This thread has got me thinking now; perhaps I'm not being specific enough in telling models how their images may be used.  Up to this point I've only said that they could be used for commercial purposes, but that the buyer may not "defame" the model.  So what should I be telling them, exactly?  How detailed do you get?  What do you all tell your models?

I have four photos online with Dreamstime that have one parent as the "parent signature" and the other parent as the witness.  Three of those photos were uploaded 2 weeks ago, and everything went through fine.  Contact support; somebody missed the ball here.

Thanks guys for your advice.  I will start researching the forums as suggested and learn all I can...then give it a go!

karen

Interesting....I also have Nikon D50 and wasn't even considering Alamy because of the photo size required.  Upsizing from a 10mp camera is a lot different than upsizing from my 6mp camera, right?  I never even tried it; thought it would look terrible, and have therefore resigned myself to wait for the next camera.

I was on Photoshelter for 1 month before they closed and that really bummed me out.  I'd like to try Alamy as a replacement but I never thought I had a chance due to that darn file size requirement.  So there's hope??!!!

The positive vibes are coming through the computer!
Thanks everyone for your responses.

"I love to give a chance to newcomers because many times in my life someone gave me a chance too"

Whitechild, what you said here really struck a chord with me.  So true, so true.  You all are winning me over and I think I will give it a go.

John, thanks for your personal response.  I admire you for your positive attitude and your continuous involvement in your endeavor.  Much success to you! 

It was nice to see that photographer's payout helped her through "Ike."  I really didn't think people were earning that much already through Cutcaster!  I'd love to see her portfolio.

I've been toying with the idea of uploading to Cutcaster but so far haven't.  The reason?  I've looked through some portolios and have been horrified at the low technical quality that's been accepted.  I've only been doing microstock for about a year in my spare time and have been trained through the SS and IS "school of hard knocks."  Now I know what to look for and I'm my own worst critic.  I can't even look at a friend's photos anymore for fear they'll ask me "what I think."  (well, your white balance is off, the focus is soft and the composition is not very interesting.)  I'm in no way proclaiming to be a great photographer- far from it, but I'm always looking to improve and use rejections as a stepping stone.

So- back to the original dilemma.  I really love John's attitude and the way he's running things over there.  On the other hand, how can a site that offers lower quality for more $$$ compete with sites that have a high standard for less $$$?  But then you hear a story like "Fern" so obviously something is selling there...plus I joined Photoshelter about a month ago (may she rest in peace) so I'm still reeling from that one and wondering if it's worth my time to try another new site, especially with the above mentioned problems.

I really need someone to shed a fresh perspective on this.  Any thoughts?

Great photo!  It's an honor to give you my vote. 

OK, I got it to work, but there's a minor glitch:

In order to click on "members" you first have to unclick "photos."  It would be better if you could just click on "members" and the check mark would move from "photos" on it's own, with out having to uncheck the "photos."

I'm also going to have to agree with a previous poster (sorry I forget who) who suggested that you raise your quality standards for submissions.  I'm not a great photographer, but even I would not have submitted some of the photos I saw (big time white balance and focus issues, not to mention photo titles spelled wrong).  If you want buyers to have a look around, you're going to have to give them quality to choose from.  Otherwise I think they're going give up and go elsewhere.
*trying to be helpful, not critical*

I clicked on the "Advance Search" (should that say "Advanced?")and I still don't see a search by photographer button.  Am I looking on the correct page?

Interesting feedback!  I guess it can't hurt to go ahead then and take a chance.  Plus, being relatively new to all of this,  it's not like I have hundreds of photos to go through to upload.

Thanks for all of your insight!

-Karen

Thanks for the replies.  To answer your question, the sites I'm currently on are Shutterstock, Istock, Dreamstime, Bigstockphoto, and Fotolia.

Any other suggestions for a change of direction?

That's "Mrs. TreeOfLife" to you... "

I bought the "Noise Ninja" program and it has worked out great.  One of the things I really like about it is the "undo" noise removal tool.  The program will take out noise from the whole photo, then if you see areas that are too "soft," you can undo those areas by using an undo brush.

Last summer I took a photo of an ostrich with a point and shoot camera.  There was a good amount of sky in the photo, and a lot of noise as a result.  I ran it through Noise Ninja- it took the noise out of the sky, but left me with a soft looking ostrich face.  I then used the undo tool to put the noise back on the ostrich (to give it more sharpness) but left the sky noise-free.  The photo was accepted yesterday at SS.   Pretty good for a point and shoot camera.

When I first submitted to SS I got rejected for "overuse of noise reduction software," so make sure you don't go crazy with it too.

When I first submitted to SS, only 6 were accepted (needed 7).

I then asked the question on the SS forum what I should do for my next try- resubmit the 6 that got accepted plus 4 new ones, or submit 10 new ones.  I got a reply from a SS reviewer that said to submit 10 new ones.  That's what I did, and 7 got accepted.  I then went back and resubmitted the ones from the first batch that were "accepted," and wouldn't you know, some of them got rejected the second time around.  Oh well.