Thanks a lot my friend. I've already uploaded them on shutterstock and they all got accepted. Not even as editorial.
On a side note i resubmitted them on Adobe and they past. So clearly whoever QCed them was on his /her period 
We spoke many times before by the way, but I'm not that active unfortunately.
Thanks again

Hey there again and good news that SS has accepted it as commercial!

Just have to accept that some QC will take a conservative approach when dealing with borderline calls relating to legal issues such as images of Meteora. It can be frustrating. Lately, I'm questioning whether it's even worth submitting dozens of my Rio aerials to iStock as they're taking the stupid line that they need to protect graffiti "artists" to a whole new level, especially when their vandalism is only 5 pixels in size.  May just have to skip iStock altogether or submit it as editorial (which decreases its worth).

As for technical issues, SS in particular seems to be letting more images through with technical imperfections that would have been rejected only a year ago. That's probably a bad thing though as it means the market is inundated with mediocre images.

See you around!

We work practically for free submitting to Microstock 

Newbs, if you're considering starting out today, don't bother! 

(Apparently in 2008 it was much easier)

...now if you really have what it takes...

Going back to the OP's original question, there's something to be said about the drawbacks of being results-oriented. In other words, asking how much one can earn before investing in those magical 10,000 hours is like putting the cart before the horse.

I used to play a lot of poker and perhaps this analogy rings true for this business. In poker, you can make the optimal decisions and lose in the short term (which can feel like an eternity). Eventually with enough smart decisions you'll end up ahead. Many amateur poker players make the mistake of changing their (optimal) strategy when in the short term results are unfavorable.

With stock photography you can spend a considerable investment on gear/setup, models, location, keywording services, uploading software and see the shoot become a flop. This can be to no fault of our own since client habits can be unpredictable to sites chafing the Lagos. What works for me is trying to keep my costs ridiculously low (which can be challenging since I do a lot of travel photography).

A recent example of lower costs is a session I did with my awesome 91 year old grandfather on the theme of fitness for seniors. I wrote about it on my blog:

https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2018/01/11/photo-shoot-older-couple-exercising/

Even if these don't sell, we just had a lot of fun.
[/quote]
[/quote]

Going back to the OP's original question, there's something to be said about the drawbacks of being results-oriented. In other words, asking how much one can earn before investing in those magical 10,000 words is putting the cart before the horse.

I used to play a lot of poker and perhaps this analogy rings true for this business. In poker, you can make the optimal decisions and lose in the short term (which can feel like an eternity). Eventually with enough smart decisions you'll end up ahead. Many amateur poker players make the mistake of changing their (optimal) strategy when in the short term results are unfavorable.

With stock photography you can spend a considerable investment on gear/setup, models, location, keywording services, uploading software and see the shoot become a flop. This can be to no fault of our own since client habits can be unpredictable to sites chafing the Lagos. What works for me is trying to keep my costs ridiculously low (which can be challenging since I do a lot of travel photography).

A recent example of lower costs is a session I did with my awesome 91 year old grandfather on the theme of fitness for seniors. I wrote about it on my blog:

https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2018/01/11/photo-shoot-older-couple-exercising/

Even if these don't sell, we just had a lot of fun.

Focus on producing quality and less on marketing. We pay agencies 50%+ commission on sales so they worry about finding clients. 

My advice: ignore them.

+1

Unless I'm missing something, I'm not getting the impression that this guy was in on the scam. He just seems to be very naive.

I agree.

Introducing a crowd-sourced business model within a complex legal framework can be a recipe for disaster. How many people actually read the agreements before clicking the little box?

Some 3rd parties are more than happy to exploit newbies' eagerness to earn by any means.

Thank you all I have really benefited from this long debate

Thanks for sharing your experience. There's plenty of other agencies out there (look on the right for rankings/links) you can submit and I trust next time you'll be more careful

  I'd share a couple links and retire to the tropics.

Brazil?  don't forget the sunscreen! 

You're licensing this as editorial but keep in mind that this type of shot most likely can and should be licensed as commercial.

I agree that if you shoot what you enjoy you'll do a better job than for using yourself to create something that is supposedly "trending" that may be a pain to do.

In my case, I enjoy visiting markets in places I visit and capturing the local products. These tend to do quite well. I wrote about a recent trip to a street market I visited in Rio last week (amazing variety of tropical fruits):

https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2017/12/17/brazilian-fruit-veg-street-market/

I have no issues with giving advice, it's a huge marketplace and I don't feel threatened by competitors. Each to their own though.

We forgive you.

Now say 10 Hail Marys and donate $200 for your sins into my paypal account. All will be well.