Wow! I've been spending more time uploading to iStockphoto and Dreamstime for the last year because they make way more money for me than SS. I felt that my portfolio had been neglected on SS, so I decided to spruce it up and uploaded about 30 images that had already been approved at IS or DT. Wow! is all I can say to the inspectors at SS. They have really clamped down on the "Too many of the same subject" and "composition". When I first started out three years ago, they pretty much too everything I through at them and IS and especially DT were the ones that were hard... golly gee  Not sure how much more I'll upload to them, considering that IS and DT both sell double or triple on nearly the same amount of uploads (around 300 each)...

Truly true... they are crazy for me for about the same reason, but that's the game.

I think it is crazy that they reject for "too many of the same subject" as the new images get more sales.  Perhaps they should delete the old photos and let us submit new ones. This must lose them and us money.

Personally I think rejecting images for this reason is a bad idea.  Why not give the buyer more to choose from?  In my book, if the image is good on a technical level then accept it and let the buyer make the choice.  If I'm not mistaken iStock made this decision a long time ago.  If it's just a matter of disk space, take some of that profit and buy more disk space.

Things have definitely changed at SS.  Gone are the days of submitting 30 images and all getting approved.  Perhaps submitting in smaller batches is a good idea.

Gone are the days of submitting 30 images and all getting approved.  Perhaps submitting in smaller batches is a good idea.

I never submit more than 5 at a time to SS (usually 3 a few times a week if i feel energetic)...   and is it me or do rejection reasons come in  waves...  for a while,  it's artifacting,  then for a while it's something else....  I swear I never had a group of rejections where each rejection was different... LOL   speaking of  "composition, not  a good seller"  (or whatever the exact wording)  came up a couple times this week for me at SS.  Haven't seen that one in probably over a year.  Maybe theres a new sheriff in town and that was the rejection button of the week???  LOL
   And in support of what has been already said here... those exact pix were accepted the same day on IS. 
    who knows what evil lurks in the minds of reviewers??  only the shadow knows.....   (insert maniacal laughter here)    -tom

p.s. and if  SS reads this... I'm not complaining.  SS is still my No. 1 or 2 seller, flip-flopping with IS.

sorry one more point.   I have on more than one site and on more than one occassion,  resubmitted pix rejected as "not stock material/not deemed a good seller/ and compostion" .... resubmitted some 5-6 months later............ and they are accepted.  Just because a pic might not be considered a good seller today,  doesn't mean that will be the case in six months. 

I agree, SS has been very tough.    I am just starting with microstock, so I don't know about past trends, but I have an 87% approval with IS, 97% with DT, and like 50% or less with Shutterstock. 

I was worried about IS when I started because everyone said they were the toughest, but for me SS is the hardest.  And I have only gotten one noise/artifacting rejection so far, the rest has been similars, lighting, etc. 

They are currently making me the most $$, though, so I am not really complaining.  Just wishing I could get more stuff online.  :-)

I have been having the opposite experience lately, SS is taking most of my illustrations and photos while the other sites reject them. Also my sales are increasing at SS the more they accept. DT is treating me like a small child by some of the rejection reasons and most of what IS throws
back is selling at SS right after it goes into their system. I know that buyers are always looking for the newest at SS but older images keeping selling. I'm very happy with SS because I see the rewards of my efforts. 

I used to think that iStock was hyper picky and unreasonable at times.  Now DT, SX, and FT are making them look conservative!  In my experience DT and SX have really ramped it up.  Today I got a batch of files rejected at SX with the reason of:  "please upload better quality images".  Ouch!  That's a new one.  I get of lot those, "too many in the libary" and "no commerical potential" reasons as well from the usual suspects.

SS is still one of favoriates and I move the most pictures through them.  IS the money leader though.

G~ 

I do find it strange how different people have varying success with uploads at different sites. Touch wood, I rarely get rejections at SS, whilst at IS I struggle to achieve an acceptance rate much above 50%, mainly for artifacting when viewed at 100%.

I presume that most of the differences come from different ways of post processing, sometimes I will downsize my images on IS and use a spot of gaussian blur for skies and darker areas if I feel it's worth resubmitting, it's generally not worth it for just one site.