Shutterstock Photographer Forum :: View topic - Not Approved ALL MY Photos! I ask you to join in my problem

shtern · Joined: 01 Dec 2010 Posts: 40

I ask you to join in my problem and help me

Problem in a person (employee) that checks the last two weeks of my work. There are the following problems:
The 1st issue in terms of verification. If you have previously checked my work over 48 hours, it is now possible from 3 days and 22 hours to a week.
Then it follows from Problem 1 Problem 2.
The 2nd problem is 2 hours before the expiration of all possible terms to check the work, not to lose your professional credibility does this in the remaining 2 hours prior to the expiration of 4 days. as it happened today, in my time zone of my time 23:04, 4 March 2012
(And it becomes crystal clear because it is 2 hours before the end of the first time check my photos on March 1, 00:00 He (she) has checked all of my pictures including cast today and yesterday's pictures!) Pr oblema - carelessness in haste hasty decisions.

He came quick and short answer, of course how can objectively assess what is necessary to check the Quick - All of a refusal!

Here is the answer to my photos:
Batch ID Date Submitted Photos in Batch
21045145 04/03/2012 1
21037402 04/03/2012 1
21037198 04/03/2012 1
21029908 03/03/2012 4
20996741 03/01/2012 2
20996540 03/01/2012 1
20996528 03/01/2012 2
20996522 03/01/2012 15

and some photos of the works of earlier and all of them in order, people do not even bother to look closely at my work.
here is my work from one shooting
96505109
Not Approved
Poor Lighting - Poor or uneven lighting, or shadows. White balance may be incorrect. This work is not accepted!

it is just as well treated and the exact same light and camera settings
as in the previously adopted by photographs from the same series:
95576959, 95576956

Here is an example of More:
96504977
Not Approved
Poor Lighting - Poor or uneven lighting, or shadows. White balance may be incorrect.
My work from the same series with the same camera settings and studio lighting, and processing
Here is the number of accepted papers
95286235, 95068237, 24718728
Maybe I was discriminated against on purpose, because I'm not an English speaker and I find it hard to describe my problem and ask for help you, I beg you to help me understand staovitsya difficult to work when there is no mutually beneficial partnership.

with respect Kazak Kostyantyn

ruxpriencdiam · Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2012 4:45 pm

We need to see the pics those numbers wont help us with anything.

semmickphoto · Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2012 4:53 pm

markrhiggins · Joined: 28 Jan 2008 Posts: 1991 Location: Australia

"Maybe I was discriminated against on purpose, because I'm not an English speaker and I find it hard to describe my problem and ask for help you, I beg you to help me understand staovitsya difficult to work when there is no mutually beneficial partnership.
"

I do not think reviewers care or have the time to worry who you are. Sometimes you may get a LCV because the reviewer is of a different culture and does not understand the image value but I do not think it is intentional. Some reviewers are probably non English speaking. Post the images up.

semmickphoto · Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2012 4:56 pm

mauijon · Joined: 02 Mar 2005 Posts: 4277 Location: Maui, Hawaii

Unless the images are accepted, the numbers don't associate with anything.

I also don't understand the time limit expiring. I don't think there is a time limit. Review takes sometimes 1 hour, sometimes a week or more.

ruxpriencdiam · Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2012 5:03 pm

jeffbanke · Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2012 5:15 pm

Kasak,
It is not possible for a reviewer to know who or where we are, or what language we speak, so it is extremely unlikrly that you have been descriminated against for any reason.
It is also unfortunate that simply adding image numbers does not allow us to see those images, especially if they have been rejected.
The best way to show us is to do a "print screen" when you are looking at the rejected images, resize that subsequent image to the 500 pixel dimension (longest side), and post it here.

rinder99 · Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2012 7:01 pm

Betcha he wont.

Kazak, the longer you do this the more you get to realize reviewing is a human thing and as such is very subjective at best.But, If you feel strongly about it "Very strongly" write to support give them the numbers and ask for a second look. or post them here from your hard drive no Larger than 500 pixels wide.

jeffbanke · Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2012 9:43 pm

Please read this thread before doing anything
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=42889

mattgibson · Joined: 11 Nov 2009 Posts: 601 Location: London

I think maybe the point being made is not just the rejections themselves but the time they were rejected in. If I am reading it correctly, he is querying how 48(?) images can be reviewed correctly in such a short space of time and that maybe rejections have gone up because of the longer review times and clearing the backlog?

Just my interpretation and I may be totally wrong but that is how I read it - the reviewers are rushing through the images becasue images of his previously which have been accepted using exactly the same lighting set up are now being rejected for lighting problems.

jhuls · Joined: 02 Jan 2012 Posts: 1046

I am trying to translate what you are saying to the best of my understanding. Here is what I got from what you wrote:

Problem #1 It used to take only a day or two for a review of your photos now it takes 4 days or even longer.

Problem #2 you submitted photos only 2 hours before the whole batch (all of the numbers you have shown us) got reviewed so you think the reviewer did not take the time needed to properly review your photos. You think they may have taken a quick look at a few and then rejected the whole batch.

The reason you feel this way is because you have had similar photos accepted and now are wondering why these have been rejected.

jhuls · Joined: 02 Jan 2012 Posts: 1046

I just looked at your portfolio and I am assuming they are portraits as most of your photos are. I can see why you might be frustrated when you have over 100 photos approved with the same lighting.

Another route you could take is to just resubmit the photos for review. I know it it frustrating because review times are so slow lately but you could write a note to the the reviewer saying you are resubmitting a few photos with corrections(even thought you haven't made any) A different reviewer will most likely have a different outcome. You may have just gotten unlucky and gotten a really picky reviewer.

But please submit a few of the photos here first so everyone can have a better idea of what you are talking about.

semmickphoto · Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 11:55 am

How about as someone suggested in the Grand Canyon thread, just post a few photos at the time. Someone else had the same problem, photos rejected from the same batch whilst accepted photos were of same quality or less.