I'm not in SS, but to the other sites that requested a copy of my passport, I sent a photo of it, not very high quality and with a text diagonally over it saying that this was for site A use only.  In my case, the page with the photo and name does not show the passport number, yet all sites accepted it.

I rather admire her.  She does not accept subscriptions as the wave of the future, instead she noticed long ago that the prices were too low for her standard of work.

More of us should reject subscription sites.  I've stopped subs on 2 sites, and pulled my port from others.  Sure, I don't make as much money, but i also don't get that sour feeling in the pit of my stomach when I see a large vector file sell for a quarter.

There is nothing to admire, I only think we have and are providing cheap assets to those who can pay more.  A subscriber get 10 images when he needs only one.  Instead of paying US$10 for the photo that best suits his needs, he pays maybe US$2.50 for those ten.  Instead of one photographer receiving a decent royalty, 10 photographers celebrate their 25c.  Not to mention the buyers who resell CDs with the cheap images they got.

Yes, I know subscribers don't always download all their quota, but it is clear they get image way too cheap.

Who are the subscribers?  Big corporations like J.P.Morgan and AOL have already purchased my images as subs at FT.  They are certainly happy that we give images so cheap for them.  I don't burn money, I just don't want to feed their greed.

Actually I've actually met quite a few designers who use SS and have found that it tends to be smaller publishing companies who don't have the resources that some of the bigger companies have.

While I respect the stand against subs, the fact is that most of the sites now have them - and for a serious contributor, you probably earn more on SS for them over time than some of the other sites - especially once you get to the top tier with .38c downloads. Looking at the total income - for many SS is still #1. I keep waiting for other sites to catch up or exceed the sales there - and occasionally IS does it for a week or so... but in the 3.5 years I've been submitting, SS is most consistently #1. As an added bonus, the extended license sales seem to be becoming more consistent as well.

...Instead of paying US$10 for the photo that best suits his needs, he pays maybe US$2.50 for those ten.  Instead of one photographer receiving a decent royalty, 10 photographers celebrate their 25c.  Not to mention the buyers who resell CDs with the cheap images they got.

For that $10, I would only get $2 commission with istock, 10 downloads with SS gives me $3.80.  People resell istock photos illegally as well, a thief isn't concerned about how much the images cost when they use a stolen credit card.