hm... virtual community is o.k. but, i think that human beings have to have real "live" friends, and social contacts/network e.t.c.
 i'm drinking beer regularely with few my friends - also microstockers, and regarding the fact that i am a pro night club musician also for over 20 years, i have a lot of friends from that population also.
 but, virtual community also has it's own benefits, that's for sure. (on example you can find a lot of help from other people on the forums regarding business).
*i'm speaking in generally, not pointing anyone specially.

^^ well, i am happy with ONLY beer. but did not want to mention this at the first place. -there might be some minors members -and i do not want to advertise alcoholic beverages.
"if the beer is an alcohol =>than i am an alcoholic"
(*thanks to d.a.maradona)

^ no. if you have deceision in your head: my hobby is going to become my occupation, and i want to earn as much as i can... than - you're right.
 if you have option "i live my hobby" -things are slightly different . what i am tryin' to say is that anything people do, must be done with love. if yo do not love something you do, whatever this is, than you better don't. off course - if you can.

yeep. -agreed some 100% 

yes. i agree - on dt. i had also.. let's say maybe 5% of images bought with less relevant kwds, but, this is on d.t. dt is not is, and is is not dt. these are two different companies, with different policies, and different customer

if love is "human feeling" - this has nothing to do with ONLY objects. objects are dead things. with no heard and hot blood inside.
-so your parallel is not good. -image of two people from the other hand can produce differ feelings. love is one of these feelings.
 if you have image with people for example are giving a present each to other - this heartial object for instance - then "love" is o.k. keyword.

 or try to think "from the end" - if you are buyer, and you need a little red glass heart image for your design, for i don't know.. st.valentine's day... - you are going to try search with : red, glass, single object, heart shape,  ...... i am pretty sure that you are not going to type word "love" for this. -you guess -you need  image of object.
 another buyer who needs "human feeling ->love" is going to have a bunch of images which does not have anything to do directly with the term "love"
 reviewers few times deleted some right kwds from my files - and i complained to support, and kwds. were back.
 but in this specific case - i have to say that i agree with reviewer.
*why is istock most sucessful agency in a business? fiwe years ago - all the agencies had pretty similar number of pretty the same images - but istock rised up from the crowd? even if the prices on is. are actually the biggest in a business? i am sure that a number of new buyers turned on istock  also because search/keyword policy

They just rejected some images of a red heat-shaped thing because I had includeded word 'Love' in the keywords. Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh!

 yes, i would love to be the reviewer too - one of the main reasons is rejecting of keyword-spamming images.
 *if this is some object, heartial-shaped, and in red color = keyword "love" has nothing to do with this. this is "object" "single object" "heartial shape" etc... = what is not-is not love ("human feeling"). - so reviewer was right.

 ** i met one reviewer from istock personally -and believe me -that person is really excellent - photographer -and photo shop operator.

interesting thing is that one of the top contributors had not any (or "ruled") limitations about uploading when he appeared on dt site.
 interesting thing is also that when one of contributors (my good friend b.t.w.) mentioned this fact, actually asked a question - why rules are applied to major community (with never mind... on that time it  was some 100 images/day for contributors with high approval ratio), but for someone else, these rules do not apply? - he was warned?

yes - the more money we earn, -we have less of conspiracy theories.

BUT:

 there is stil NO my specific image in the search typing "newest" option. this is not a conspiracy theory, this is the fact. - there is no image. this might be that is going to appear in a time, but now, at this moment - there is no image (which is online).
 o.k. - image surely need some time to come into a search - but - how the images which are newer than mine are already in a search?

I'd love reply ONLY from the members that are in 2nd and 3rd payment "grade" (036 and 038$ per download).
 A few days ago i drank a beer with my good friend, and also one of the very best microstock photographers at the moment (don't believe everything that everybody says about himself ) - and he told me his observation: his (excellent) photos are not showing in the search when typing a few top keywords for his image when "newest" option is chosen. -you guess on example if the image number is 3......150 - in the search on some of the pages is 3.....180, and the next one is 3.... 140. - there is no 3...150 image in the search by newest option.
 His analyze of portfolios that are shown are there is a number of if i can say "not so experienced" contributors, -or contributors with small portfolios etc...(pointing->these contributors are in the 0.25/dl "grade").
 Concept that we've discussed about is one of top needed/searched/bayed  - "woman/beauty"
 I had a short trip these days, i had no internet in the mountains, but i'm now back, and this morning, i tried to find my latest (was only one image sent) image, and at this moment mine should be somewhere in the 13-15th side of "newest" with "woman, beauty" keywords - and mine photo is nowhere with newest search.the number is 38234959.
 i did a check again this moment - on the 13th page (when "photos only" is chosen also, and 10 rows view at the bottom) - the latest image is 38234212 - so this one is uploaded before mine, and the first one is 38235994 - so, that one is newest than mine.
 am i correct if i say that mine should be somewhere in between these two, and - this is not.

 - so, my concerns are - is this a site bug, or this is a common issue on ss?
 if i am correct, agency has an interest to sell images on the 0.25$ per download rather than 0.38, because a credit package is a total of dowlnoads for total of money -so there is a bigger part for the company left. (am i right about this?)

 so, i'd love to have some reply from the contributors that are in the bigger payment grades.

 if i am right about this, i would agree with selling my images also for 0.25, RATHER than for 0.36 (where i am at the moment) - and my images to be shown in the search, -because, these can be a 100$/dl, but if it is not in a most common search (best match - whee this is never going to be at the begining of its life on the site without downloads, and newest - where this is not showing) -this is very likely that this is not going to be bayed ever.

no, you are just looking on to things from the wrong point of view - images are not more expensive today - simple "producing price" is so big (without very very expensive gear) - so prices should/could be even higher.*tip: just try to produce some studio image with a model, and make a calculation of costs( model, makeup artist, studio (if you do not have your own - i do ), clothing/stylist... and yes - you'll have to have a (good) camera too, and some photographic skill either)...
 the right point of view is that images back in 2004, or whenever - were much more cheaper than today. today-cheep images - a few years ago - very cheep images.  - that is the fact.
 today - expensive images - a few years ago - cheaper images - that is wrong point of view.
USAF today do not use brother Wright's plane - bike builders made a plane i believe for a few hundred of buck$$ - no. they are paying a large amount of money for quality products of the manufacturers, Yf-22 on example.
 any other business on the planet - for quality product -  you have to pay. you wanna ride a Ferrari ? - well - you better prepare some good ca$$h for this car.-or drive... i do not know.. hyundai..

Quote from: loop on February 02, 2009, 19:45

The business of giving away images for free it's not a business, it's the reverse. Call it want you want but is not the point of microstock.

Oh, really? That WAS the original point of microstock......

interesting "point"
if i understood correctly - the point was -me to buy some 15K$ photo gear (little more, but let's stick to this 15 000$ that my gear is worth) - to educate myself, hard working to produce high quality images, and to give these images for free to designers - who wil sell designs, that sometimes have my photo as an essential part of it (photo, with no corrections + some text).
and you now are boo-hoo-hooing here that some 20-30$ is expensive for the image that fits your needs.
 you can always buy a cheep point'n'shot camera, (avialable from some 100$), and to make free designs?

from the other side - maybe you should look onto istock policy through the getty images policy? (getty has some other microstock sites too i believe)?

 on example i am banned from the DT forum for writing trouth on the forum.  from the other side these people are hipocrites - so my images are not going to be "banned" from the database. reason? - these people are not so stupid - they make money on my images, i am also not so stupid to give up - i make also money on my images.
 *what i am trying to say is that it is very good thing not to mix up emotions and busine$$.

i have had rejected a photo of a professional model with MR form filled up with agency's booker - with the agency's adress - the only thing where you can find this model for modeling purpose on the planet earth.
 after a several mails and telephone calls - i just gave up the file. of course - they are not right - morally and legally, but one image less in my portfolio is saving more my nerves, than 'fighting for justice.

*imagine this option:
on photo shooting on exampe.. for l'oreal - if photographer asked a models "excuse me young misses - may i have your home adress, and not agency's in your contract/mr. excuse me miss penelope cruz are you sure this is your home adress?" ...

"good morning" ....