Thanks for the info. It's no big deal, but hell do I nerve out when my upload schedule gets scrambled;)

I bet the  reviewer's problem is the color management policies in AI that have options available for mismatching color profiles. That's why some people get the warning box, some don't.

p.s.: You actually have options to ignore, convert or preserve color profiles of opened (or imported) files, but this is not a solution. I'm wouldn't accept changing global AI policies each time. Those options are there for a reason. And when working outside of the microstock world it is pure nonsense to convert CMYK working profiles (or swatches) into RGB automatically (or the opposite).
p.p.s.: As someone else mentioned in the SS forums: it has to be a jerking issue with someone downloading vectors, seeing the warning and panicking like hell broke loose. There's actually plenty of options to convert CMYK colors to RGB, straight from the beginning. In CS3 you even have an automated action (under edit/edit colors) to convert all selected elements to RGB colorspace (or vice versa).
p.p.p.s.: For f**k's sake. It's an issue with the their repro and printing studios, not submitters. Hell, even iStock doesn't complain about it as far as I know. If they're not able to convert graphics to working/printing color profiles, they shouldn't do their job in the first place.

---
One problem I've noticed in CS3 is that the chosen color profiles don't get embedded in AI8 EPS formats. Can't say why, but this could be why the issue occurs. If that can be called an issue.

Falling dramatically.

p.s.: On top of that I experienced the weird problem of disappearing credits (and balance going into the negative). And their forums where this issue has been brought to attention don't work (I get a strange error while posting - definitely a sign of gorgeous Fotolia jerking moderation).

Anyone else having the same problem of a negative credit balance? I cashed out my regular sum this month and the credits went below zero to around -4, then went up as I sold new files, but then again fell to a negative.

Is this a glitch of some sort? How's it possible?

I have 17, all still unreleased Intel Nehalems with 20" Cintiqs. I have 4 hands too.

Who gives a crap, man?

Thanks, Helix. Nice info.

This might hold true, but only partially.

What I think is happening at Shutterstock at it's most unpleasant consequences is that they have lowered their standards, not been flooded with alteryuris and superandresrs. Those 55K images weekly are definitely not of the same quality (overall) as they were months ago. And that's lowering the sales of us all.

p.s.: On top of that buyers are fleeing away. Things are changing.
p.p.s.: As for the new ports appearing: I just wish them all the best of luck. It does seem they deserve it profoundly.

I might've agreed with you a couple of months ago (and I still firmly stand on the opinion that their "friendliness" to contributors is full of a pure all-profit capitalistic nature/approach - we all more or less hate their limits, their obsolete uploading system, their review system...), but I've come to rethink my position on their potential.

I won't spend words regarding the competition (strictly speaking this applies to DT, StockXpert, F and 123RF) with a credit system, but I will shout out loud that what is giving me the most disappointments lately: the subscription system at Shutterstock. I've come to realize how badly it is developing, evolving in the wrong direction and how inconsistent are the sales there (plus of course lowering by the minute).

I've detected a couple of facts that is pushing Shutterstock down (and I'm sure many of you feel the same lately):
- the image lifespan is ridiculously short (and can't compare to long-term "solids" elsewhere no matter what arguments you bring in),
- the incomes (per new image) are lowering at an alarming rate and this has to be connected with: the new subscription prices in vigor as of March 2008, the ca. 80-90% increase in weekly approvals (only a couple of months ago they received around 30K new images, now it's almost 55K), the load of new lower quality images popping up in the search engines (they definitely have lowered their standards).

I sincerely hope I am wrong and only my personal experience reflects this outcomes, but I'm almost completely sure this is a tendency that we all can agree with.

So I wouldn't mind about iStock that much. The biggest problems for microstock contributors (who like myself have SS as their primary income source) is the developments of credit vs. subscription "battles" and how the (considerably fluid) buyers category will choose their "dealers" according to efficiency criteria (not money, but time).

I sense the hybrid agencies are raising and it is no surprise iStock is going that route too.

p.s.: As a sidenote: Shutterstock usually yields 5 times more monthly Dollars to me than iStock, but what counts are stat tendencies (and the industry-related situation "snapshots" we're witnessing lately).

I'm not really sure PS uses multiple cores. The test of choice regarding this applications was and still is the gaussian blur filter, but as far as I know, higher clocked Duos (speaking of today) perform better than Quads. And this would probably apply to CPUs with one core as well.

p.s.: So for filters (and such) higher CPU frequency per core is better. The overall PS speed might prosper with more than one processing unit, but I'd almost bet that anything over two CPUs gets lost. Nevertheless the whole system works better with more cores (especially if you're multitasking a LOT while using PS or you have multiple applications running in the background).
p.p.s.: The 64 bit extensions of PS are coming to the PC user in the next version (CS4) (there's btw a hot, hot debate about the exclusion of Apples from this particular functionality). What this means is that all us users who already are running 64 bit OSes and more than 4GB of RAM will rejoice immensely. It is kind of a joke that this feature wasn't implemented earlier, though.

My take (even if it was already said earlier): get more RAM (it's supercheap nowadays), set up an additional swap file (the primary not being on your OS disk) and only than think about a CPU upgrade. And defragment your disk. Working with big files with chunks spread all over the partition slows PS like hell.

Used to use AceFTP a lot, than switched to FlashFXP. Lately using FTPRush. Works great.

p.s.: Tried Filezilla in its first iterations, buggy ones, and can't stop hating it.

The price of the 5D is "lowered" for almost half a year now. Everyone's expecting the successor;/

Slow in March? For me it always is. Position six, permanently.