I found the address for the owner? I believe while reading in the forum (Alex)...a start, at least I have an address of somebody that works there, so I sent my reply to him.  Lets see how long it takes to hear something back.

I thought that it was just me (and my iddy biddy port), granted Easter just happened, but about 2 weeks ago it just died.  A good pattern had been developing, slow on Sat, Sun, pick up a bit on Mon, good day Tue, peak on
Wed, Thur, slow down on Fri (about Mon levels), then start it over.  However 2 weeks ago at started usual (to Tuesday), then the midweek peak never happened and its been chugging along pretty slow ever since, less than half of the early part of the month.  Yesterday was encouraging though, not the best but still looks like it might be pulling out of the slump.  Didn't think that Easter would have such a huge effect, but it has been a trend across all sites, that things have slowed over the time period, for me at least.  I hope that next week the effects of Easter have completely passed and everything is back to where it was at the start of the month.

I do upload at least 1 photo a day to most sites, SS included, but strive for 3.

Quote from: Waldo4 on March 25, 2008, 08:55

I don't know that multiple exposures were used, if the camera captured the full tonal range in the initial shot multiple exposures are not needed, the effect of an HDR can be created from any shot when its curve is flattened, and multiples of a single shot can be created in PS (a screen blending is equivalent to a bright shot, a multiply blending is equivalent to a dark shot, if the initial shot contained no white or black clipping, there is no difference if noise reduction is applied to the appropriate layers (the screen blended layer)).

thanks for the info waldo.

multiple exposure:... check out these three images
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-8943298-taj-mahal-palace.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-5053381-taj-mahal-palace-in-india-on-sunrise.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-4686271-taj-mahal-palace-in-india-on-sunrise.html

one taj mahal - three images. 

which makes me think that images like this
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-4884196-group-going-along-hill-on-sunset.html

even though it is totally possible to take - it is probably a merge of 2 images - one of people walking on a sand dune, and a nice sunset.

For most of his work it seems he has a nice stock library of skies, and just adds them in PPing, the results are stunning (I've done it before too, not for stock however).  Two different pictures merged into one is very different the multiple exposures merged to HDR.  I wish that I could get that mileage out of my shots  , looks like the initial capture of the Taj has made him a couple of bucks, I'm sure that each shot is a decent seller, they all are stunning.

Though to me the colors look very oversaturated, they obviously are not posterized if the images are accepted.  A shot generally can take the most saturation without posterization when it has an even range of tonal values throughout the range. 

Most important of all however, is that the WB is spot on across the whole tonal range.  The global WB adjustment in a RAW editor or midtone color balance in PS is typically not enough, first adjust the highlight WB, then the shadow, then the midtone, this is usually enough, but not always (occasionally a local area will need its own WB correction).

If you look at the tone histogram for each of these images, it probably is quite well balanced without any big dips or troughs, from black to white the amount of luminosity is probably fairly even across the board.  As few shots are actually taken this way, in order to boost saturation to those levels first the tone curve has to be flattened. 

There are a number of ways to do this, keep in mind the goal as you do it, an even spread of tones across the whole histogram, which typically also makes for a pleasing image to look at.

From easiest to most difficult, depending on the image several techniques may be needed, some applied several times (like the levels and curves):

With the levels you set the white point and black point (right at the end of the range) and adjust the brightness for an even spread.

The curves are one means of boosting brights or darks to even things out, and adjusting local contrast, an easy tool to use, but difficult to master.

A contrast mask can even an image out overall, apply sparingly as the effect can be noticable if used to much, but it is a fantastic means of flattening the tone curve.

The highlight/shadow tool can be used to balance (increase or reduce) the light or dark areas, but use caution, this lightening dark areas brings out noise, and darkening bright areas adds halos, apply very, very sparingly, only for very minor corrections, it is quite easy to use however.

A targeted luminosity mask (once the mask is created (either the luminosity or its negative) the mask itself can have contrast, levels, and curves applied to target/highlight certain areas) on a contrast/levels/curves adjustment layer or image layer has the same effect as the shadows/highlights tool, but there is far more control and the results are much better, however it is time consuming and difficult to do.  These layers also can have the blending changed to further intensify the effect (then opacity reduced to balance)

The luminosity masked adjustment layer (or image layer with adjustments applied to it) can be taken one step further and areas on the mask masked out (painted black) to only target specific areas like a sky.  This is probably the most intense level of surgery that can be done on the tones of an image, and it can be extremely time consuming, but very good results can be obtained.  Same as above the blending of the layer can boost or be part of the effect as well, and opacity used to balance.

Some of my most intense work in this area had 20+ layers and took several hours to PP (probably a lot less now that I know what I am doing an it is second nature), but in the end the results were fantastic.  Once the tone curve is evened out and smoothed (if you go by how the image looks, in the end typically you find that the histogram evens out, it is pleasing to look at), overly bright areas are darkened and overly dark areas lightened (often when lightening a dark area with a mask, noise reduction should be done on that layer to keep down noise, as lightening makes noise more visible).  The smooth tone curve can then have saturation applied and it can take a lot more (making a more intense picture overall) before it starts to look goofy or posterize.

Any of these techniques are easily found with google for an exact tutorial.  The most intense stuff requires the full PS (any version is fine), I'm not aware of another program that can use targeted luminosity masked layers.

I don't know that multiple exposures were used, if the camera captured the full tonal range in the initial shot multiple exposures are not needed, the effect of an HDR can be created from any shot when its curve is flattened, and multiples of a single shot can be created in PS (a screen blending is equivalent to a bright shot, a multiply blending is equivalent to a dark shot, if the initial shot contained no white or black clipping, there is no difference if noise reduction is applied to the appropriate layers (the screen blended layer)).

As leaf mentioned LAB color space is worth looking into, specifically the technique that I know as LAB color popping, where the A and B channels have the tone curve slope increased (contrast raised), which intensifies colors in a different manner than saturation alone (basically applying a tone curve to the saturation, color can be made very intense this way)

I think that the concrete keywords is a very important point becaus of the nature of keyword searching.  If a buyer has browsing in mind, for a background for example, chances are they would do a category search and not a keyword search, a keyword search would be used when there is something in mind.  But a database with millions of photos is overwhelming and photos that do not belong are terribly annoying and time wasting, therefore to limit the list to only those most relevant, the searcher will try to be as specific, yet short as possible (same mindset as google searching, the internet is huge, and a google search is fundamentally similar to a keyword search). 

My top few keywords (for FT) are always a very concrete description of what the shot actually contains.  All of my sales on DT via keyword searches have been by very accurate descriptions of what the photo contains, yet only using a few words, just cross checking those searches I have found surprisingly few results for each word combination, as if the buyer refined the keywords until a nice accurate short list was presented to them.

The way I always begin keywording is to think to myself, what keyword combination would put this image on page 1 of google for me, with the most basic words.  After that the tenses and less basic words come, then the more ambiguous stuff.

I pretty much given up on the whole resubmit thing, it just isn't worth my time, except for some particular shots on IS or SS where there at least exists the potential to make back the time I spent redoing the PP work, even then, I'll wait until a shot has shown it's meddle elsewhere before I try to redo it, maybe I'm losing out on some earnings, but as my time is finite I just use that time for new shots for all sites instead of getting one shot on a second tier site.  When they rejected it in the first place, it at least was an indication that the shot will probably not be a hot one there, in which case even if I do get a few DL's out of it in the long run, I still wasted my time essentially.

Is it worth it for me to upgrade from the Canon XT to the Canon XTi? I mainly want to do it because of the self cleaning utility that comes with the XTi, and the increased megapixels can't hurt anything. Maybe this will let me have XL images on iStockphoto. What do you guys think? Thanks.

Is it really worth spending the extra bucks to get a new camera just so you  only have to clean the sensor every 2 months instead of every month?  It isn't that hard to do with the proper tools (crop sensor swabs and e2 fluid).  Sure the other features are niceties, but with the increase in pixels comes an increase in noise. 

The biggest thing I would seek in an upgrade from my XT would be a halfway decent auto WB, an easier means of adjusting the aperture (that little button is annoying), moving the shooting mode (single, multiple, timer) away from where I hit it several times every time I go out shooting, standard PC cable connections to fire flashes remotely, a bigger brighter LCD (or shade, an add on I know, but OEM would be nice), and ISO shown in the viewfinder.  Megapixels, eh whatever they are a nicety, but surely I do not want more if noise is increased.

I guess I need a 5D 

I think the shots have way more to do than the numbers.  Either one of my top earners (they earn across all sites too) each have made more than all other shots in my port combined minus the other one.  Granted I'm sure it is hard to predict these shots (1 was easy to see, the other was not, and I've missed on 2 others that didn't take off like I expected), but honing your ability to predict these and trying to concentrate all effort on taking them and ignoring the simple overall #'s of shots will not only make you a better and more creative photographer, but also will earn more in the end, as it takes time to take, process, and upload shots that maybe will see a few DL's at most in their lifetime, time that could be better spent trying to get that one great shot that will out earn dozens of lesser ones.

With this in mind that critical mass will be drastically different for each photographer, and each too will define the boundary about what constitutes reliable cash flow differently.

Buyers are not like us, we submit everywhere but they just buy at one place maybe two at the most.

I buy everything from istock even if the photos  are from non exclusives, buyers don't have time to waste and go around just trying to save $1.

I agree with andresr here.  I'm sure that there are a few exceptions (maybe some freelancers or less professional people), but professional designers (and professional people in general) use their time to maximize their cost efficiency.  If a designers time is worth 50-100+ per hour (at least, their gross pay (to the company, much more than what they actually see) + company overhead is bare minimum) in actually making money for the buisiness, wasting that valuable time to chase a few bucks in cost savings on a picture here or chasing a little refund there is just a waste of time, that time is much better spent actually designing in terms of the cost effectiveness of their time.

FT for me.  Once I figured out what IS wants my rate has been pretty good, FT OTOH, I have no idea, they only take about 30% of my shots.

For now it's confusing. Many of the magazine give a very high average rating for this lens. Photozone.com included, but lately like you say many users given it bad analysis.

IMO you have to take the user reviews with a grain of salt.  There always will be variability in the QC of lenses, especially new models.  People that buy the lens are either A) Happy as can be, it is everything that they hoped for and more, B) Not blown away, but satisfied, or C) Disappointed to extremely disappointed, either from setting the bar too high in their minds or getting a bad copy.  Chances are either A or B aren't going to write a review, it is C that is mad and does the writing.

As an example I was considering a Sigma 10-22mm for a long time.  All of the mag and pro reviews rate it very highly and some user reviews are great.  But the bulk of the user reviews are people PO'ed that they got a bad copy and the lens stinks, it took them .....x tries to get a good one and it still isn't that good....whatever.  But I also happen to know 3 people that own one, they all love em and consider it their favorite lens.  All 3 got good copies to begin with and their pictures back it up.  While Sigma may not have the greatest QC, reading user reviews makes you believe that 50%+ of lenses are bad, which I don't think is he case at all.  Maybe high as far as lenses go, but they would quickly go out of business if 50% of the products that they sell are defective.

I tend to avoid all user reviews unless it is a general forum of owners (such as the lenses' group in Flickr (most popular lenses have one)) or I have a relationship of some sort with the person (even chatting online), a review left at Amazon et al is just pointless to me as it doesn't represent an accurate cross section of owners.

Jack - Small airplanes definitely give the best shots, I've seen a bunch on Flickr from that altitude that I really love (without the scratched up, warped  plastic covered polarized windows and 10's of miles of air distortion/tinting,  the shots are way better from the camera).  Do you do it professionally or as a hobby?  I work with a few professional guys, occasionally on some of my bigger projects we hire some pros to come in and take some aerials for sitework planning.  Not quite the same though as the ones of cool places. Almost daily I download NASA Landsat/Astronomer pictures and use them as my screensaver, simply stunning (I send way too much time staring at my screensaver). 

Aircraft shots do well in my limited experience.  My best seller is of an airplane (a business jet).  I'm sure that there will be many more too as OEP airport access (all airports in general) in the RSA and TSA to active runways is something that I occasionally get at work (very, very few people do) (I design Navaids, especially VORs/DVORs, but a lot of ILSs too), and I am expected to have at least a PnS in my hands when I am there.  He he.  I know that there are quite a few aviation magazines, might want to page through those for ideas at least for what the aviation community is looking for, I always steal a few minutes when I'm in an FBO to flip through and look at the photos in the ads and articles.  The whole vintage thing, especially dawn of flight/warplane (WW2 especially) I can see having a decent market outside of the regular aviation community, the more markets a shot is applicable too, the better it seems to sell.