I am wondering about the quality of the photos that show in the main page (latest uploads, I pressume) and how that can affect the perception buyers get from this site.  I welcome the idea of a wide approach in the themes of the pics that are accepted, especially since many micros are underserved in some areas (as being "not stock" in their perception).  But I wonder if images that have been clearly improvised and without any editing being uploaded are going to give buyers the idea that the quality of this collection, as a whole, is not that good.  There are lots of images of people's backs, other images in which the built-in flash was the source of light, images taken on a harsh midday light and very large series of similars that show up quite frequently.  There are even images of people with T-shirts with the names of universities that are marked as RF!  I'm not the best photographer out there, on the contrary, I'm an amateur, but I've seen in the last four or five years that the sites that thrive the most are the ones that are "picky" with their collections.

I hope they look into this because I really like them and I've had more sales there in my first month than on 123RF and BigStock and they promise a lot if they can correct these situations.