What?  Use the PS image scale function to resize an image.

Is that new, I only have seen image size. Then you have to type in the new horizontal and vertical dimension and let it go.  What I would like to do is specify the product of the horizontal and vertical dimensions, i.e. pixel area. This would be a constant for, for example, a 10 MP image, would be 10,000,000. Rather than setting the width and height to achieve that product. Due to the wide variety of image shapes I have doing the calculation is tedious. Thanks.

I use Google Adwords with various specific ads pointed at various collections, which I post separately. So if they are interested in the area where your photo is taken, that collection will be displayed.  So they don't have to find it. 

I have found out about this option called Payloadz.com which is offered by PayPal.  It is specifically intended for what
they call "Digital Goods Ecommerce".  It basically covers any type of file you want to offer (mp3, ebook, pdf's, jpegs, etc). 

They host the file, they perform the download, they collect payment and send it to you as in plain old PayPal payments.  You get an account, and get a provider number and you register each product and get an item number for it then upload the master to them.  You put two buttons on your web page (e.g. detail view) of a photo.  One is buy and one is checkout.  The costs look ok to me I won't try to summarize it.

Does anybody know about this service, does anybody use it, or have any helpful input.

I would have to make multiple items per image, to accommodate various resolutions file versions.
I wonder how you would make the license part of the deal.
As I understand it you do get customer information from the sale which is better than the stock sites give you.

thank you for any info or opinions.

Madelaide, Thanks I looked at their website.  It seems like they specialize in offering prints from your images. I could not find the specific service I was looking for on their very whizzy website. It seemed really sparse on details, very full of bells and whistles though.  Perhaps others may have some experience with them?  How about Photoshelter?

There people who post constantly, incessently, helplessly even, especially on the political sites, because they just like sticking their fingers in people's eyes and getting people mad, getting a reaction.  Many of them have revealing titles, such as "nobama". I thought shank might be such as handle because of its common meaning.  Anyway, many such posters just create continuously counterproductive motion and noise and irritation to no useful end. I don't know about this one but these often don't seem like serious questions, more of just a desire to get on the screen endlessly.

To me, FAIR would mean a best appraisal of the selections based on available information, and taking into account those things the search user expressed interest in and ignoring those things not of interest.

For an external search,these things listed below would be available to choose among ( or ignore ).  These were found by perusing a source dump of a file closeup page. I may have missed some...

Title.  Description.  Keywords.  Contributor.  Rough number of downloads.
Available Dimensions and their Credit Prices and File Sizes.  Number of views.  Uploaded date.  Ratings.
License Options.

So, for example, the price desired could be specified because it is available in the data. My meaning of a fair search is it honors the criteria selected by the search client. 

There have been ongoing and numerous  complaints about the search feature at iStock. Both customers and contributors have problems with it.  For buyers, the engine tries to upsell from what the client is looking for, in an effort to push expensive Vetta and Agency images.  For contributors, there is the feeling that the match function is constantly being tweaked for the benefit of somebody else. Also, issues with reliability, predictability and over-complication keep getting mentioned. To many, this does not seem like a serious, professionally written search function, it seems like something the marketing department came up with as just another angle and which just keeps getting hacked endlessly.

This need not be the only search engine available. If you look at the html source of an image detail page, there is sufficient information in it to enable an external search engine.  That information is there only to support outside searches. It is not needed by the internal search at all. An independent search engine could be built by some enterprising person or group. It could work following the wishes of by the user, not the agency.

I'm surprised that with all the internet savvy entrepreneurs out there, nobody has indexed iStockphoto's detailed pages and provided a search engine that works the way the user wants it to.  There is probably a way to make money at it, look what Google did with search.

I like her work. A lot.  And I'm glad to see it as stock.  Everybody uses the stock sites for their own reasons. More power to her.