MicrostockGroup

Me too... and yes those files are accepted everywhere else and selling well. The irony is what DT picks out of a batch to accept are often images with least sales potential.

I for one after 6 years am getting tired of DT and there silly policies. Image Looks to much like this or that. Judge the  individual Image already!!!!!!  Gee, My Image was flagged? please. But, it's still well worth it to upload to, Just frustrating and I agree they and others should remove old stuff BUT.... as we know SS the last few months are selling primarily Old Images, Some I don't even remember submitting and if SS did that , a lot of folks would be losing a lot of money now. Maybe if they tweaked the search?? I dunno.

Indeed, but with the rising level of quality, prices (and our earnings) should follow as well. Otherwise it makes no sense, it's like offering a Ferrari for the price of a Corvette

The point was really that the price should rise along with quality, you can't charge a Ferrari price, for the worst supersports car. Perhaps it would be better if I mentioned Kia vs Rolls or something...

And your images are flawless.  Reviewed enough of them at LuckyOliver to say with confidence that any reviewer who rejects your images doesn't have a clue about what they are doing.

Nobody will contradict you Elena since most of us know your portfolio as one of the monuments of stock.

The "similars" policy of DT is pretty stubborn but Achilles swears by it and it's his site. He is a nice guy but he hasn't the monopoly on stock-truth. By coincidence I had a look at DT this evening with another IP/browser and not logged in. I was shocked to see them use the argument too of "cheapest in the industry" (sic). Hey sorry, I don't want to be the "cheapest" since I have to pay my equipment and bus rides to the studio and if a customer wants it "cheap", he can go to heroturko. Flickr or shoot it himself.

There are 2 possible attitudes one can have. One is to scorn the agency, and the other one is to just take it as it is. Other sites will sell it, and by Jove, nobody is married to one single site except exclusives that sold their soul. Dammit those rules of exclusivity, they wouldn't stand any trial at a decent labor court. They own your total personality, especially DT with their very strict exclusivity rules. At iStock, you can still sell RM. Even if a DT exclusive earns 4x more than me with a comparable port (I got evidence) I'd rather throw all my stuff for free on Flickr than give my soul away for peanuts and I don't care other people will step in to copy good sellers.

One of my current focuses is to shoot tribal folks in the Philippines. I know it isn't stock but I don't care. Of the last series  they started rejecting after just 4 because of "similars". But is was a story. I will soon delete those 4 shots they accepted since they aren't worth it. They even took the worst shots.

I had an editor of a German travel magazine that site-emailed me if I had more of the Intha leg-rowing people in Myanmar of which there are a couple exclusive on DT. I said sure, but DT won't accept them since they are "similars". Send them all, said the editor and I made more on those shots than 3 months regular income on DT. If DT would have accepted all those "similar" shots I wouldn't even be bothered to sell those privately. That's how they miss business by the taboo "similars" hangup but I have no critique at all since it's their business. I just don't want to go exclusive there any more. Unless they sponsor my camera and my time.

@Karimala and @Lagereek and @FD - thank you guys.  But that's exactly the thing I am frustrated about - shouldn't reviewers be able to tell the difference between someone who submits 20 images of a pizza slice on white shot from different angles and someone who submits a series of images that actually tell a story? My expectations were that a reviewer should. I actually had very reasonable reviews when Ellen Boughn was DTs creative director, was sad to see her leave.
I wonder how much of these ridiculous reviews we are seeing is Achilles' original idea and how much of it is just reviewers not understanding what he wants them to do. A guy who founded such successful agency should be able to see that they are shooting themselves in the foot here.

I don' know about you guys, but this January on DT was unbelievable for me. A 50 credits sale, a lot of 7'8'10 credits ones...really excellent. The problem is they are rejecting 70% of my images and they became really strict...
I just passed SS appication and trying iStock. Now I have to decide when to quit exclusivity with DT...tough call...

Dont kid yourself, she has been my girlfriend for over 20 years, now we are planing children, one boy and one girl and theyre going to be microstockers.

Yeah it's good not to have high expectations for ur kids so u don't end up being disappointed.

not surprised.. amazing.. from one of the best stock executers.. colors, isolation, incredible stuff always.. really nuts looking what they are doing..

Here's the rejection:

"Too many photos/illustrations on the same subject or from the same series. Your submission should not duplicate content already in your portfolio or content which you plan to upload separately in the future (ie. collages based on your images). Please be more selective and choose only the best shots or illustrations. Avoid submitting simple variations on the same subject or duplicating content already in your portfolio (including from collages). You can create sets of similars (several shots included within the same image)."

Maybe the flames were too similar. Seems pretty picky.

are you serious? if we look into that they would approve 10 pics a month..