Sue, I was expecting this. I told you that I think that you will have difficulties getting 90% of your 500 images on IS accepted at SS. The images have lighting which SS does not like. Also the images lack punch. If you understand what SS likes to see, then you will most likely get more accepted.

If you don't post the images, there's no constructive help anyone can offer.

However, it is true that nowadays it's much easier to get into iStock and get photos accepted there than it was in the old days.

Until the middle of last year, iS and SS were usually the hardest to get into, and there were images which one accepted but the other didn't (Ft and Dt also had some 'different' criteria). Each agency has makes up its own mind about what it wants, and that doesn't necessarily correlate to any other agency, or sales there.

I'm going to run the risk of being a bit harsh here but...
In 2 1/2 years you have 578 images on istock with only 9 sales.
you have 374 images on DT with 112 sales (100 of those by one file) & you�ve been there a little over 2 years.

I don�t see the very successful images you claim- at least on these two sites, which are in the top four for most contributors.
So if two of the top sites aren�t selling your work why do you think the number one site would want the images that aren�t selling.

You don't have a very commercial look to you portfolios and your editorial images are very local oriented.
Neither is very conducive to a lot of sales.

You may very well be a great press photographer - the point is that if what you are showing so far is representative of what you plan to up load you will face a lot of disappointment - it's not what sells on MicroStock nor what the sites that sell a lot want.

If you don't like SS don't upload there anymore. Nobody is forcing you,

@ Jens, SS is pricky? I thought IS was the pricky one 

Sue, Jens and Jatrax have good advice, post your images here so we can help.

As said before, the work on IS is not representative of what SS wants. Press photography is different from the clean, overpolished, saturated look SS normally wants to see. You might be a brilliant press photographer though. However, its two different types of photography.

Please dont give up on SS, as they will most likely become your biggest earner.

Hi Sue

Is this you on SS  newbielink:http://www.shutterstock.com/g/sueburton [nonactive]

In my experience the abstract shots don't go down too well at SS so try not to upload too many of them.

Watch your aspect ratios too - images need to uncropped, or cropped to maintain original aspect ratio.  They do like ultra pano 16:9 as well.

SS QC can be picky over backgrounds - is the background bokeh distracting.



A common misconception about SS etc is that they'll take anything - this is FAR from the case.  Anyone should endeavour to submit only their very best shots paying particular attention to sharpness, noise and sensor crud - don't over sharpen.


Process images on a calibrated monitor and a proper colour managed workflow, check your images IPTC, and check the images in a web browser before uploading just to check that conversion to sRGB has screwed things up.


I don't profess to be the worlds greatest exponent on SS - I've only got 400 images up there after all; but I have multiple sales every day come rain or shine, and in something of a niche market compared to most stockers - I don't point a camera at anything that requires a release!

The title - SS very strange review process - sounds like a broad generalization that I find hard to agree with!  There are days when an image or two gets rejected that I feel should have gone through.  But in general I  would say SS is pretty fair on reviews.  If they are tough that's not such a bad thing. Because they do sell better than most other microstock sites for many contributors including me.

An idea might be to evaluate your work against the best selling images on SS and see if there's room for adjustments - to get at par with microstock needs and standards.  Its not about being a good or bad photographer - more I think, its about identifying what the microstock industry specifically requires.