Just a smokey type background. Someone liked it with rating it. The only reason it was rejected before was for Artifacting. I cant say what will sell or not in photos or illustrations. Just putting it out there for the ones with money to spend to make that decision.

Sorry, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. The colours are pretty but I don't understand the hard edges/shapes in particular. For an image to sell well it has to be obvious at thumbnail size __ really, really obvious. I hope I'm wrong though!

You didn't hurt my feelings. I have another one that all the other sites rejected save one. Today as soon as it hit SS search index.... 2 dl's in 30 minutes. I honestly cannot say yes this will sell or no it wont (unless its really uninteresting, noisy or blurry). I really wish I could (as everyone else would love to be able to also). All I can do is put it out to see if it sells or not. I might like it but that does not mean it will sell at all. There is a thread around here I think on Images that you thought would not sell or something like that.

This comes from me...A Guy...who a few years ago sold a used Cigarette Butt on Ebay for a little more than the price of a pack of Cigarettes. All you can do is try.

As soon as I find the disk I saved this one to.. I am putting it on SS.

Quote from: gostwyck on June 19, 2009, 01:06
^^^ What exactly is that supposed to be?

It's not going to sell unless it jumps out of a page of thumbnails as a good representation of it's subject matter __ and I can't tell what it is even at that size.

It is very useful abstract background for any designer!

Quote from: Black_Sheep on June 07, 2009, 19:48
Back on the subject of frustration with iStockphoto:

Quote
We regret to inform you that we cannot accept your submission, entitled squares mosaic pattern...



... for addition to the iStockphoto library for the following reasons: We're sorry, but we did not find this file suitable as stock. With the rapid growth of the iStock collection, we give valuable consideration to each file but unfortunately cannot accept all submissions.

So, I've sent it to scout and it is more than obvious that this IS VERY SUITABLE STOCK IMAGE with other version downloaded more than 300 times on other places. Nevertheless, this one has 50mpix resolution!

Well, iStock will probably be my EX agency and 4th bailout due to this stupidity!

OK, here is response from scout:


Comment:
Congratulations, a scout ticket that you have submit has resulted in a rejection being overturned!
Regards,
scout.

Quote from: Adeptris on June 17, 2009, 09:42
You guys really should give the agencies a bit of credit for knowing what they are doing, if every asset is accepted on every site and the search returned the same assets, where would be the diversity and what would be the point?

Should accept fewer. Some people upload far too many similar shots from their shoots. It was better in the days of film when only the best few got picked out for copying and distribution.

Quote from: alias on June 23, 2009, 23:48

Quote from: Adeptris on June 17, 2009, 09:42
You guys really should give the agencies a bit of credit for knowing what they are doing, if every asset is accepted on every site and the search returned the same assets, where would be the diversity and what would be the point?

Should accept fewer. Some people upload far too many similar shots from their shoots. It was better in the days of film when only the best few got picked out for copying and distribution.

Totally agree with you - 3-5 from different unique images from series would be more than enough!

Quote from: FlemishDreams on June 10, 2009, 10:57

Quote from: Milinz on June 10, 2009, 10:40

It's so shorts-sighted of iStock to reject an image like this. The copyspace is very salable 

Milinz, can you not understand that iStock standards are generally higher - aesthetically speaking this illustration is quite poor.

Quote from: Noodles on June 24, 2009, 02:10

Quote from: FlemishDreams on June 10, 2009, 10:57

Quote from: Milinz on June 10, 2009, 10:40

It's so shorts-sighted of iStock to reject an image like this. The copyspace is very salable 

Milinz, can you not understand that iStock standards are generally higher - aesthetically speaking this illustration is quite poor.

Aestetically speaking - there are many people downloading that for various purposes - so aestetics standards are quite dubmb if you ask me... Nevertheless - 'poor' is wrong naming for simple decorative detail which is very useful to many designers.

Quote from: Milinz on June 24, 2009, 09:55...which is very useful to many designers.

I am sure that can be seen in some people's portfolios as a successful track record of numerous images that have been sold hundreds of times...

I just added my reply to back you up on this issue on the istock thread.  Don't expect them to change their ways overnight, but the more that chime in about this, at least I hope the more they will consider it.

I've proved my points in 'not good for stock' reviews...
Also, I am stopping further uploads to Getty owned sites - which brings iStock at first place for not uploading.