For the second time i try to be accepted at stockXpert.com and for the second time rejected.
The reason is that don�t need the kind of photos and illustration i upload.
I�m in the Dreamstime, SS, IStock, Bigstock, fotolia, 123R, featurepics, illustrator stock and for all this sites my photos and illustrations are good enough. I now that I'm not amazing, but if I'm good for 8 sites, why I'm not god for stockxpert? They don�t need more photos and vectors?
What i m doing wrong?

Can't help you. My rejection rate at SX is much higher than 2nd place. I get more accepted at DT, SS, IS - places known to be tough. Most times all rejections in a set are exactly the same, either:

We are not looking for such images now
Thanks but we have too many of these, or (my personal favorite)
Please improve photo

The fact that every image in a set, whether 3 or 30 all have the same rejection reason says to me a lazy reviewer.

pauloresende -  dude, you may not be doing anything wrong.  In fact,  if the same pix are on all those other sites, obviously you're doing everything right in their eyes (or the eyes of their  reveiwers) . There's nothing wrong with them there.
      It's just the way it is in this business. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone here at MSG that hasn't had photo's that they sell by the dozens, even hundreds, that weren't rejected somewhere for some reason.  I know I have.
      Don't take it personal, bro. It's no biggie!

 I have stuff published in magazines that stocks shot down as not good enough to sell to those very same folks. I have a picture I personally sold last week, that is being used in a national ad campaign that  SS and  IS shot down as  'poor focus'  or  'harsh lighting' & 'blown highlights' a few weeks ago.  So much for those reviews.
 I just laugh it off.
      It's a perfect example.  I made a heck-of-alot more selling it myself than I would have gotten from both of them. A LOT more.  And... I'm willing to bet there are plenty of photogs right here on MSG that can say the same thing.  It's sure not unique to me.

      Sometimes there is no sense in it.  Sometimes there is.  However, it is always smart to consider why they shot it down.  Sometimes you agree, sometimes you don't.   Sometimes you learn a thing or two, other times, you sit back, shake your head and pop open another beer. It's just like dbvirago said,  sometimes you just get a lame reviewer.
There's good cops, bad cops... good doctors, bad doctors,  good reviewers, and ... you guessed it.

       Photos are like nachos, you can always make more.  Chill out, and welcome to the club!     LOL    Peace!   -tom

modify:  i looked at your linked stuff above. Nice work, I guess StockXpert just doesn't need them.  I think  that's the biggest rejection reason I personally get from StockXpert.  If they don't want to sell them, somebody else will.  LOL

Tank you all!
You all are right. There another sites that want my pictures.

Paulo,

I would try to contact StockXpert support.  To me, they're a good site (apart from some silly rejections as exemplified here).  It's hard to image why they reject your work.

Regards,
Adelaide

I concur. I should have mentioned that myself.  I did have a couple problems when I first went to StockXpert... and contacting support worked out for me too.  Give it a shot.

I just joined StockXpert this month. I guess I got lucky or otherwise played my cards right, because I got accepted on my first try. I just sent them my best work..images that had been accepted unanimously by all the other microstock sites I am working with, then narrowing those down to ones that were most popular with buyers. I also made sure my initial images were as diverse as possible. I tried to be thorough in describing what my interests and goals are as a stock photographer, as well as describing the equipment I use.  Not sure if that's what helped me, but I thought I'd pass it along, anyways..

I wish you all the best of luck..it sounds like you might have a good chance of successfully appealing their decisions!