yes, if the real reason is moire – no question.
but it was just an example.
I want to notice, that I agree with the most of rejections reasons, even with the low commercial value etc.. But I don’t understand rejections when the camera is not stable (of course I don’t speak about small dslr rolling shutter shakeness, I don’t speak about big handheld camera shaking – it should be rejected, it looks too amateur…)
this shot was approved after 3 reuploads with long messages from me and scepticism from the reviewer:http://videohive.net/item/little-boy-traveling-in-an-airplane/7562505?WT.oss_phrase=travel&WT.oss_rank=27&WT.z_author=Grey_Coast_Media&WT.ac=search_list yes, there is some camera motion. And what?!
Actually, the first 5 seconds of that clip are too shaky, but from 0:05 on it’s acceptable. But if you’ve had a lot of clips be rejected for shakiness, it should be something that you try to avoid with footage in the future. Some natural, smooth motion is OK, but if the shot contains short, jarring movements, it will be rejected.
Discovered this link the other day. Might check some of these out myself next time I take a drive into the city. #9 even pertains to our industry! Have a great trip.http://guff.com/15-secret-or-easy-to-miss-things-in-new-york-city/
Completely agree. However, the star rating system is inherently flawed because all internet rating systems are flawed. No matter how hard we work as authors to build perfect projects and provide excellent support, there are always going to be unpleased, disgruntled customers, which will always lead to overly-negative and biased reviews. (Yelp.com, for example)
All projects are reviewed for quality and functionality. There is never an instance where a project should be rated below 3 stars, and in my mind, every project that I accept for sale is worthy of 4 or 5 stars.