If the OP was really serious about their project, they would find a photographer and work out a deal.  80 extended licenses are going to run like 10,000 by the time you're done.  Plus you're skipping around from site to site looking for content.

graphicleftovers is "really easy".  123 is what I imagine root canal work is like.

is it just gonna bad for late starter or depends this to strong in the images?
i make much nature images.

Your "nature" images come across as very bland, and there is nothing really making them stand out.  The lighting on your non-nature images needs work - grey background, incorrect white balance, etc.  You're going to have to speed up your learning if you're expecting a different result.

They're pretty images, but there's probably a lot of similar work from people who vacation in those areas.  And how much demand can there be for random mountains and ocean views?

It�s not something I can recognize! I have about 98 - 100 % images accepted at all uploads.

Same here.

What is the subject matter of all these rejected images?

https://contributors.gettyimages.com/article_public.aspx?article_id=2367

Let's say that an agency give us a platform and contributors set their own prices for their images. That would change the entire market, better for some, worst for others. I would be able to charge more for my unique images, while the value of certain images would fall even further. Every contributor would try to outbid each other and devalue each others images in the process.

It's called Pond5.  It didn't really change the market in any way.

Don't believe it? Look at the App Store. People are so used to getting free apps, they rarely pay for apps anymore. If there are 30,000 strawberry images on the platform and one photographer decides to sell a high quality one for $.10, it would shoot up the rankings and devalue the everything in its category in the process. Next, everyone else will follow and it becomes a race to the bottom...at light speed. Suddenly, entire portfolio lose value faster than stocks in 2008.

Your app experience doesn't necessarily translate to image licensing, as Pond shows.  People still spend $1000 for images there.

The reality is that agencies are better than photographers at pricing. If contributors have pricing control, we would destroy ourselves and ruin the market in the process. Right now, I don't see agencies as my obstacle. I see myself as an obstacle. I see my competitors as they are...competitors. There is so much supply right now and that's not the fault of agencies...that's our problem. We just have to get even better at it, think more about images and try to produce amazing work.

So, too much supply is the problem, and the suggestion is "make more"?

Here is one of the threads on the subject that was easily found (just search on "union" or "fair", etc.):
http://www.microstockgroup.com/ranting-general-stock/stock-artists-collective-anyone/msg383812/#msg383812

Every so often someone comes in with the radical idea of banding together to tell the agencies what's what.  In the end, nothing really happens.

They all seem accessible now.  Don't like them at all.  Don't plan on being in there much at all now.

Yep.

This was a scheduled maintenance thing.  They announced it a week or so back - maybe longer.  They are supposed to be down all this week.

We'll see what the "new and improved" forum will be like.

Thanks.  Somehow I missed that.

Perhaps if the description weren't removed, this wouldn't have happened: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/donald-trump-campaign-ad-nazi-soldiers

Wow, did you see all the VERY specific "briefs" today?