well that is a good question and i am not sure what the answer is.  They are a pain to upload to, but I also have the highest $/pic/year with them, so perhaps the extra time is worth it.

What is frustrating is uploading a load of photos and spending the time on disambiguating them, only to have them rejected....... perhaps that should teach me to upload better files.

for me, I still upload there, but grumble about it and leave it to the last thing I do.  I know there is lots of people still interested in becoming exclusive with them so they must obviously think that it is worth it.

It's probably worth it. After 10 months there, I have 300 photos online, and they sell ok. I'm more worried about the future though. The last couple of months, DT has been more profitable for me, and they are much easier to deal with.

A golden rule about IS: never ever criticize them at their own forum. You'll be attacked by a swarm of loyal exclusives and inspectors, telling you that IS is the greatest gift to mankind since John Lennon or jeepers creepers, whoever you prefer. Any thread that is critical to whatever IS stands for is routinely closed down.

Just accept their rejections, and resubmit if you find it worthwhile. Actually, they aren't too bad to deal with when it comes to rejections (except for intellectual property, where I've had a few funny cases), and it seems to me that they are looking for photos that are slightly different.

Just my 2c

Daneel: It is worth the pain to upload to iStock. They're overly picky (just my opinion), are far too slow, and their system is very cumbersome, but sales there make up for it. Kinda.

leaf: You may want to put in only an absolute minimum amount of keywords & categories, then edit the data when and if the image is accepted.

leaf: You may want to put in only an absolute minimum amount of keywords & categories, then edit the data when and if the image is accepted.

interesting thought - would also mean you only need to disambiguate the accepted ones.

I would say yes.  Istock is tough on rejections that's true.  But 99 percent of the time, I resubmitted my rejections and they were approved.  Istock is also consistent, you can expect your profits to rise with the number of files you have with them (this is not always true for other sites).  And, funny enough, I am kind of glad that the limit is 15 now--this way I only spend two hours a weeks doing the bloody uploads.  I am not complaining about low quotas anymore because I would never be able to submit more than 20 images per week anyway (given their current system).  Give it a try, it kind of grows on you.  As far as the forum goes, yeah it's not perfect... But you also have to realize that a lot of admins on istock started out as contributors and if you are an exclusive this is the only market place you have for your RF work... 

Since I am only 17 I can't submit photos to Istock. It's a big loss because I always read thats where the best money is made at. Meh, 1 year to go.

Since I am only 17 I can't submit photos to Istock. It's a big loss because I always read thats where the best money is made at. Meh, 1 year to go.

 

Boy i didn't know that was the case.

I hope you are submitting to shutterstock.  I think THAT is where most people are making the most money.  Perhaps only though because it is easier to get images on that site.  None the less I am concered with the amount of $$ in my pocket for the 100 pictures I took.

Hi!

Shutterstock doesn't allow photographers <18 either. There was a thread in their forums recently about that.

All the best,
Michael

Well they let me sign up and I already applied once but got declined. I didn't have to show them my ID, just had to put in a credit card to verify myself. Since I don't have one I put in my dads credit card number. (My parents don't have any problems with me doing this).

Daneel I am currently on Fotolia, Dreamstime, StockXpert, 123RF and Bigstockphoto. I will be able to reapply for Shutterstock in roughly 3 days.