IS insists they're photos, DT, SS insist they're illustrations, FT doesn't seem to mind so I go with illustration. 

First option might be safer - 5 of my first 10 had sold on SS before I even knew they had been accepted...

I keep mine to 2000 pixels on the short side in a 3x4 format usually - sometimes even smaller where there are close views of volumetric materials or complex light and could be looking at render times in days.  I don't see much financial benefit to me in making them bigger and, as well as much longer render times, any slight technical flaws are multiplied.

What would you get on other sites???  Seems the only difference with DT is that the size is specifed and this rubs salt into the wound...

I posted this in the SS forum a while back but I don't think anyone saw the parallel with stock:

So, the platoon had been living in the jungle for months. When the cook succumbed to malaria, nobody wanted the job so they drew lots with a provision that whoever got the short straw would be replaced by the first person to complain about the cooking. After several weeks of receiving nothing but compliments from the men the �cook� decided desperate measures were needed. He fished around the latrine and proceeded to cook and serve what he found there.

The first guy took a bite, immediately spat it out exclaiming �ARRRGH, tastes like crap!!� Then he caught himself and followed up with �� but beautifully cooked.�

The max you can set depends on your rank (up to last month the max I could set was 20).  The % change appears to happen automatically (wow a whole extra �0.01 for a sub) - I didn't know the actual price charged could be increased and wouldn't have either except I noticed it was higher for new files.

I would much rather prefer the sub sales than the credit sales I've been getting.  I've been getting a few 19 cent, and 23 cent one credit extra small sales.  Wish they would have been subscription sales.

On the + side, a file with a mere 5 sales will net in the region of $1.70 instead of $0.20 and ALL sales count 

Seems to be swings and roundabouts with subs, for me only 7 of the last 20 but overall reckon about 50/50.

Considering they were in the same batch, it's hard to make the case it was separate reviewers. 

Most likely the reviewer hit the wrong rejection reason button.  Maybe they thought it was not commercial enough without the graphic??

Either that or decided why have 2 of the same thing and the one with the graphic is more marketable.  I think the wrong button is often pressed and usually the lighting button.  I had the same thing, involving an isolated version version of a rejected picture - the truth is the background on the non-isolated version was pure crap.

... It takes a fair degree of spin to characterise the OP as anything other than giving a negative connotation to IS exclusivity.....

Funny, I always thought I had a reasonable command of English....
Use of the word �institutionalised� is slightly tongue in cheek with the intention of getting a reaction (which it has).  Nevertheless it isn�t necessarily unfair or inaccurate or, indeed, negative as a generalisation (and there are always exceptions to any generalisation).  It simply means that exclusives have to be predisposed to be positive or admit to making bad decisions.  I�d say exactly the same of DT, not an issue at SS and EU version of FT doesn�t have much of a forum so can�t form an opinion. 
In terms of the actual question, it�s an open one which has both yes or no options with no bias to either.  For the record (again), the question was posed out of curiosity as I don�t see much positivity towards this site in particular � I don�t have any strong personal views except that, given all the sites are in the same business and have the same aim (making money for the site), it seems the others are playing the game with a bit more skill.  Some positives from my perspective (given I�m plankton in that particular food chain):
As Madelaide pointed out, allowing smaller file sizes is sensible given the uses for lots of these downloads;
I believe one or two beatings in the critique forum has enabled me to be more critical possibly leading to the acceptance rates I have on the other sites.
Downloads per image and revenue per image are higher for me there than anywhere else but this probably more to do with the fact that�s it�s really hard to get certain types of 3D accepted so most of the folks who do this kind of stuff well just aren�t there.

'No more insulting and no less accurate than comments on any of the various critique fora - folks who commit to ANY single agency are going to be more inclined to buy into the crap.  I'm doing contract work for one of the big IT multinationals at the moment and see exactly the same thing in the permanent staff.  '

Sorry, obviously you were only looking for negative comments, under the guise of asking for positive ones, else you'd be happy to hear from anyone.

Not the case at all.  The question is prompted by the almost universal negative vibe I get from most IS related threads here and comments on other fora from former exclisives so it was an honest question.  I have no problem with exclusives rowing in but:

1.  If someone is only with one agency it's difficult to be balanced because you don't have a basis for comparison,
2. If you're an exclusive and can't be positive then why would you be an exclusive?

[Wow, insulting right from the start.

No more insulting and no less accurate than comments on any of the various critique fora - folks who commit to ANY single agency are going to be more inclined to buy into the crap.  I'm doing contract work for one of the big IT multinationals at the moment and see exactly the same thing in the permanent staff.  
Seeing the odd positive but much more negative.  I'd guess if I asked the same about the other big sites the reaction to FT would be similar but much more positive on the other 2.

Liverpool huh?  Could be worse I suppose, Chelsea or Arsenal    Have to say I favour the other reds.  On barca, I was shouting for man u but these guys are just so good,,,,,

Quote from: microstockphoto.co.uk on July 23, 2011, 13:17

I don't like controlled vocabulary: it's just another layer of organised spam between what people search and what they actually get, imo

Actually, the cv, while it still needs improvements, is a great improvement over sites that can't tell the difference between orange the color and orange the fruit, for example.

It's just like the newspeak dictionary - it doesn't prevent spam it just restricts what can be expressed whether relevant or irrelevant.  Complex, badly designed solutions tend not to work as well as simple effictive ones.  If you want to get rid of spam restrict the number of allowed keywords which will force contributors to stay relevant.