thanks for response, ParisEye!

On my screen the hand in the 5 is really pink.

flower originally have mix of pink and purple which is hard to describe but it wasn't totally pink from what I remember.

And on the 4 the shadows are on our side, which seems to indicate the lighting was behind the eggs.

indeed light was behind the subject and this was the point of the picture(background shouldn't be totally white but rather look as gradient).
is backlighting is rather unwanted for such kind of photographs?

Recently I was accepted to IStock but same 3 pictures along with 4 another was disapproved with DreamsTime as "Poor lighting setup, poor contrast or incorrect exposure.". Although they look well on my monitor, so I wonder that maybe my monitor wrongly calibrated and I see totally different picture than reviewers on other end?
Maybe someone can help me and review rejected photos on calibrated monitor and tell what he think? If you would like to help, please let me know and I'll upload few of them to my site and send you PM with URLs.(this is to save on bandwidth as I'm overused it last few months).
Thank you in advance!

I'm not sure what it's worth but could you sell or trade it and take that money to get a used DSLR?

I would do it if I could, and although I've bough it for 500$ about 4-5 years ago I wouldn't sell it for 100$ now, as it have few broken buttons, and some bugs appear right after taking photo(now even in burst mode it show me preview of what pictures I've did), and few other minor glitches.

Like the others said, a Canon 10D is about $200-$250.

not here, if camera is working it's most likely to be sold at same price as new one... I even sees on local auctions old cameras which cost more than newer models, which is ridiculous!(it's happen because people bought them for higher money and now prices are drop a bit, but people still wish to return their old investment...). Service centers are sucks here so if equipment get broken you'll need to send it to other city(or even country for certain brands as many companies doesn't have representation here) so it's better to take camera with warranty.
And remember that my country is much smaller than states or Europe so there are not much sellers here.
We have no such prices like 250$, the cheapest dSLR I've seen was D40 for around 600$-700$(depending if you order it on shop or internet).

Just did the search on two local internet auctions like Ebay, the only second hand camera which is sold are some pentax with broken LCD, no dSLRs or even lens)

And now about good news

It seems that not only troubles come together but good news also, today was very good day for me because:
1. 3 images were reviewed on DT and one was approved after three days of waiting. So there is hope that not all images have excessive noise which would be the reason for rejection.
2. IStock approved my inital application today, all 3 photos were accepted
3. I've got approval from PhotoShelter, they reject 3 and approved 7 photos which I've submitted, not sure why 3 was rejected as they wasn't noisy as this one, maybe they just don't need something like this in collection.(BTW does anyone work with them except me?).

That's all news for now, so there is tiny hope that if at least I wouldn't make enough bucks with stocks to buy dSLR it would be enough to buy some better compact if mine would gone dead 

well i hope you managed to get some images online and eventually upgrade your equipment so start a serious microstock income.

Thanks, Leaf! But after this thread I reviewed images which was going to submit for second time and it's appears that only some of them which doesn't have gradients and monotone patterns doesn't show obvious noise  Even on well exposed pictures in daytime noise is still obvious.
I'm waiting for review in IS and DT but now my hopes about buying equipment through earnings on microstock doesn't look so realistic. Guess I just need to start collecting money from my salary like I've did with previous camera and in few years I'll get money new one. There is a good side as dSLR market is developing rapidly and prices are slowly going down.

I would guess they'll reject it for noise. I wonder if the blurred wings will be a problem to them.

thanks, Adelaide, now I'm also realize that my images have too much noise to which I simply get used over years... I just reviewed full size sample shots of few cameras on Steves-digicams and Dcresource and it's look like technology gone too far, as cameras produce crisp clear sky or smooth background which is out of focus right away, in time when I couldn't get as close result even with noise removing software.

Thanks everyone once again for useful tips and support! it's really value this!

Hi folks! good to hear that I'm not the only one who using Linux 

BTW forgot to tell that I'm on Debian distro.

using flashes would have helped, of course not if it was an improvised  shot. 

it was improvised and I didn't have much time to prepare(I only managed to change shutter speed).

Sorry to tell you, but it still is quite underexposed

are you referring to sea-gull? as it wasn't intended from beginning to be exposed from the front but look as silhouette and regarding sky it's look more or less like that from what I could remember.

but bumping the exposure up would bring only  more artifacts and noise 

guess that I'd better delete this image. I actually asked about it just to see on example what margins of noise are acceptable with stocks.
Thanks for your feedback, Vika!

That is an amazing watershot Denis !

thanks for compliment! wish I could have better camera than, as many people who inquired about don't wish to get 2mp photo.

Other photos posted here not only have strong emotional value but a good quality which is what my photo definitely lack.

Leszek, you need to use this link so other could view your photo: http://www.fotolia.com/id/5549902 as one you posted is accessible only through your account. Anyway your photos is really great, one of best water falling photos I've seen.
Wonder if you used blue colored light for it or just background?(of course if it's not a secret ). I'm asking because I like to photograph water myself but fail to get such clear colors as on your photograph.

Didn't thought that Brazil have similar problem as it's too close to US. But guess it's all mostly depends from government...

Okay, that makes sense. You should be able to give yourself a raise pretty quickly with microstock. 

hope so

Used Canon Rebel 300D on Ebay = $250US
Used Canon 50mm f/1.8 = $50US

300$ + custom taxes which doesn't define whenever equipment is new or used. From what I know it would add 50% from the item price(customs define the price). Also from experience I can tell that most sellers won't ship in xUSSR countries anyway or shipping price would may reach very high numbers for new camera(Last time I've checked Nikon D40 on Ebay and shipping was $89 to my country).

Your job pays $150 per month?  Time to ask for a raise...

it's around 300$ right now and I'm self employed so can't ask myself to raise my salary I'm working on the web and people in my city earn even less than this

thanks for clarification, folks!
I guess that I'd better upload images without exclusivity and if I fail or decide not to add them to other stocks I'll make them exclusive to DT.

#1 Save as .tiff
#2 Adjust levels (in a separate layer)
#3 Adjust Saturation / Hue as necessary (in a separate layer)
#4 Adjust Color Curves
#5 Crop as required
#6 Clone out Logos, Trademarks or Blur recognizeable faces w/o a model release
#7 Sharpen as necessary (always last task before saving)
#7 Save as .tiff w/ layers
#8 Save as .jpg with layers flattened
#9 Use Noise Reduction on .jpg as required
I hope this helps

thanks Mark! I don't have own scheme on working with stocks and for editing own photos I've used different steps which wouldn't be so effective as yours, I think. So your advices would surely come into help.

Who knows which is the next Titanic? I don't think you can micro-manage the numbers too closely though when calculating how much you make on just, say, iStock as an exclusive vs. what you can make as a non-exclusive plus the other sites.

guess you're right on this as any scenario is possible in our world and any agency may possibly go out of business so it have sense to diversify income sources.