In a post above, it was noted that "artsy" photos seemed to be what istock was looking for in the Vetta collection. And I have seen lots of funny, artsy, cool photos. And Sean's photos are all nice, clean, very professional, no filters photos. Not what I would consider artsy at all. So there still doesn't seem to be a definitive explanation for exactly what they are looking for.

Does the term crapshoot mean anything to you?

However, if he submitted them to iStock, they stay in the rejected items area - and if they were resubmitted by an exclusive, then they would be linked to two users.  Wouldn't that scream for penalty?

But they were first submitted by a non-exclusive and rejected. Then the copyright was transferred (or sold, whichever the case) to an exclusive who submitted them and got them accepted. I don't recall anything in the rules that say a non-exclusive cannot sell the copyright to someone else. What that someone else does with the photo, under it's new copyright, to me, seems like a whole new ball game. As far as I can tell, no "crime" has been committed here.

The whole exercise was to prove a point anyway. Rinder knows the rules and I'm sure under normal circumstances follows them.

I'm sure istock will not appreciate the humor or truth. But I don't see where anyone has violated any written rule. Though now a new clause, the Rinder Clause, will be added to the Contributor terms document!

GeoPappas
Here is a link to my store, so far

http://www.zazzle.com/cathysphotos

OK, never mind. I see the problem. This image was shot early on in my photog career and IPTC data was not added. So the file was missing the Title and Description, it's just that the log said it needed a model release. Sorry, false alarm.

Nothing to see here people. 

thank you madelaide. I'm going to go try that for my calendar.

I think its a scam. If you can verify that, you should then report it to the admins so they can stop it.

Sometimes buyers want to purchase photos outside of the system, which isn't kosher either.

I'm finding the new uploader confusing. I just uploaded 3 editorial images for the first time and forgot to check the "for editorial use only" box on all 3. Noticed it just as I hit the submit button on the third photo. I hate that you cannot go back and edit stuff while it's sitting in the queue. I could go back and make sure I did everything correctly. Instead I have to email support. Unless I am missing something and you can now edit all information once submitting.

^^ @ m&M

There is something about IStock that just invites a send-up like this.  Their public image has become so pretentious, so elitist.  All the hoop-jumping,  the art-school personality, the head-scratching rejections, and then they pay you 28 cents just like everyone else. Go for it.

I totally agree here. And I thought it was pretty funny when I saw it. That being said, there are some legitimate points made by later posters. I think the Betta works when in the sentence Betta than Vetta, but take away the last part and Betta on its own could be miscontrued. We all will remember what it means but in a month when this is all old news, people who didn't read the forums won't get the joke.

We had a similar incident here in the city where I live. A local bar is named Up A Creek because it sits right next to...you guessed it...a creek! But a competitor opened across town and called itself Without a Paddle. Up a Creek is still there, Without a Paddle has changed hands and names twice in the last year. It was funny for a minute.

All of my top selling images were rejected right off. So I submitted newer images with no downloads. Of those, a little more than a third have been rejected. I am so disappointed that they don't even have a link from our name to the rest of our images. I know it's coming, but come on...that is such a basic requirement.

I am going to upload until I get 100 images there. That seemed to be a good number for the other sites when I started seeing sales.

We'll see. I can't believe they are making you jump through the hoops Lisa. Cripes, they could be making money hand over fist with your images. Why would they make it more difficult?

I have those areas unchecked like you do. There is also another place. Click on your name at the top where it says Welcome, your name. Under profile>settings on the right side, click notifications. On the left, email notifications. I have that unchecked also and I still get a daily email that says nothing.

I'd like to correct a misunderstanding here(my fault, of course) there are no  24 photos of aids, just five of them and four of them are here. all other batch consists of different objects, some travel photos, although i got many worse travel photos in and sold them.

Heres my 2 cents:

If you submitted 24 photos, 5 of which were the hearing aids, and the reviewer saw the first 3 or 4 that he didn't like, he/she is likely to reject the whole batch. I know it doesn't seem right, but that's what they do. Who knows if the hearing aids were the first ones they saw, or if others out of your batch were the first ones they didn't like.

It's always best to submit in small batches and if you have multiple views of the same subject, I always split those up and submit those with other subjects.

I just got 6 rejections. The comment? Other concerns. That isn't helpful at all. Does anyone know what that means? They aren't people photos, so not about model release. Geez.

I submit to 6 places and keep an Excel spreadsheet of what photo was uploaded and if was accepted or rejected. I have one folder for all my uploaded images. That's it.