MicrostockGroup

Well, I don't really know why, but there's some inconsistency in the iStock process with regards to a certain set of photos. 

I uploaded some photos of action shots taken in an ice hockey arena and a lot of them get accepted and some of them don't, which leads me to believe that some reviewers understand the situation and some don't. 

Its funny because a lot of the photos are actually very good considering that I have to shoot ISO 640 or higher with a 30D (SS has accepted virtually all of them - so they understand the noise issue) to obtain a fast enough shutter speed.  There are very few cameras that will be able to do noise free work in arenas, and its a shame because I'd like to be able to send a note saying that.  To top it off, anything that does get accepted sells well, and has the potential to be good for me.

What do you think?  Should noise (and that forsaken word "artifacting") be based on situation?  I do, because sometimes its just gonna be there.

PS - I downsize my images from 8MP to at least 4 for iStock (unfortunately I won't be able to get into the Large price range) to reduce the artifacting.

same complain here. Some reviewer just do not understand the constrains that certain pictures were taken under and do not give credit for an otherewise wonderful and usually rare picture.

Ichiro, I saw one of your hockey photos is an editors' choice at Dreamstime.  Great shot.  SPEED!  I hope having an EC brings some good exposure.

Thanks for the kind words.  I'm happy to see that some of my photos are getting some exposure.  I don't really get much due to the fact I'm not overly specialized or my photos in the past haven't had as much
'kick' as others.

Hopefully one day I will be the Photog of the week somewhere