Review Queue Changes for VideoHive & PhotoDune



I guess it’s waste of time to ask that why my upload rights have been revoked for indefinite time on VideoHive?

I had 1780 sales
4.89 average rating over 37 reviews
Featured Author
Featured Item
Top Monthly Author
Weekly Top Seller

Yes, to be fair I can’t remember which of these are from VideoHive and which are from 3DOcean, but still these badges should stand for something. And also yeah, not the most impressive statistics but still an indicator that I had my place as an author in the marketplace.


I think the one main factor in this instance boils down to your approval ratio.


You replied to me?


You are right. Approval Ratio.
But on what interval of time? Since when? And at the time of which reviewers?
Because they said on post they want a new generation of reviewers and they want to train new ones (because, logically those who were in past, were not so good)… So, the decision of blocking upload process for some users based on approval ration is very relative…


No idea I’m afraid.

Did they actually say that, or have you interpreted “recruiting and training new reviewers” to mean that?

How so? Surely you’re not judging how good a reviewer is, purely on whether they accept your items or not?


Christian_Fletcher: I would hope that the reason for new reviewers is this exact one because the old ones weren’t good enough.

SpaceStockFootage: It would be wrong to assess reviewer’s skill on whether or not our own items get accepted, but I will have to side with that point here a bit. Especially for me, I have had multiple instances were items have been rejected which are basically shot with the same settings on camera, just with a different subject than something that got accepted (I am aware of the 3 variation rule, and these examples weren’t even near to breaking that rule) and I have had hard rejections based on the reviewer’s assessment that something I shot was apparently shot on a GoPro, whereas it was shot on a DSLR, and this is a dire situation in the sense that my rejection ratio rises just because the reviewer has no idea what he or she is looking at, which contributes towards me being banned from uploading. But, also the hard rejections I have got have been in part because of me not being able to produce high enough quality, I’ll admit that.


[quote=“SpaceStockFootage, post:27, topic:186174”]
recruiting and training new reviewers
I`m not judging a reviewer upon my uploads but the envato stuff sure does if they need to “recruit and train new reviewers”. Other way, Why the need for new reviewers if the upload files volume is the same or less than in the past? Why the need for change? Only if something went wrong in past or is changing a lot. I think.


Because uploads are increasing considerably as time goes by. I don’t think it’s ever been stated that upload volume is the same or less than in the past… where are you getting that from?


If they are restricting upload for some users I presume it will be less uploads to review for the next period. So no need for extra reviewers but for better reviewers. My thoughts.


Of course.


Sorry… only replied to the first part of your comment. The ‘of course’ was related to there being less uploads to review after the changes. With regards to them not needing more reviewers… I don’t think Envato have ever hired reviewers that they didn’t need, so I’m assuming they’ve run the numbers and are hiring based on what the levels will be after the change. Especially as the number of items submitted gradually increases every year… so they’d have to put even more limits on uploading, to not require additional reviewers at some point.


How can I find out my approval track record? Don’t you think it is normal for everyone first to know his approved&rejected items percentage before blocking us from uploading? You can not tell me I am sick if you are not showing me the signs of my disease.


What difference does it make?


Read again the last proposition of my post.


Well they’re not a health centre or a hospital. A better analogy would be that “you cannot tell me my uploads have been suspended due to my low approval ratio, if you are not telling me what my approval ratio is”. But they can… and they have.

Sure, it would be nice to know just for our info, and we’re welcome to ask… but it’s unlikely they’ll tell us, and they have no obligation to do so.


Great, you just explained the analogy. See? It was so simple.
I Don’t care about your assumptions.
Don’t put yourself like a fly in the milk.
Leave me alone. I know you. I don’t want to spend the rest of my life arguing with you.
I never asked you something. Good day to you!


Well your analogy wasn’t quite working, so it was easier to bring back to the original concept, which didn’t really require an analogy in the first place. Sure, you never asked me anything specifically, but you made a post in a public forum… don’t be surprised if people reply.

What assumptions by the way?


Okay. So I’ve sat here and read ever one of the 38 comments so far … and the prognosis is not good. Not good at all. We are at a critical apex of Videohive’s life cycle. And I see vultures coming in. The Microstock industry is now a mature market, and with the increasing quality of iPhones and cheap DSLRs, everyone’s in on the game - shoving up a shot of a duck floating across the water at every angle and hoping it sells.

So Envato are absolutely right to implement a ‘Self Curation’ concept and empower authors to look internally at their work. But the process that Envato have taken to do this IS wrong, and fundamentally flawed. This Acceptance/Rejection Ratio concept is not a detailed qualitative approach to a considered portfolio. It can never be qualitative because no one is looking at them ! It is a quantitative ‘;hack’ to mass reduce the queue- and consequently there are some potentially amazing content which we’ll just never see.

What Envato is doing is the equivalent to taking a blunt machete to hack off your arm, because one doesn’t have plaster/band-aid to cover a little cut on the finger. It is highly interventionist at the extreme and very concerning. Envato, It’s been so good, but please… Wake Up. You are really killing your business here. People will leave.

The migration is happening already and what will happen is a stagnation of content which is irrelevant from a buyer sales point of view, but has ONLY been accepted because an authors’ previous item(s) has been accepted (approval ratio). Do you see what I mean? Do you see how this is not a qualitative approach? Notwithstanding what I mentioned above about the growth of the Microstock industry. This is not the reason of Envato’s problem.

One reason why Envato’s stock footage may be so large and their review queue is so long. It’s simple: People need to eat. If an author uploaded 3 or 4 stock footage items to the queue, if this takes 6 months to review - only to be rejected, it is sensible to assume someone wanted to upload 170 files to the review queue in the hope that 6 months later, if half of those are rejected, some would be accepted. It is a flawed way of doing things from an authors point of view, but it is happening - and it has made Envato’s review issues grow and grow until they’ve now reached this critical problem.

SpaceStockFootage: May i suggest something to Envato: Here’s a new perspective:

Who is the customer here? Who dictates the success of this site? Not Envato. Not The Author. It is the Buyer! So how about putting this in the hands of the Buyer? Let the Purchaser decide. How will this be implemented? Let me explain:

Instead of a Approval/Rejection ratio, How about an Item-To-Sales ratio.
So we can clearly see an author with 150 items that are selling loads is obviously curating a higher concentration/quality of material (relevant saleable material), than an author with 6000 items which are selling none. Because at the end of the day, (as we have seen with Photodune) a Microstock site’s survival is absolutely dependent NOT on how many/how few files a micro stock site has, but how relevant the material is - which manifests itself in a true metric - how well an authors’ portfolio is selling.

An Item-To-Sales metric would be a great and easy way to stop overflowing of basically crap content. It could be displayed on an author’s dashboard, and could be automatically reviewed quarterly, after which, a notice could appear on an authors’ dashboard:

‘’Your Item-To-Sales Ratio for this quarter is now 65%. If this falls below 50%, we’ll temporarily withhold your ability to upload for one quarter (3 months)".
AT LEAST WE KNOW WHEERE WE STAND! And it’s the Buyers telling us our stuff are not selling - not some reviewer.

To reduce the risk of their uploads being capped, and to get their Items-2-Sales ratio up - they simply self-get rid (delete) their own crappy items that aren’t selling. Just think what vast resources this could save Envato where authors are forced to remove their own work which isn’t selling.

This would also take the subjective reviewer nature out of the equation - reviewers rejecting work which has been selling 100s on other sites. Who is right. The reviewer, or the 100s sold on others sites?

So that’s how you implement effective self curation - let him/her upload it here. If it sells it sells, if it doesn’t eventually the author will be forced to remove it him/herself.

I could imagine this being a revolutionary feature. We could do away with ‘The Sales Monitor’ thread and have an Items-2-Sales monitor. I envisage posts like: ‘’Hey I’m a new author - I’ve just uploaded two videos in the last three months and both have sold. My Item-to-Sales ratio for this quarter is 100% Yeah - I must be doing something right, I’m going to upload 10 more relevant content, and see how they do’’.

Secondly, Videohive should wholeheartedly adopt the Audiojungle trial method of allowing ALL authors maximum of, say, 5 uploads per month. (Or even 3 per month). This surely gives time for Reviewers time to qualitatively look at 3 items properly, then approve… and of course, if your Items-2-Sales ratio increases - then your upload capacity increases too.

Just an idea, It’s gotta be better than the current ‘hack’ rejecting masses of potentially great and unique work and suspending authors !


If I understand you right, there will be no initial review at the time of upload anymore?
So the marketplace is flooded with crap from new authors nobody reviewed and only after 3 months there is an upload stop enforced on them? And then they can actually leave all the non-selling items in the portfolio, they just can’t upload anything new?

This will fill up the marketplace with so many low quality files that no buyer is able to find something good. And this is not what we want.


‘‘If I understand you right, t’’

No Creattive - you did not understand me right.

ALL Files will be reviewed just like ALL other stock sites in the history of the Microstock market. At the moment, the ONLY microstock site that does NOT review items - is (shockingly enough) Videohive !!!

But with a cap on maximum 3-5 uploads per month - enough for Envato reviewers to handle the workload qualitatively. this will force Envato authors to up their game, because if those 3 to 5 they’ve monthly items uploaded aren’t selling after a period of time, their upload rights would be capped.

Videohive are NOT reviewing the majority of items they have accepted if a user happens to have had a higehr acceptance ratio. Which is why, just because an author with previous accpetance ratio is allowed to chuck 100 more of the same ‘work’ in.

Remember, a ‘good’ item accepted by a reviewer has no bearing on sales. an example:
I could produced 3 brilliant motion graphics items of a Map of the United States… looks great- gets accepted. Then i produce the SAME file, but a map of UK… Then the same for China, India, in fact i can do this for all 196 countries of the world… But because my first few items have been accepted - the rest will automatically be accepted based on my acceptance ratio.

Now VHvie is flooded with 196 files of … maps of Azerbaijan to Mongolia. - 196 files.

As a buyer, when i come to look at the newest files and all i see is this, how is that tailored to what i want?

The Items-2-ratio model i proposed would be motivation enough for authors to look at what they’ve produced, see what’s selling, and self curate every 3 months or so. Now if these all sell - great ! I will have a good healthy items-2-sales ratio. Not all items will sell, some countries will linger for 7 or 8 months before selling, but the overriding principal is for me to put my most popular or best selling works up first.

I will also add, from a professional point-of-view, to be taken seriously as a major Stock curation agency - Videohive needs to implement Editorial non-journalistic footage.(non-commercial use).

I have had the fortune to take some exclusive video footage of President Trump’s recent visit to the United Kingdom. It has sold bucketlods and has been used on the BBC and German ZDF channel. If i’m a news content editor or documentary filmmaker, - the last place i wil look for anything relevant is Videohive.

That is something Videohive could look at in the future.