In my language iSTOC(k)a means Cattle, so I treat they like they treat me.
Small vermin bugs which are constantly making my percentage lower and lower.
See the new inspectors
http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=147&Page=3
if that kind of inspector will be soon or shes roll on iStock, for profesional state of view it is absolutely nonsense,
but it is good for Us submiters, she will accept enough images to by 2 pairs of shoes in week.
Others are soo boring but also more pain in the ass. (Because of shoes)
WHATS UP THERE ON iStock??
Are they really belive that they can make employee of every creature who are not havent nothig to do and pick it from bus, railway or other station??

Saving a well isolated shot as a jpeg causes rough edges because of jpeg compression, it's not a problem to designers because they can just raise their threshold to 1 instead of 0, I contacted Adobe a while ago when I was having this problem and they confirmed that if your edges are too well isolated this will happen, the only way round it is to actually degrade the isolation by feathering.
Most of the iStock inspectors understand this and won't reject when it's clear a shot is on a pure white background, however there are still some who can't understand this.
The process of feathering the isolation actually renders it harder for a designer to use, but in order to get them past some inspectors at iStock you have to make the choice.
Personally if I get a rejection like this I stick it back in and hope to get one of the better educated inspectors next time.
The thing that always makes me laugh is when they reject an isolation with a clipping path for 'rough edges' - HELLO - it's got a clipping path!!!!

Quote from: DanP68 on May 01, 2008, 22:25

I like the idea of the Infinite Collection and EVO too.  My work is not nearly good enough for those collections today, but it is exciting to think perhaps a few years from now I will be able to "move up" as well.

Oh I don't know Dan, I'll bet you could match the quality of this little gem

http://us.fotolia.com/id/6732372

(I know I should stop trying to find these clunkers, but it's like watching a massive accident when you know you should be focusing on the road ahead - I can't help myself!)

I did get paid this morning (as did one other contributor who'd uploaded an ID with sensitive data blacked out). I don't know what this means as there's been no further communication. Chad did say that my idea about getting a notarized statement - where the notary would then see you and the ID, giving some assurance that you were who you said you were - wasn't acceptable for Fotolia.

I keep checking to see if they've closed my account, but so far, I'm OK.