Some people have sent GoPros into space with weather balloons and taken photos / footage of the earth that way.

Well I tried uploading another image there yesterday and to my surprise, it worked. I didn't do anything differently.

This is bloody disgraceful! the missing images, over 50[/u], were in my portfolio for 3 years and making some sales, now gone worst it will take me an age to identify photos from my archive that match their number and then go through the whole process of upload and approval again

Woah! That is totally unacceptable. Getty / iStockphoto have really sunk to a new low in terms of incompetence. And this is how they treat exclusives? I keep asking myself why I keep submitting to them....I honestly don't know why I do.

How can buyers find me with 1 million new images a week, spammed uploads, bad keyword, same bad shots over and 20-30 of each one. Add that new people will just copy what they think is most popular, best selling, making more of that a wasteland.

It does seem overwhelming when you look at those kinds of figures. Sometimes I think: "What chance have I got?" when my images are amongst a sea of millions. Then again, I'm sure that your images are still selling, right? Just as my images are selling also. So they are being found by buyers (despite the odds.) And that makes me positive. I admit that I only have a very small portfolio on SS (under 200 images) but the sales I am getting inspire me to upload more and hopefully one day, I'll have a decently large portfolio.

To be honest, I'm not sure if I should bother submitting to iStockphoto / Getty anymore. Just so many negatives with this crew - lower pay rates for contributors, hidden payment information, no visible way to select 'editorial' during the submission process for images that should belong to that category - the list goes on. And now I can't even upload a photo. It's almost like they're trying to discourage contributors from submitting.

Just logged into iStockphoto and there is no sales information for me at all.

Finally, I can see some sales figures on the ESP site (under Royalties.) Though it only provides information for 1 January 2017 (not sure if that includes payment information for the previous month or not.) Is there any way that I can check sales for earlier months too? The last time I was able to see my sales was months ago and I had accumulated $20. The current 1 January 2017 statement only displays a total of $10.50 so I'd like to see all those missing dollars.

Works fine for me.

Interlaced is extremely outdated. There is no need for it.

Unless your'e going to Bluray. 50i is one of the standards supported by Bluray, as well as 24p. But yea for stock footage, I can see that I'm going to have to re-edit and re-upload my videos as progressive.

If you don't want to purchase other software I'm sure there are many free options:

http://www.techradar.com/news/software/applications/the-best-free-video-editor-1330136

Thanks for the link. I'm currently scrolling though the list. I haven't used Lightworks but I thought I recall reading some years ago that the maximum resolution that software could output is 1280 x 720p. Is that still the case or does it support 1920 x 1080 as well these days?

Just wondering if many tv broadcasters or production companies make use of interlaced footage footage or do they mainly prefer progressive? Most of my footage on the stock sites is interlaced (1920 x 1080 50i) because I don't have much choice in the matter. I'm limited by the software that I use - Sony Movie Studio. With Sony Movie Studio, I can create 1280 x 720p (25p) clips or 1920 x 1080 (50i) clips no problem. But for some strange reason, I cannot create a 1920 x 1080 25p video with this software. Well actually, there is a preset that will allow me to export a 1920 x 1080 25p video with Movie Studio but only as an obscure file format that's not recognised by many devices and with a pitifully low bitrate. In other words - pointless.

I have had one 50i video clip sell but I'm not sure if that was just luck. So what's the general consensus - Is there much demand for interlaced HD footage?

The navigation is lousy, but uploading is surprising fast and easy compared to the old iStock uploader. No more custom dictionary nonsense.

Gosh, I hated that. I didn't really see the point of clarifying the meaning of certain keywords you added. I was tired of ticking or unticking the box next to the line: "Did you mean....?"

And bad news for any keywords that their dictionary didn't recognise. I use scientific names in a number of my images of wildlife and plants and so many times, iStockphoto didn't recognise these words and omitted them. Same deal with names of certain locations. I remember there was a time when you could request iStockphoto to add the omitted keywords but then later on, they refused to do so. Consequently, you were put at a disadvantage when people searched for your image and there wasn't a thing you could do about it.

Top left of the ESP submission page is a box that says Istock creative submission (or something like that). There's a drop down on that to change it to Istock Editorial.

When I'm logged into ESP, there's no drop down option on the iStock Creative Image tab.

Okay, I got the image deleted by request (I left a note for the Getty team.) Now, Ive uploaded the same image again but I still can't work out how to mark it as editorial. If I click on the text on the top left of the screen that says: "Submission Batch: iStock Creative Image", nothing happens. Maybe iStock have become like Fotolia - no editorial submissions.