...
100,500 or 1000 it's still very low number in comparison to number of contributors worldwide.

True enough.

There was a thread recently, somebody had to delete all photos from flickr and photo.net in order to become IS exclusive.

Dunno what's up with that - there are many iStock exclusives who use Flickr, me included.

...
I've got 9 files approved so far, only in the past week and a bit, but no sales yet. Anyone seeing any movement here?

Check this thread: http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-macrostock/getty-flickr-collection-update-jan-26-2010/

I think your question is a good one.  I was wondering about doing that too.

After reading some other threads here where stock pros say they are getting assignment work and a fair number of sales on Flikr it definitely seems like something to consider.

Certainly the images would have to be heavily watermarked to avoid people just helping themselves.
 

I've been on Flickr since 2005 - I used to have a paid account there (what they call "pro" costs $25 per year), but now only use a free account, which limits me to 200 images. If I wanted to I could open multiple accounts to bypass this, but that goes against the Flickr community spirit. Click here to see my stuff.

Getting attention on Flickr requires work: don't expect to upload a bunch of pics and have people contacting you out of the blue. First you'll have to downsize everything and add a watermark - watermarking is generally frowned upon, so I don't do that. After uploading you'll have to add tags (that's what they call keywords), which isn't done automatically. There's probably a way it can be done automatically, but I add add pics infrequently enough that I can't be bothered to get set up this way. To get good exposure you'll have to add your images to appropriate groups. The comment-on-a-photo-when-you-add-one groups are a popular way to increase an image's "interestingness".

As far as licensing goes, I'd typically charge $100 for a RM license. When I had more images there I used to make regular sales (1-3 per month on 1000+ images), but now that I only have 200 available I rarely see sales - perhaps 2 or 3 per year. In my experience, at least 2/3 of the people contacting me about using an image didn't want to pay, and I never heard from them after I mentioned the price. Nowadays my main reason for uploading there is for comparison purposes: I'm interested in seeing the correlation between an image's popularity on Flickr and it's commercial appeal.

Using Flickr is a really good way to make and maintain contact with people who like making photos. It's a photo sharing site, not a commercial image site, and you need to adjust your approach and expectations accordingly. For those making $50k+ in microstock, I'd say your main benefit from it would be that it might broaden your approach and outlook to photography - it's certainly not going to add significantly to your income.

I find the fact that he's not active here - the premier forum/clearinghouse for the microstock industry - to be among the most telling things he has to say.

I think there is a bit too much focus on 'who is pro' and 'who is not' and where the line should be drawn.  I do agree that it is nice to know when someone posts about a 100% increase in earnings when they have a portfolio of 20 images, but to shun people who are 'not pro', however you define the term, or if we take the attitude that they don't have anything to ad - I think is narrow sighted.
...

For me it's pretty easy to draw the line: if you earn a living through photography then you're a professional, if you don't then (at best) you're a semi-professional. Although I'm primarily interested in the opinions of my professional peers, I still value the opinion of the part-timers and newcomers, though not with the same weight. Each of these groups has a unique opinion to offer: pros tend to look at things differently than semi-pros/amateurs/hobbiests, and newcomers can sometimes provide a fresh perspective of the marketplace. By definition, I don't think anyone who is professional unjustly discards the opinions of people who don't do this for a living or have been at it for only a short time. Certainly not a successful one, anyway.

From all sources?  Or just stills?
...

Heh ... that's funny - looks like you didn't bother to read through all 8 pages before you posted, dnavarrojr!

Thanks, a.k.a.-tom!

Newbie  ... Is that a derogatory name?  

I don't think newbie is derogatory, but 'newb' (or more correctly 'noob') certainly is - a noob is someone who's been at it long enough to know how to avoid the mistakes a newbie would make, but somehow just can't make that leap. In the context of microstock, I'd say you're a noob if you've been at an agency for, say, one year and are still earning an entry-level commission.

I can't believe you're still fixated on an image I spent less than two minutes with, and only to illustrate my point, which you've completely and utterly missed. I don't know whom I'm more angry with, you - for being so stubborn in your thinking, or myself - for wasting time and energy trying to help you out. On the bright side, at least I  got something out of it: That'll be the last time I offer advice to someone who doesn't really want it.

Good luck, Whitechild, you need as much of it as you can get.

i personally would probably redo my photo like the one on the right also. but these two images also represent perfectly the style of is, the natural (left) and ss, the processed (right). since you're exclusive on is, sharply, i wonder why you don't veer towards the is style?

The only style I veer towards is the commercial style - a style that sells.

... and that is just because they accept 10-20% of my images, and almost always images that are rejected elsewhere.
Where is the logic?

As was said before, which I agreed with: if your imagery is commercially borderline (and from what I've seen, it is) then you should expect reviews to seem more whimsical. Instead of making images the same way and complaining about what you see as random rejections, I think you need to take a step back and examine what it is you are doing and how you are doing it.

You've been at this for two years. Where do you want to be in another two - still complaining about nonsensical rejections, or having learnt from your mistakes, making enough money to support a nice family lifestyle? A pretty simple choice, I think.