Yes I think the reason stated is quite self explanatory

"Content lacks clear, compelling, or commercially relevant subject matter and / or execution"

It means in their view you submitted snap shots

Though if you posted an example it might clarify

I thought Istock said are while back once you were accepted they would accept anything other than for legal compliance reasons.

I don't think that was ever officially stated (BICBW), but certainly for photos, that's how it has seemed for a while.
However, they seem to be more picky for illustrations.

Post examples.

Quote from: ShadySue on November 19, 2018, 05:25

I don't think that was ever officially stated (BICBW), but certainly for photos, that's how it has seemed for a while.
However, they seem to be more picky for illustrations.

They don't seem too picky anymore there either. Not that I'm testing it with a lot of garbage. I just assumed the floodgates were open everywhere. In hindsight, maybe upload limits and stricter rejections weren't too bad.

I agree things should be much tougher...except for my images obviously. I remember when Istock's test was by far the toughest your images had to be nearly perfect to pass.

they have been asked to show us their images and told the basic facts. Most likely they just wanted to vent and not really want our advice ...

Istock is right now the best of agencies! and inspite of their low commission. Give them the right stuff and it will sell. Conceptual photography, studio, people, technology, industry,  lifestyles are among their best sellers.
Dont think in terms of SS! thats where the floodgates are more then wide open collecting tons and tons of utter garbage.That snot the way to do it!

Istock is right now the best of agencies! and inspite of their low commission. Give them the right stuff and it will sell. Conceptual photography, studio, people, technology, industry,  lifestyles are among their best sellers.
Dont think in terms of SS! thats where the floodgates are more then wide open collecting tons and tons of utter garbage.That snot the way to do it!

yeah i agree no reason to leave them personally so far i only got rejections for copywright and trademarks.when i first started on them i remember i got a rejection for oof well i was surprised couse that image sold on 500px for 250 dollars but anyhow who cares? But they are not so picky anymore like Adobe. The only thing i dont like is that they dont accept many editorial images.for instance photos with people in the background even if they are unricognizable,or photos with buildings .how can you have legal issues if there are no logos or trademarks in that building?so just like adobe is difficult for me to choose what photos to send as i am doin alot of editorial
Also  DT  accepts celebrity events photos.i was at the film festival last week,took nice shots of some of the guests at the QaA but only DT accepted one of them so far and DT sux at sales lol
so even if istock gives the editorial option compare to Adobe they reject editorial images for the things i wrote so how can you send cityscape photos for instance without the buildings in the background or the people?
ggrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr