Just had two sales today on SS, images from Feb 2009 that have never sold before. Why, I don't know...

Are buyers buying more old images because most of the good new ones are being rejected? It could be.

Not all the kiddies are back in school yet some start this week others don't start until September so maybe things will start to look brighter in September. 

Yes, when all the kids are back to school and vacations have been taken in the Northern hemisphere, sales should start to increase and be good until a week or two before Christmas. As for my CanStockPhoto sales, they have been trending normal, creeping up a little from the expected July slump.

Quite often ones that I think are least likely to make money are accepted and those that I think will definitely sell are rejected. 
... I'm finding it really hard to stay interested in microstock if it's just going to end up a stagnant pool of old images.

I have been reading Sharpshot's posts on this subject, and I hope SS has been too, because I agree with everythng he has said. My experience and thoughts with the new rejections at SS are the same, and I do vectors. I have cut my submissions there down by over 75% and I feel gloomy when I even think about submitting to SS.
The only bright spots I see are:
1. Since SS is rejecting so many good new images, I think it hits us oldtimers less hard, since buyers have to buy old images when the supply of good new ones is reduced.
2. Whatever SS's true reasons for the rejections are (cut reviewing costs or whatever), the policy may have been implemented intentionally at the slow time of year, and maybe will end by Labor day, when micrsotock sales will increase across all the sites (except maybe IS )

This is interesting, I too didn't know about this.

The only reason to register your copyright, and pay $, is to give you the privilege of suing infringers for damages. If you ever did sue someone for infringement, and that person's lawyer could show that you filed for your copyrights in the wrong way, your case would probably be thrown out, and the time and money you spent would be for nothing, I'm guessing.

IMO iStock will never accept images rendered with the rendering engine you are using. I don't think they are telling you the real reason why they are rejecting your images. My guess is that they will keep giving you different reasons for rejection every time and never tell you the real reason. Why they do this kind of thing, who knows? That said, I personally like the Telephone image the best. Good luck!

I like it. Straightforward, simple, easy to use, fast. The prices are reasonable. I would buy something from it. But another payment option besides Paypal would be good. Also, I think your Legal is a bit skimpy. Your License could be more complete and you might need a ToS to protect yourself more.

On your About page,
"This is great offer for those who doesnt mind spending a few dollars for vector art." should be "This is great offer for those who don't mind spending a few dollars for vector art. "

Did you do the web dev yourself or what did you use?

Very informative thread. I might add that another non-microstock market for 3D textures is the Renderosity Marketplace and DAZ, which are a little like TSquid but serve a different group of 3D enthusiasts, who do buy some textures.

Some reviewers think that more complicated means better.
Fortunately it is vector. So best way how to get simple vector approved is to add illustration of chequered raccoon with wooden legs that dances pogo and has parrot and rat smoking pipe on his shoulder. And buyer can remove it.

Some reviewers think that more complicated means better.
Fortunately it is vector. So best way how to get simple vector approved is to add illustration of chequered raccoon with wooden legs that dances pogo and has parrot and rat smoking pipe on his shoulder. And buyer can remove it.

  This is so funny!
  This is so sad, because it's true. What has the complicatedness of an image got to do with how well it will sell? If DT thinks that an image will not sell, DT should say so. The only other reason for rejection should be on technical or legal grounds. DT is not an art gallery, if buyers want an image, they should be able to buy it, complicated or not.

IMHO DT is making a big mistake by alienating their suppliers with these absurd and nonsensical rejections.

I further believe that the author will do very well at this low price because he wouldn't share any royalty from his books sold in half-price book stores or flea markets.

True. Or when the book is checked out, for free, from a library.

We microstockers feel alone in our victimization, but think about the author who spent years writing one book, only to see that most of the people reading it - as used copies or from libraries - are not paying him a single cent. And how many of the people who hear a popular song ever pay the songwriter or musicans a penny?

It's the nature of intellectual property. IP, as something you had a legal right to own, did not exist until the late 1600's, now millions of people make a good living by selling it. Progress is slow, but it is happening.

I guess next time I meet Bill Gates I should tell him not to employ fools at Corbis...

You might give the same advice to the Seattle Times editor-in-chief when you meet him.

aka specimens like the infamous LOBO. He'll probably see this post and wear it as a badge of honor. Just shows what a complete knob***d he is and how he has significantly contributed to the current demise of ISP. Getty should fire his ***

Exactly. Has any company in history lost more good will in a shorter time than Getty/IS?

And what did they get in return for throwing away the loyalty of so many suppliers and customers? Anything? What has been the purpose of the Peeberts and Lobos over there? And all the anti-contributor and anti-customer policies? What is management thinking?

I just don't get. It seems to me that small children could have run iStock better than it has been run. That IS continues to exist at all, after the decisions they have made, is testimony to the advantage that being first in a new marketplace gives.

 Nice to see some agencies are capable of prompt, informative, polite responses here. (Maybe I should get me some of that Veer gear )