The problem with your overcast picture is the color of the plant, green.  Green is a horrible color to meter and photograph.  Next time look for a red or yellow subject on an overcast day.

Under the picture you wrote, "this image projects the look and feel that I wish to convey." If this truly projects the look and feel that you wish to convey, then you have succeeded. 

I'm using a 4x5 inch field camera.

kathrynshort

At least you can do something about your students.  I say give them an F and make them go to summer school!

redhat

Look around . . . there is bad photography being used everywhere.  And it's not just on billboards and web sites, I've even seen pixelated pictures published in magazines.  To steal a line from a TV commercial I saw last night, "People wouldn't know a good photograph if it sat on their lap and called them mama!"  (I think the TV commercial said people wouldn't know HDTV.)   I don't know if art buyers are ignorant or if they just don't care.  But these art buyers hold influence people's opinions and they are using this influence to lower the general public's perception of what makes a good photograph.  John Q. Public thinks it must be good, it's been published.  By using sub-par pictures these art buyers are having a negative effect on all photography.

Having said that I am not sure that all the fault lies with the art buyers, after all they only buy what they see.  And I think a lot of people who have gotten into microstock don't know any more about what makes a good photograph than the art buyers do.  And it is hard to blame these new microstockers because all the pictures that influenced them were published by the art buyers.  Garbage in garbage out. 

That brings us to the microstock web sites and their reviewers.  I have no idea what kind of photographic qualifications are required for a microstock reviewer, but it can't be much.  I have had images turned down for reasons so ridiculous that it was apparent the reviewer no idea what he or she was seeing.  (Alpenglow on a mountain is not caused by the white balance being off, it is caused by the low angle of the sun.)  I think that the microstock web sites are very narrow minded in what they do and don't accept.  They think some subjects are "not commercial" and won't sell.  What I always wonder is how do the reviewers know that todays "non-commercial subject" is not going to be popular in 6 months or next year.  Last year everyone wanted to drive a big SUV now everyone wants to drive a hybrid, did they see $130 a barrel oil coming?

Now, I have images that I don't think are so good, but they sell every week.  So some customers think they are good.  1. Are these customers being negatively influenced by the art buyers?  2. Did a under qualified reviewer let these images slip by because he or she was tired of seeing work by new microstockers?  3. Should I take these images down because I don't think they are good enough?  The answers are #1 I don't know, #2 I don't know and #3 Not as long as I am making money with them. 

What's wrong with buyers? The way I see it there's no easy answer because there is plenty of blame to go around!

redhat

If you are planing on making a career in photography then you need to purchase professional lighting equipment.  Remember you get what you pay for.  Follow this link http://www.calumetphoto.com/ctlac.ui.pn=search.Search&query=%20strobe%20power%20pack&page=1 look at the lighting equipment being sold there and pay close attention to the price listed for each piece of equipment. 

Since you are "lost when it comes to using reflectors, umbrellas etc." maybe you should take a class and rent lighting equipment until you have a little more experience.  Just so you know, reflectors and umbrellas are very basic when it comes to lighting equipment.  If you don't know what they are or how to use them then I would suggest that you learn what they are and how to use them before you buy them.  (Would you enter the Indianapolis 500 and then show up at the track with a go cart?)  What you described in your posts is like trying to do algebra without knowing how to add.

Please don't take what I wrote the wrong way.  If I could learn the proper way to use lighting equipment then anyone can.  I'm just suggesting that you gain a little hands on knowledge so you can make an informed decision. 

yingyang0,

That's good advice but everything, including the agreement, on the site is in English except the part where they tell what they don't like about the image, and sometimes that is in English too.

Keep in mind that if you switch from Canon you will most likely have to buy all new lenses, flash, etc.

I've had trouble with Panthermedia too.  I e-mailed them and they directed me to send a note to the image editors.  To do this go to My Panther>My Images>Image Overview.  Find the image in question and scroll all the way to the right side of the page, the last column is "Edit Image" click on "Edit Image".  This takes you back to the "Upload Image" page, scroll down to the "Message to image editors" box and tell them you don't appreciate receiving mesages in German and ask them to repeat the request in English or you can be nice and politely ask for a translation.

I think your image is grrreeaat.  (As Tony the Tiger would say.)  I would upload it to every site you can find that sells stock images or prints.  If the reviewers don't like that image, in my opinion, they should be fired!  My question is: If you think it is good then why do you care what we think about it?  Make your own decisions that way the mistakes you make will be yours.  Your mistakes and your successes will give you the personal knowledge to know what to do in the future.

One more thing, don't stop asking questions or for comments on this forum.  You don't have to worry in the future I will refrain from answering or commenting.

A thousand apologies if I offended you, that was not my intention then and it is not my intention now.  But please let me defend myself.

I thought your answer to my post was condescending. 
You said "I know Aliencat's spot well, and I've done a lot of research across stock sites - all images are sorta the same wide angle of the same two-three shots - from Canada - wide shot of American falls, from Terrapin point (his shot) to the Canadian side, and some side views of the American falls (which I already have plenty of and I don't even bother submitting them... may be I should!). So, I was going for something different, more detail, closer, more intimate Niagara, with stone-like icicles and rushing masses of water in the background - for copy space.... Well, I live 30 mins away from Niagara, I'll go photograph some "usual" suspects next time I'm around there...." 
That sounds like an I know it all attitude to me. 
And your statement "Ahh, the law of "gotta do the opposite"... if it's a close up - they'll say back away, if it's a wide angle, they'll say get closer... can't win huh" makes me think that you do not want to hear from people who disagree with you. 

I did not state that I assumed you did not know the rule of thirds I said "use the rule of thirds for composition".  Had I assumed you did not know this I would have explained it to you. 

Does "If you don't have the equipment to get close then try backing up a little and photograph a slightly wider composition." sound "less than polite" to you?  If it does then again, I apologize.  I do not know what kind of equipment you have and you already knew my opinion was that you needed either a wider or a tighter composition.   

My statement "I feel you are wasting your time shooting badly composed tight shots and then attempting to pass them off as close ups." is just my opinion.  Can an opinion be impolite? 

My two statements "You are on the right track but you need to learn the difference between tight shots and close ups." and "Also you need to learn the limitations of your equipment so you will know what kind of picture you can make and what kind of picture you can't make."  sound like constructive advice to me.  I could have written "you don't even know the difference between a tight shot and a close up!" and "learn the limitations of your equipment before you shoot again!"  To me those statements would have been impolite.   

My statement "It's like you photographed an arm and are now attempting to pass it off as a picture of a hand." is just an analogy.

And my "If you are going to get close then get close, don't get "close-uppish"." statement simply means, if you want to shoot a close up then do what you need to do to shoot a close up.  Impolite? 

Again I apologize if my writing style offended you, I mean no disrespect to you.  In the past I have tried to pass one kind of picture off as another and most of the time it just did not work.  Maybe I should have stated that somewhere.  And in my opinion some of my pictures are just plain ugly, bad lighting, bad exposures and cloudless sky's but they sell every week.  Like I've stated in the past "If I knew what was going to sell I would apply that knowledge to picking lottery numbers!" . . so good luck!

I said "try backing up a little".  You are on the right track but you need to learn the difference between tight shots and close ups.  It's like you photographed an arm and are now attempting to pass it off as a picture of a hand.  Also you need to learn the limitations of your equipment so you will know what kind of picture you can make and what kind of picture you can't make. 

You state, "I WAS going for a tighter, close-uppish shot".  If you are going to get close then get close, don't get "close-uppish".  Then later you state "I was going for something different, more detail, closer, more intimate Niagara, with stone-like icicles and rushing masses of water in the background".  That's good but I and the reviewer think you failed.  If you don't have the equipment to get close then try backing up a little and photograph a slightly wider composition.  I feel you are wasting your time shooting badly composed tight shots and then attempting to pass them off as close ups.  Then still later you state  "Ahh, the law of "gotta do the opposite"... if it's a close up - they'll say back away, if it's a wide angle, they'll say get closer".  When you go out to shoot you should already be doing all of that, that is shooting this side and the opposite side, close up shots, tight shots, wide shots, high shots, low shots, down shots, motion shots, stop action shots, silhouette shots, use front light, back light, side light, wide lens, normal lens, telephoto lens and any other technique that you know.  Finally you state "can't win huh", if you are not willing to learn from the answers why ask the questions?

I agree with the reviewers, the composition of these pictures is too tight.  Try backing up a little or using a wider lens so the viewer can see what is happening in the picture.  Also these pictures only have 2 elements water and ice.  I have found that most good pictures have at least 3 elements.  Like water, ice and a person in a barrel going over the falls!  All joking aside try to shoot during the magic hours, shoot a lower or higher angle, add a foreground element, use a slower shutter speed, find the spot that Aliencat used (http://www.dreamstime.com/niagara-falls---winter-sunset-image7) and use the rule of thirds for composition.

WOW!  I can't wait to try this the next time I shoot a 2.5 minute exposure with my 4x5 camera.

You asked for it, so here goes.  The StockXpert reviewer was right on, the picture of the boy crying is one of the worst lit images I have ever seen offered for sale.  If you are going to shoot low key then shoot low key don't mix low key and high key lighting.  The right side of his face is totally burned out as is his right shoulder.  The left side of his face is way too dark.  Evening up the lighting ratios a little would allow the right side to still be brighter than the left and would also open up the shadow on the left side of his face so we can see that he has 2 eyes.  Did you shoot a close up of just the eye and the tear?

As for the girl in the oversize clothes, photograph her doing everything you can think of with any kind of prop you can think of (playing a musical instrument, reflected in a mirror, on a bicycle, putting on makeup . . .).  Also photograph her from as many different positions (high, low, front, back, left, right, inside, outside . . . ) as you can think of.  Get her input, I bet she will think of things that you won't.

Adelaide,

I apologize to you, I should have addressed my second comment to sharply_done.  I did not notice the date on your original question.  It was on the first page of the Photo Critique section so I assumed that it was fairly new.  I'll check the date from now on. 

The subject said "What do you think?" so I answered with what I thought.  It didn't say "What do you think in October but don't bother answering in January".  Since Adelaide had only gotten one responce in the last 4 months, I thought she still might want to know what people thought!

The left tilt of the box on the second picture is better than right tilt of the box on the first picture.  Your backgrounds are not uniform.  Try this, flip the first picture so that the box is tilted the other direction and then resubmit it to see if it is accepted that way.

There is a furniture store in Houston and the owner makes all the TV and radio commercials.  He jumps up and down on mattress claiming that he will "Save You Money".  He has been doing this for well over 20 years.  About 15 years ago some people did a survey on local advertising. They asked the public which local commercials were best and which ones were worst.  He won in both categories.  When asked about this double win he said he was glad people remembered his adds.  Now I don't claim to know anything about advertising but maybe this is what Shutterstock was going for.  Good, bad or ugly maybe Shutterstock just want people to remember the add.

mjp,

Make your own decisions that way you get all the credit and can not blame someone else if things do not go as you hoped they would.  Be flexible, ready to change your decision if things are not working out.  Do not worry or pay attention to what other people think or tell you, only you know what you can & can not do and how much money and time you have to invest.  Make your own mistakes, you will learn more that way.

Zirafek,

You stated "Of course I'm not taking pictures to make money from them, but I just thought I could give it a try and now I want to learn more". 
If you are not taking pictures to make money from them, then why do you care what a micro stock reviewer thinks about them?
If you want to learn more, take a photography class where you can get some good one on one criticism of your pictures.
Don't give up, believe it or not your knowledge of photography, limited as it is, is probably greater than the photography knowledge of the person who reviewed and rejected your images.

I think I did this to be accepted on Stockxpert.  I picked the images I wanted to upload for my initial submission then I searched the Stockxpert site for similar images.  When I submitted my image I  pointed out the file number for a similar image already available on the Stockxpert site and asked them which was better.  I did this for each image I submitted, they accepted my images rather quickly.  By the way all the images Stockxpert has accepted from me have been landscapes, that's all I shoot.

redhat is not Lione, I wish I knew how to make images like that.  Now think about this, what if Lione makes one sale because of each keyword, is that wrong?  Just because a few people on microstockgroup.com see life, forest and cool as invalid keywords for this image does not mean that a customer will see them as invalid.  I think everyone should worry about their own images and let Lione worry about his or her images.  If Stockxpert has a limit on the number of keywords allowed then it is Stockxpert's and Lione's problem.

It seems to me he has figured out something you haven't and your jealous.  Who died and made you the keyword police?