I found my image on a laptop screen

http://www.komputerswiat.pl/testy/sprzet/notebooki/2008/09/fujitsu-siemens-computers-amilo-pa3515.aspx

I was wondering the same. Let's hope they continue their business. StockXpert/JIU/Photos earnings are still steady.

Interview of microstock VIP (sites owners, best photographers...) with some rules:
- we prepare questions list (every MSG member can participate)
- questions should be precise and professional
- if VIP accept to participate he should honestly and clearly respond. If something is not clear we can ask for more details.
- then members can vote for VIP (relevance, usefulness...)

Great idea! We already have this with some more responsive people, mostly from smaller sites (Thank you!). It would be great to have the same for some bigger sites as well.

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on September 14, 2009, 23:12

Today isn't much different. We now get instant information from Wikipedia, but who creates the entire? Scholars? Teachers? No, Joe and Jane average. So we risk being fed instant misinformation. Britannica and all the rest missed the boat on the transition. So now we have la-la land.

In fact I think they are adjusting, with encyclopedia CDs for US$30 or less, including access to their website for an year. If I had kids on school, I would try that.  I am even considering that even for the fun of it - I always liked encyclopedias. 

I still think that Wikipedia is good enough for everyday use. If i had to work on a scientific paper, I would not rely on the info in Wikipedia. However, to quickly glance through some information, Wikipedia or just a simple internet search works wonders. The risk of misinformation is there, but I think it's low enough that we can take it for convenience sake.

I was in a similar boat just recently.  Had to wait a long time to resubmit.  I didn't want to gamble and possibly have to wait another many more months if rejected again, so I reached out to the iStock critique forum for help.  I showed several that I was considering and most were shot down by the members for various technical reasons.  It has hard to hear, but I took their advice and selected three shots that I hadn't been considering... and I was accepted!  So take my advice... get help from the iStock forum... those people know the iStock processes, and the reviewers' likes and dislikes, better than anyone.  They could save you from longer and longer review periods, as they did for me!

Well said! That's how I got accepted too.

@sgcallaway1994 - thanks, that's good advice. I guess they review each 3 shots in isolation, without looking at what came before. Hence they get the impression of a lack of variation. I'm really hoping to get it right next time, as the re-sunmission time just doubled to two weeks!

That's true. I also had the same feeling when I got rejected by them for lack of variety. They don't' look at previous applications at all.

If you do, then post to the iStock critique forum (or if you don't have any credits, post somewhere else, like here) showing what's been rejected.

You can also get someone else to post the photos on IS forum for you for critiques.

You may want to pick up a neutral density filter.  Also, I have used my CP from time to time for an extra stop, but if your model has pink tones in the skin a polarizer exaggerates them.

Thanks for the tip! I have been thinking about getting a CP. Being in California with a lot of sunny days, I think it would help me anyway.

I don't think it's anything serious. 123rf has had quite a few problems lately displaying the right balance and statistics.

This one is pretty scary. I'm glad we don't see these around here much.

If this is for ShutterStock, I think it would be very good to post these pictures on their forum itself. They have Photo Critiques section and their review are usually very good and ShutterStock oriented. I posted it in the forum a few times, until I got critiques that were good enough.

If this is for iStock, it is also good to get someone to post pictures in their forum.

In both cases, they are looking for a variety of subjects because they want you to prove that you can shoot diverse subjects and situations. I thin it would definitely help you to get some pictures with people in them.

Now, about some specific pictures:

1. The clouds behind are a bit burned.
3. Too tightly cropped. Might pass if supported by other subjects in the application.
5. The pole is not vertical. Try looking at every image involving the horizon or vertical lines and try to rotate the images to fix that.
9. Fix lighting in the corners (vignette).
10. Burned sky. Too tightly cropped.
11. Subject too centered.
15. Lighting. Too dark.
16. Lighting. Visible flash.
21. Too tightly cropped.
22. Nice image. I would clone out the distracting poles on the bottom of the image. Noise needs to be removed too.
24. Same as 1?

Some of the background images might be good for stock but I wouldn't submit them in the application. Overall, pictures 1, 7, 20, 22 seem like the most interesting, but I would submit a maximum of 2 or 3 for Shutterstock, or 1 for iStock.

I hope this helps.

I had much more luck searching for my username or name and names of sites like FT or DT.