Wow... the acceptance at LO come even faster than the rejects at StockXpert   

I requested payment from them yesterday, so they're probably bankrupt   

Epixx

would you care to share details of charges/limits incurred using Moneybookers as I understand it there is a fee when you transfer funds to a bank account.

The fee that Moneybookers deduct, has for my transactions so far, been around USD 2.5. Here in Thailand, my bank charges me as well, but that will vary depending on which bank and which country. Banks in Thailand charges a lot when they know that you have no choice

Sounds like a good idea   

I'm trying out paxxion as well. I can't find anywhere to specify my PayPal account. Do they just assume it's the same as my email address?

I find the whole DA thing very confusing, and the threads on iS are so long that they don't bring much clarity to the theme. What I've noticed is that some of the files that I hadn't DA'ed, didn't appear in searches at all. That changed after I DA'ed them.

Also, after the whole mess started, and yes, I think that it's a mess, some of my bestsellers dropped by around 100%. There may of course be seasonal variations etc., but I don't find the situation very encouraging.

For me, the result is that I'm frequently selling more on Fotolia and DT than on iS. But as long as I sell somewhere, I suppose it's ok.

DT works fine for me, and even if some of the rejects are questionable, it's much, much better than StockXpert and CS. My sales are good there as well, and it competes with iS being the second or third best earner.

The review times have been long lately, but my photos are going to be online for years, so I don't really worry about it. In many ways, it may hurt them more than it hurts us, since photos will be online earlier at other agencies.

Only four sales in three months. I've priced my photos from 5-7 mostly. I don't think there's much point in setting the prices much lower as long as the re-sizing option is used. When customers find the image they need, one or two dollars extra won't matter that much. The question, as always, is if they can market the site properly. That would be nice.

I think it's to put emphasis on the "big happy family" thing that they try to make us believe that they have created. As long as they sell my photos, I'm ok.

Quote from: epixx on January 17, 2007, 19:22

Quote from: madelaide on January 17, 2007, 16:12

In your image, I believe the reviewer thought the manometers' scale is "too dark".  I don't think it's an appropriate term, but in some of the rejections as "photo too dark" I had some specific area that was not so bright or clear, and adjusting just this part was enough to satisfy them. 

Adeleide,
I agree that may be the reason. The problem, as with many stock photos, is that this is their real colour. They're gray, not white. It is possible to change it, but at least in this particular case, it takes some work to get a good result with a white colour and more contrast in that area alone, and I know at least one other agency that will probably then say "overprocessed". Not easy to make everybody happy, is it?

Jorgen

yep.  I agree with these guys.  It is pretty good as it is, but if something was to be improved i would say it was the dials.  They could stand to have a little more contrast, with the whites being a little whiter.

The photo with the dials, and four other from the same series, were approved by SS yesterday, and they have already passed 15 sales in less than 24 hours. The one with the dials has sold three times. That was as expected, and they will probably be among my top sellers there as well as at a couple of other agencies.

What annoys me endlessly is that StockXpert rejects them arguing that they have stricter standards and "are not looking for that kind of images". Too me, it looks like they are not in touch with reality, not to speak about their customer's needs.

How on earth are we expected to know what to upload when proven concepts and photos well above average quality are not accepted? And this is not only about these photos, but their reject policy in general. If they had been a niche agency, it would have been understandable, but they are not. They depend very much on a broad selection of photos, and good quality industrial photos is not over-represented in their portfolio.

Am I annoyed? Yes, I am. I'm annoyed because I, and many other photographers, invest a lot of time and effort in making images that are of good quality and particularly images that are not of the "thirteen-in-a-dozen" kind.

Obviously, life will go on regardless of this, but trying to maintain a positive as well as professional attitude is sometimes very, very hard.

Rant over. Thank you for listening   

ewww 10% is all they give you?!?? You may wanna check out DeviantARt.com where you can sell your prints at YOUR price and make 50% on sales...I do well on there

kkart,
I've been considering DeviantArt for some of my work, but their website is so �ber-cool that they seem to have forgotten to explain how it works (or I've become so old that I'm out of touch with modern forms of virtual reality). Can you give us a quick rundown?

There are quite a number of photographers who, for microstock, reduce the images to near the minimum of what is accepted by each agency to get rid of blurriness, noise etc. It often works, although it may decrease the sales potential of the photo, since there won't really be a hi res version available.

It's not the first time it happens, and if I remember correctly, there were days of small problems the last time it did.