Nope, because I'm not spending time to "download" them from that page.  Just find a host that can let you display the images at full size with one click.

oh, sorry

So, can you comment on above images.

thanks alot.

Dara

I had already modify my post and it is now current diplay on IS forum.

your kindly feed back is really appreciated.

Dara

I like the two last ones (the crabs on the beach and the christmas-bell-thing). I'm not sure which one I'd pick for the third one.

The bottom three. You're a talented illustrator and should do very well!

Yes it's very important to view vector at full size because Illustrator is infamous for noise, compression artifacts, chromatic aberration and lens distortion. That last sentence was sarcasm btw. I feel it necessary to point that out these days.

The only reason to see vector at 100% would be to see if the lines are clean and really even if they're not, it's illustration and that just gives it a more human look which i prefer over super clean machine precision.

I like the first one for the intricate pattern and the last two.

oops, I wanted to add that the work is quite good. Good luck.

Why da hack someone this days (years) want to be contributor on IS ?!?
Oh I see...
There always peoples who likes pain in the ass...

I would go through the Do's and Don'ts again. For example, the proportions on the girl don't look right with the arm as long as the leg. http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=367&Page=4

If the istock critique forum questions are anything to go by, I think you need more examples that shows off your drawing ability. These are perfectly competent illustrations but a bit simple for istock applications - and some are fairly heavy on non-subtle gradient use (I have a lot of illustration rejections for that on istock).

The first one is too heavy on non-subtle gradients; the roulette wheel is nice but looks a bit like it comes from an illustrator tutorial on how to draw shiny objects rather than observation of how the things actually look with bright light shining on them - the shine shape doesn't follow the curvature of the components of the wheel, making it look like a shiny icon rather than an individual illustration. I like the chinese dragon, but patterns often get rejected as too simple for application.

 The figure won't fly -the drawing is a bit too simple, falling a little awkwardly between being trendily stylised and realistic figure proportions and the gradients don't do a very good job of rendering a three dimensional shape with consistent lighting;  I very much like the crabs, but I suspect for istock you might be better doing a version with less gradient use and more flat colour shading; the Christmas one is again nice, but somewhat cliched. I'd expect most of them to get through into the collection once you are accepted (especially if you tone the gradients down a bit) but I'm not sure they are sufficiently complex to get through the initial application process.