?! Child pornography, people! A pair of bloody wings that looked like they were freshly pulled off a live bird, both laid out neatly on the grass. How gross. I didn't need to see that. And then there's my favorite one. A photo of black. That's right. Black. And it wasn't a mistake. This photo of black was properly titled, described and keyworded. Keywords are equally puzzling. A landscape photo of a cactus set against a large rock with 10 keywords: cactus, rock, desert, mins, health, penis, phallus, erection, funny, humorous. All I could see was "Ouch!"

Is there a camera anywhere capable of shooting 58 megapixel images? Apparently so, because someone uploaded a photo that size, which stalled my computer for a good 10 minutes. For my time and trouble, I earned a few pennies.

It's amazing how many different types of noise exist. And how many more people can't see it or don't bother to look for it. Some images had noise so large I could see it in the preview panel at 300 x 400 pixels before viewing at 100%.

People are filthy creatures. I've seen greasy sunglasses, years of collected dust, fingerprints on wine glasses, pet hair, eyelashes on food, and the most offensive hair of them all...the dreaded pubic. And they like to grab just any old object they can find and pose them as new. Beaten up watches with the color coming off. Broken joysticks with sticky food particles. Sippy cups with teeth marks. God help me if someone sends in a photo of their stained underwear or belly button with lint inside.

Doors. Steeples. Clock towers. Radio towers. Construction cranes. Power lines. Brick walls. Log piles. Grass. Sun flares. Rocks. Waves. Seagulls. Clouds. Dead tree branches. Train tracks. Boats. Street signs. Lamp posts. Roads. Moving cars. Money. Computer mice. CD-ROMs. Colored pencils. Apples. Oranges. And a whole assortment of one-click Photoshop wonders. Water ripples. Pencil etchings. Pastel paintings. Motion blur. Mosaics.

I keep hoping Christmas will end sometime before summer. Aren't there any other holidays or occasions besides Christmas, Valentine's Day or weddings? I'm very thankful computers don't have smell-a-vision, because I would faint from the constant fumes emanating from all those roses and pine trees.

When did pizza turn blue?

When did camera shake become abstract art?

How long will it be before I stop asking these silly questions and just lose my mind? Hopefully it happens before my eyesight deteriorates from viewing images half blown with sun reflections, or images with no focal point. Or before my nightly dreams start appearing with noise.

The second saddest part about reviewing is seeing so many photographers with a good eye destroying their images with overfilteration during post processing. I rejected some of the most gorgeous scenics from Japan I've ever seen, because of oversharpening. Perfectly composed cityscapes from Bosnia and interesting office buildings, rejected because of overuse of noise reduction software. And gone are the lovely heirloom gardens, ruined by oversaturation. I hope they don't take the rejections personally and choose to learn from them instead.

The saddest part about reviewing is seeing so many photographers who have contributed to stock for several years continuing to submit poor images. Don't they know the rules by now? One guy with several thousand images on one site alone uploaded so much junk in his last submission that I could only accept 20% of the photos. The rejection reasons ran the gamut. Out of focus. Purple fringing. Poor composition. Overexposure. Copyright violations and trademark infringements. It wasn't like he was a newbie trying to learn what is acceptable. He's been around for a while, and should know how to be more selective.

The queue is caught up now.

And now it's time for me to get some rest so I can start another day.

hhltdave5 · Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:30 pm

Like I have said many times before Karin, anyone trying to be accepted to submit stock should be required to read this and the orignal Day In the Life thread before they can submit one image. I think it would save a lot of grief and the reviewer's sanity!

rinder99 · Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 11:33 pm