I used to have the same problem when I was using a free utility to add/manage keywords, but now just putting them into photoshop and the problem went away.

G.I.S. Forester  (Geographic Information System) i.e. computer maps/data management

I think it is important to realize that just because a law exists dose not mean its enforced.  American politics can rapidly change what is enforced and what is ignored.


Some people interpreted Jon's responce as too terse, I would prefer something blunt than from some silver tongued lawyer type who afterwards I am still not sure what was said.


BTW I think it sucks for those who are stuck paying the thirty percent

If using FTP, you must upload the .eps file first, then the low resolution jpg, otherwise the jpg will be rejected for being too small.  Also don't choose any categories, for the vectors, otherwise that will get you a rejection.

lbarn

Yea, I had 3 stuck since nov 10, just deleted them today, and re-uploaded.

Yea, tried to upload a few, but they never show up in the ToSubmit section.  Sort of glad it isn't just me..

I have had rejections in the past couple of weeks of the same type of images that have been accepted before residential and commercial/retail construction, and they have been rejected for the property release required reason.  I questioned 123rd via email on why their own listed policy on their website differed from their rejection reason.

They replied that they were currently in the process of re-aligning their practices to be more like their parent company, and once this re-alignment was complete, they would change their written policy.  It appears to have gone the same way that Stockexpert has gone, all architectural style shots require a property release.
 

Here's how you find them. Create an Adjustment Layer and choose Threshold. Set Threshold all the way to black. You will see stray pixels floating away from the edge. Paint them white on the image Layer.

I am curious about this method for checking for stray areas, as I have this rejection reason from time to time, especially before I purchased CS3.  I used the threshold method to check on one of my isolations where I used the pen tool and refined the edge, the used it as a mask to make the isolation.  Using a threshold layer to check, I see some black "flecks" that are right on the edge.  Are these "flecks" from the edge refeinement?  Istock accepted the image that I checked using your method.  Do you suggest looking for large areas like in the hardhat example?

Lee

Just sent 2 with firefox/fireFTP and encountered no problems.

Lee

Well, I have recently (1 month) ago up-graded from Elements to photoshop CS3 and agree the using the pen tool is the way to go, much better than the "1 shot methods" that I was using in Elements.

DanP68 I agree that SS is much more realistic about isolations, and if they are rejected and I feel strongly enough about them, they can be edited slightly and re-submitted.  The ones that get thru on IS often do well for my limited portfolio.

Zero feathering is the right amount. Careful use of gaussian blur on a small selection (say 1 pixel either side of the line of isolation) can be useful if you have an edge which you don't like even though you have done it properly. I make an arbitrary rule to always downsample the image to about 2/3 if I have softened an edge after isolating.

I have never heard of using zero feathering, but it may be worth a shot.

I have tried several times at Istock for vectors and haven't passed either.  I don't think you will have much chance with those 3.  I think they want complicated, well thought out vectors to get past the test, then perhaps those may be accepted. 

Mark, I use the 400d for the past 10 months after using a 300d for a couple of years.  I think that the 10 mp is enough and still leaves some room to crop images if necessary.  I am interested in how the new XSI fairs when some sites get one to review, I would think the live view would be useful for isolated object photos.

At the time when I bought the body, I purchased a 28-105 3.4-4.5 and the 50mm 1.8.  I had read all the reports on the 50mm or "nifty fifty", and just couldn't believe that a 75 buck lens could be all that grand.  They were right, it has amazing sharpness and color for a "cheap" lens.

Although I have had many shots accepted at the big 5 with (just started with StockXpert) with the 18-55 kit lens, I recently upgraded to their new budget IS lens the 18-55 IS, which is also good for the $179 price tag.  I may get flamed, but I think for starting out their new 55-250 IS may be excellent for the suspected $279 price tag when released.  Some recent posts over at DPreview have linked to some images that appear good and photozone.de reviewed it and gave it relatively good marks.  Although these budget lens won't work on a full frame camera, their low price should allow one to get more shots accepted to save up for some "L grade" glass.

The only site I struggle with sometimes is IS and their amazing ability to find artifacts that most other sites either ignore or don't see, and I suspect that this is more of a problem in postprocessing or exposure, than a specific problem with the camera.

Lee