Good for you. It will take a little while to get things going there, but I have found the returns to be worth it. Good luck to you.

Let me tell you! 80% of rejects, everywhere are due to bad In-Camera settings.
Irrespective of camera-make ( which you are not telling us ) you should always make sure that Sharpness is OFF, as with noise-reduction= OFF. This is In-camera you understand.
Further you should shoot in RAW and use appropriate Converter, again stay away from any sharpness etc. After importing the file to PS where you set your whites/blacks, etc parameters, as a final step you convert your TIF file to jpg for uploading.

This is not a monitor thing!  its got to do with your camera settings and your PP workflow.
good luck.

You're absolutely correct on the n camera settings. And getting out as much noise as you possibly can in the Raw stage is of greatest benefit.

But if the OP is not seeing what the reviewer is seeing, he could have monitor problems as well. and as he has not come back with any replies, just hard to comment further. It's all conjecture as there have been no further information posts.

I use a PC with a great LCD for weenie stuff and a Mac for commercial catalog work. A couple of years ago I got the 23" apple Cinema, and as stated previously, it reveals all sins. I'm not saying it is the cure all, but, nor am I saying it is the absolute best out there. If anyone is curious though, just throw some h res images you want to question on a flash drive and head to your local Apple store. The guys there like to play and will usually let you plug in. If you view your images on the apple display and say "oh crap!" it's definitely time to question your display.

The OP also did not say what agency rejected. Shuttestock standards have been a little bit on the slide these days, Bigstock bouncing good stuff in haphazard fashion because the new reviewers are just plain strange, and iStock has very high quality standards. On Shutterstock though, usually if they say there is noise and CA, yes it really is there.

With recent economic stress and recent closure of PhotoShelter and demise of Dig Railroad, just wonder what sales venue(s) will go under next.

I really thought Albumo would be a goner by now, but still alive.

Last month a BME and this month is on another BME pace so far. Have been doing well with eco friendly and green theme images there.

DT has always waffled on what the rules are I'm afraid. I had problems with not having a phone number. I marked it "does not have telephone". The guy I shot is from the flower child generation, lives in an isolated cabin in the woods, and refuses to have a phone. When I questioned support, they never did give me a straight answer, just some rhetoric about "all releases must be complete". I just don't bother there with "resubmits" there anymore, but good luck to you in getting an answer back.

As far as the thread deletion for your inquiry, that's just plain wrong - you weren't whining just trying to find out what the real rules are. Their childish tactics are getting tiring.

Quote from: WarrenPrice on November 05, 2008, 11:10

From the comments I have read on this board ... it seems that IS receives a lot of negative feedback?

How true my friend, how true!

It's only because their standards are higher because they can afford to be more selective. Some people just don't like to face reality. My own small portfolio on IS consistently outperforms 123 and Bigstock combined, and then some. The proof is in the earnings.

At this writing, when I tried to check balance, I get server scripting errors. So it looks like they may be fumbling with tallies on the server. Maybe sme lost nubers will make an appearance.

Yes, as I noted in another thread, spam is a big issue.

Also said, I like the simplicity - no stupid fan clubs, faving, creative networks, lightboxes, etc. Views don't matter to me. And also stated I wanted DL numbers kept private because it only promotes copying.

As far as not getting the survey, maybe they will do another mailing wave. I am over $500 there. Perhaps they used that as a criteria in the mailing.

Things I have learned since starting photography on Sept 2nd 2008

My pictures stink - Auto mode is not my friend
My pictures are blurry � bought cheap tripod
My pictures are still blurry � bought expensive tripod
My pictures are still blurry � bought remote
Found out what noise is (1st rejection) � read how to fix in Photoshop
Still have noise � found out why all pictures should not be 400 ISO
Still have noise � �oh great� read reviews that state my camera has noise issues
Chromatic AbaWhat? � new term to look up. (rejection)
What is this histogram thing? � read internet, that helped
Need model release? � Why, ya can�t see their face or identify them (rejection)
Why do I have dots in my sky?  UFO? � learned that sensors need cleaning
Raw? � to be continued��

What is your camera model and preferred lens(es)? Maybe we can help you out with some specifics. All cams have their quirks.

My food images have been doing ok there. Increases every month. So that's what I have been sending mainly.

Hi guys,
If someone of you recently submitted a photo of a bunch of red chrysanthemum flowers, please check the description of your image, because there is one image with red chrysanthemum flowers with a description: "bunch of yellow flowers, holiday background, congratulations!".

Well just a perfect example of spamming.

Did you get that SS survey yesterday? I listed allowing Keyword Spam ans the number one thing I hated about SS. They should at least take some steps to correct this as iStock is doing. Maybe not the extreme correction tactics, but at least enough to allow everyone to be on a level playing field. Then again, maybe a giant audit and some booting of the bad violators is what s needed.

In the end, would benefit the buyers as KW spam is a huge time waster.

Sorry but reassigning copyright to a buyer upon sale, no matter how obscure, old, or seemingly insignificant the work, is simply absurd. Have no problem with licensing exclusive rights to use, since I contract many out of my private stock, but copyright always remains with me.

Gee, really unique art. Hmmm, I'd like something one of a kind by Art Wolfe on my wall. Maybe Eugene should contact Art and see if he's willing to sign over copyright. Or maybe just easier to solicit the inexperienced and naive.