Congrats and good news, thank you… back to work
This is good iv already been fixing up some of my weaker work
What’s this mean for my existing files?Right now, we’re not removing any existing files. However, in the coming months, we’ll be planning some “Spring Cleaning” measures for existing files that meet a few requirements:
- Fall below our current quality standards.
- Have no or very few sales AND
- Have been on the marketplace for a year or more.
(Clarification: well done older files that have strong files are not at risk!)
Just a question, how many sales are few sales?
Although the last 54 comments are all supporting message to graphicriver new move, but I would suggest otherwise.
Pricing itself already enough to distinguish quality or non-quality stuff. All GR needs to do is to have a new option to filter by pricing (quality) and GE can keep all the 18000 arts.
If that is not enough, just add a new data field called “premium or non-premium” badge for every artwork then let the buyer filter by it.
Anyway, it all come down to GE directions. Either they wanted to become a super duper high quality marketplace (where the artwork are too special for general usage – sometimes) or a very BIG marketplace (over 1million artwork) with many many things (just like the Big 4 Stock Agencies) where you can find ANYTHING AT ALL .
Hmm… not sure if I missed anything, but what I am trying to say is feature like filter price of an exact amount, below, and above.
As someone who buys as well as sells I like that the quality of items will go up.
I also agree with many here that reviewers need to give a clearer and more precise explanation of why a file has been rejected. It sometimes appears that a file makes its way onto the marketplace depending on who the reviewer is.
My hope is that quality and marketplace need is driving selections not personal preferences. I worry that the community feel could get lost a bit. I wonder if we should have a peer review area so authors can preview files to the group prior to quality control should an author wish.
I’m very much in favor of the raise in item quality…but it seams as though your reviewers need to follow the same standards. I recently had an item rejected that doesn’t currently exist anywhere on GR. The generic explanation was that there was possibly already a lot of similar items on GR. Of course I promptly responded asking for further explanation as to why this original, high-quality item was rejected only to never receive a response.
It didn’t help that I saw 4 or 5 recent items get approved that same day that were what I would consider low quality replicas of stuff I’ve seen on GR from day one.
Raising quality = good. Unequal standards among reviewers = bad. Lowering customer service toward authors = unacceptable.