MicrostockGroup

yeah, they send these empty emails that they've approved some of your images w/o any info. i'd say their approvals are only slightly higher than fotolia's. i'm surprised how quickly they approved your photos. normally they sit in your port for about a week. images don't need to be placed in categories to be finished. that's the beauty of stockxpert.

you can find what sold through your account balance and then just click the month.

You didn't have to tell that you were new!  It's pretty obvious.

As for your concerns:
- Rejections?
You are going to have to figure out a way to cope better with them than cry everytime you are rejected. This is a millionth time I heard someone saying "but, but, this image sold zillion times at X site, it's unrejectable! What's wrong with X site? I am new, yet I know more about stock than X site"

- StockXpert website?
It's pretty well designed if you spend time trying to learn what's where!


 

Or a very quick way to make some money for having reviewed a whole big batch of images in seconds. When reviewers are paid by rejections and numbers of photos reviewed, there is always an opportunity for abuse. The flimsiest reasons can be cause for a whole batch or quick reviewer profit.

I'm not going to get on some soap box and demand accountability, but if there was a system for reporting inconsistencies to agencies, it may make them aware that some of the reviewers have personal issues, or possibly are making quick money by unjustified batch rejections.

I know, every photo I take, should have been accepted,   and some of my rejections are best sellers on other sites, but if there's a reviewer who's constantly playing the system for cash and then photographers are sending the shots back in, it's creating more work and costing the agency money. There should be some way to report vague, bulk rejections.

Not StockXpert but some other places. When I wrote asking why photos from the same series went from 100% accepted to 100% rejected, they sent the email to the reviewer, which means, the fox is watching the hen house and there's no agency oversight to what that reviewer does. The answer was "these don't sell well" and the obvious, which I know everyone is sick of hearing is, they are my best sellers on SS and IS, who did accept them. I can add that I won't be submitting to that agency ever again, and on Dec. 31st, which I'm positive means nothing to them, I'll be closing my account. But when more and more photographers give up on any site because of inconsistent reviews with vague wording on the rejections, they are losing potential active contributors.

The problem with crowd sourcing is, the agencies just don't care. For every ten of us that leave and take our work with us, another 20 are lining up trying to make some money. Good reviewers are hard to find and probably harder to keep for the long hours and minimal pay. We leave, they stay on driving people away. No one cares.

I have found StockXpert to be very accepting and friendly. It takes really trying and uploading marginal crap to get a photo rejected on StockXpert. Kind of like BigStock, nice and friendly.

But since the rumor mill has declared StockXpert dead, I guess I'm just wasting electrons with more uploads. 

Dude- you completely missed the point of post. I'm asking about their site design and workflow which is clumsy and unintuitive.
As for rejection, I handle it quite well, I've been married twice and just met my "future ex-wife" recently. Rejection is my middle name.

It's not that hard Dude 

When you are logged in, click on My Account and then bookmark that as your Stockexpert link. Then it will always come up with the page showing image stats and artist earnings.

Roll over "My Account" and you will see the button for "My Images" which shows DLs/views/sales for all your images, one by one.

No need to use the main page login, just go straight to your account information. That makes it easier.

Good Luck!