MicrostockGroup

Want a little feed back from you pro's.  I am a newbie here and to microstock.  I have been reading these forums and other internet sites for a couple months now to get a feel of what to expect when submitting to microstock.  I will admit I do not have a good quality camera, (only what you guys call point and shoot)
About 5 or 6 months ago I submitted photo's to a public domain site, (yes the unthinkable to some) but needed to know if anyone would even like my work.  I submitted 35 photo's and so far have had 8,089 downloads on those photo's.
Well just this week I submitted 11 photo's to two different microstock sites and have been rejected for low quality and no commercial value.  It seems to me with 8000 downloads that my quality and value has been useful for someone.  With that being said, and knowing I will not be able to purchase a good quality camera for a very very long time if maybe I should just give up on this idea as it seems I don't stand a change.  Oh one more thing to add.  Some of my photo's that was rejected for no commercial value I searched on that site afterward for those type images and found pretty much the same thing, one in particular was just a different bowl color.  Go figure.
TIA for advice

People will take anything that's free.  Doesn't mean it's actually salable.

I think from a pure business perspective it doesn`t make much sense to get into the game at this moment. Hoever, if you are willing to learn and grow you should go for it!
En contrario: If you just want to enjoy Photography as a hobby, I would rather join some of the communities and avoid dealing with the troubles and frustrations of nowadays (micro)stock market or set up my own site.

Basically, what those above say is correct.
When I was a teacher, I used many, many Creative Commons and Public Domain images. I bought exactly one, ever, and that was because I happened to know the photo was available on iStock. So, just because a photo is useful to e.g. a teacher doesn't mean for a minute that it would be acceptable on a stock agency. (Also, e.g. Flickr images are often much more useful to a teacher as they're 'real' rather than set up in a studio) Their technical standard is way above what's needed for at least 95% of 'real world' use.
No matter how good the picture, it's no guarantee it will sell: I've a photo which did well in international salon competitions and has sold exactly once on iStock, because people looking for that subject don't search the micros.
Again, my top selling photo was taken on a p&s, but almost everything else taken with that camera was rejected, and it, and most of my early scanned slides would have no chance of being accepted nowadays, even though some of them still sell.
So yes, it's far harder now than it was when I started, and it was harder when I started than it was when iStock started. But I'm sure there will be plenty new people starting now who will do well.

Put some work up in the critique forums and learn from the feedback you receive.

as "disorderly" wrote it's more difficult with your p&s, but if you decide to keep on trying try to get the best from your camera:

- set your camera at highest resolution and highest quality (lower compression); most cameras are not factory set at best settings;
- set at low ISO (if that setting is possible);
- disable digital zoom if enabled;
- choose the best possible lighting conditions; daylight is good if used properly
- carefully edit in a professional picture editor (adobe photoshop, corel photopaint, ...);
- always save as a lossless format during editing (.tif, .bmp);
- as a last step, downsize pictures to minimum required (4 Megapixels on most agencies - 6 on some) to reduce noise;
- resave as .jpg at highest quality

may not be enough in many cases but it's worth trying

I do have my camera set at the highest quality but don't think it has an ISO setting but will check again and also
will check about disabling the zoom although I never use the zoom because I read somewhere that zooming could cause
noise.  I do edit a little but am afraid to sharpen too much also read that over sharpening could cause noise and reducing
noise too much can cause blurring.
After editing I save the file as PNG.  I haven't downsized the pictures so may try doing that.
One of the sights I submitted to stated that they will not be able to consider any more submissions, so now don't know
wether to keep trying or not.  Some of the other sites may tell me the same thing.
I just set up a photobucket account so I will go over to the critique section and post a link.

Well maybe it is the world's poorest camera.  It is a Nikon coolpix L20 and at the time I bought it didn't realize about the ISO setting but have checked for that setting long before I tried microstock and there is no setting for it.  It is automatic!

I had a quick look a the L20 user manual, and this seems to be a camera with no manual controls whatever. The only mention of ISO is that an idiot light saying that comes on when the camera has to adjust the ISO (automatically) because of low light. There is "auto" or various scene modes.

This really isn't the right sort of equipment to use for stock - even if you start with a point and shoot, you need something with more manual controls. My take would be that you'll spend so much time trying to work around the camera that it wouldn't be worth it.

Remember, there is a pretty strong second hand market, so when you get some money together, look for a nice second hand DSLR. The big advantage is that a DSLR is a lot easier to use than a high-range digicam. But like Lisa says, keep practising composition with your current camera.

You're too late for the game, even more experienced photographer will struggle if they start today. Not saying that you can't make a Dollar or two but the hourly rate will be such poor that any other work will be much better, at least from a business point of view.

I'm also newbie in this business like you, after 50 images rejected. I still keep going on what I like and interested to do so.  I have not more than 20 images in my portfolio, but one days it will be 100,1000,10000 until 100000.  

No one will stop you, until you do it yourself.  Rejected is not a reason for stop doing thing, the only reason is your heart is too weak.

Keep your chin up my friend!, we gonna go through this together, many useful topic in this site are available for you to see and it completely help you in the future.

It has become way more difficult to make money with stock. And especially for a beginner it´s hard to understand why some images are in the libraries that would now get rejected - even for copyright reasons. Why are some product shots in the library while new ones get rejected (e.g. the ever so popular mac computers - lots and lots in the libraries but if you upload a new one with removed logos it gets rejected for copyright reasons, even if it´s only part of the image) - very hard to digest.

Anyway - if you have the slightest optimism that you might make money from some of your images in the future, you MUST NOT give them away for free. And even if you don´t have any hopes - please try to keep in mind that some people are trying to make a living from SELLING images. It´s definitely tempting to know other people like your images and download them, but history seems to be repeated here.

A few years ago some big traditional agencies refused to open the gates to their libraries for some photographers. Being turned away, some of these photographers started selling their content on some upcoming small agencies that sold images way cheaper. So the later called microstock agencies were able to gather a pretty good stock of growing quality images in very short time. That new competition has quickly become a big threat to a once flourishing business nowadays called macrostock.

We fellow photographers only put our work up for sale on those microstock and macrostock agencies we are not the ones rejecting your work. Even if some of my collegues above seem to be a bit arrogant, please help feeding our families by not giving away images for free.