I must say that I, too am curious to see the portfolios of both litifeta and StockManiac - especially when the former photographer complained of a 100% rejection.

I'm always surprised when members here don't list their portfolios. I look at this place as a resource to learn and grow. To me, looking at the work of others is an important part of that process.

So, it was a glitch that enabled more than 100 to be uploaded.  Now we have that settled (as I beleive this was the main issue) we can move on.

My sales are on track this month (after a BEM last month) and $ per DL is slightly up at above $1 per DL.

I'm on the flip side of the coin: my earnings at DT are up by 32% this month.

Likewise.   My DT sales are up as well. I'm not going to be retiring any time soon on my DT sales, however, they are up.
       I am a bit concerned now after reading all of this thread and the response from DT.  Why?  Many of my recent sales are  "older" pictures posted upwards of 5/6  months ago. Pix that had never sold before.  I hope that this trend does not cease due to some program that now  'dis-favors' older pictures.   Seems to me, if it sold today, age doesn't seem to matter, it must still be relevant to someone.  On the other hand, I understand there has to be some kind of  'shelf-life'  on these things.
     
         Long upload times?  Low approvals?   What are you going to do? It's the nature of the business.
        Uber-folios,  one-man shows....  what are you going to do?  Nature of the business.
         Keeping integrity?  Lie thru your teeth?  ...  What are you going to do?  It's the nature of  every business.   
         You could go on for days picking apart every facet of a business and how it deals with it's customers, contributors and employees..
       We pick and choose what and who we think we want to deal with.  If later we feel the deal went sour...   we have two options.   Bear with it or bail out.  Yeah, you might have to wait 6 months to bail out, but you knew that going in. That's the chance you took.
        It didn't take me long to learn that. The number of people on this planet that actually do succeed in 'fighting city hall',  fighting 'the man'... are very, very, very few and far between. Same here in this situation. Their lawyers are more powerful and more plentiful than yours.
     Micros I have a problem with, really, any business I have a problem with...   I'm not going to waste a lot of my time hacking it out with them.  I ask once, I ask twice.  If I still feel I'm getting jerked around, blank 'em.  I  leave.  I'm biding my bailout time with a few micros right now. In their case not due to any disputes,but simply because they don't sell my pix.  When the limits up, the delete button gets active for an evening and the email  goes out to withdraw my name from the site.
         It ain't no biggie.  There are plenty of places to sell your work and microstock is not the be all end all of outlets for your photos.  I'm making far more outside of the micros than I do in them.

         I can understand the anger,  disappointment. whatever, that some have flamed on about in these related threads.  And I can agree with much of what was said.... and,  disagree with much that was said. 
         The photogs made some strong and valid points.  The  'company'   likewise made some valid points.

But in the end...  it's their company and they can do whatever they want. 

       By day I train low & middle managers for a multi-national, multi-billion dollar company.  There is something in their employment agreement each employee reads and signs.  It is also in the business agreements they make with their vendors and customers alike. It's something like this...

"   .................... reserves the right to change these policies at will and without the need to provide any written or verbal notification in advance nor to advise any participants prior to those changes. "

If anyone wants to work for them, buy from them or provide for them, they agree to that  condition. 

That's the way it is.   If DT wants to change on the fly,  that's their right.   Like it or not.  Right or wrong.  Ethical or not. 

When we sign up with any micro,  we click on that box saying we agree to their terms.  That includes the ones that they decide to change later at their will.

As for me,  I am not totally happy with what I've read on either side.  Photogs and DT have both put some doubts in my mind. Time will tell.

 None-the-less,  I won't be leaving DT any time soon.  If my work sells there, swell for me and swell for them. If my work should stop selling there....  hasta la vista, baby.

 If the day should come  that I've had enough, that's the day I stop uploading and start the 6 month countdown.  No biggie.

Dudes and dudettes of discontent....  Do you actually believe Coke would care if you called them up and said, "I'll never drink Coke again"?  You'd be like spit in the ocean... of no concern.  The only way you could beat Coke or, for that matter  Dreamstime, is if  EVERYONE pulled their photos... and that .......just ain't gonna happen.  Spend your life on really valued things.

You're wasting your valuable life time.  If you're ticked,  let 'em know  by pulling your own plug.  Just keep in mind,  they aren't going to miss you.  On the other hand,  .......you won't miss them either and your life will be a lot less aggravating.

Peace      -tom

thanks for clearing that up achilles - and taking the time to post.

Thanks, Void.     Hope all know I do not think myself  "holier than thou".  God knows I've had my rants in life and even here on MSG. There's been plenty of times I came back 5 minutes after posting and deleted everything that I said.
    I became a member on this site because I liked the family-like atmosphere that Leaf  had going.  It would be a shame to flush it all down the poop-chute over one micro-outfit and a couple policies they had that irked some of us.  DT isn't the first to tick off the photogs and they won't be the last. We all know, next week it'll be one of the others. And this DT thing will fade into the archives. It's the nature of this business.
    We need to remember that the day before yesterday, everyone in this thread was getting along, exchanging ideas, passing on tips and enjoying ourselves shooting the bull. It's crazy that suddenly we're hurling insults and calling names.
       I've learned a lot hanging out here, and I'd like to learn more. I've learned from parties on both sides of the above debate. Hopefully, by  the day after tomorrow, some verbal handshakes will have been exchanged and we can get back to the business of helping each other  make some money and have some fun.
     And above all,  I know I don't need to preach to anyone here. We're all adults.  We just need to remember why we all joined this forum in the first place.  I think that was because we all liked it.
         Peace..  (yeah, I'm an old hippie)      -tom

You decide if this falls into the 5% upscale limit.

Nothing much to decide: that's a 12+% size increase. Kinda strange why someone would upsize an already "big enough" image...

I guess that is not the only one who has upsized images. Iophoto is in focus right now, especially here because of this thread. Reviewer cannot see everything all the time and if the quality is ok then who cares?
Apparently this image is of good quality and I have no doubt about that.

I guess that is not the only one who has upsized images. Iophoto is in focus right now, especially here because of this thread. Reviewer cannot see everything all the time and if the quality is ok then who cares?

Why care?

First, because it is against the stated rules of DT and every other microsite.  Many sites would ban an artist for this sort of action, but being that he is new to the business I think that he should just get a warning.

Second, there was actually a very long thread at the Yahoo microstock forum about this very issue a short while ago.  Artists went so far as to call each other liars and cheaters for thinking about submitting images that were upsized more than the rules allowed.

Third, microstock sites continually reject an image for being "overly-edited".  They state that we should leave the editing up to the designer.

Fourth, you introduce artifacts when you upsize an image, so the buyer will not be receiving the quality image that they might expect.

I'm sure that there might be other reasons, but that is what I could come up with in a few short minutes.

If DT does not mind up-sizing anymore, my apologies for bringing up that matter.

Are there rules about that?  As long as the image looks good at full size, I don't see any problem with upsizing.  I have two upsized images in IS (50% upsize) and one in StockXpert and BigStock (100% from a 640x480pix image!).

I used to upsize my 3.9MPix images to comply with TotallyPhotos minimum 4MPix.  Of course it was so insignificant that it was never noticed.

I've seen however horrible upsized images, though.  There are also some cameras (Fuji, I think, has several models) that have an internal upsizing algorithm and the result is always an image with very soft edges as if slightly unfocused.

Regards,
Adelaide

I do some upsizing.  When I crop an image, I want to preserve original resolution, so I define the crop area in the same proportion as the original and then just use the bicubic smoother option.  To be honest with you, it was never a problem... A sharp, hi-res  image upsized with bicubic smoother option is difficult to spot.  Alamy seems to think this too.

and i thought this thread was going to die a peaceful death

 i agree that if i have a stock agency - and if i had a "newbie" as iophoto is - i would make exception - iofoto's portfolio is great - on every single photo we can see that "they know what they're doin' " ...

 and also, i have to say that i had a few times uploaded more photos than it was limit at the momentum (it was a little breaking limits - but 120 > 100 - so it is breaking of rule) - and no one made any problem to me.
 i do not what would happen' now, because i stopped uploading photos for a few months. - a few days ago i uploaded a few small bactch of photos (some 20-30 files) - so i do not know.

Perhaps the first reviewer was blinded by the beauty of your submitted pictures and could not find the keyboard to approve the pictures. After a certain period of inactivity in the review cue they reverted back into the general line.

Ha Ha HA Ha . . .  (PS. I am not making fun of you or your pictures. If only you could see the tear on my face regarding the performance of DT).