MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => Photo Critique => Topic started by: Konadan on October 15, 2011, 20:25
-
I am new to microstock. Come from a background of sports, PR, news and scientific photography. I have been out of the game for a few years so want to get back in. To do this I need to know what the agencies want. My three photos got rejected by iStock. Two I understand but the third I don't.
The following is the dropbox link:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/16375342/calliope%20pipes%20with%20steam%20w%20watermark.jpg (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/16375342/calliope%20pipes%20with%20steam%20w%20watermark.jpg)
I rather like this one but it might be appropriate for microstock. Let me know.
Thanks for the help even if you think the photo is S....
-
Blurry, noisy, poor lighting, and probably low saleability. And what would a buyer use this for?
-
Something wrong from the start, I won't bother with marketability, some things sell for unknown reasons. If it gets accepted and never sells, that's the answer to that one.
Soft image, lacking definition. Hey I'm sounding like some Alamy review? But honest for ISO 200 1/500th f/11 it looks flat and lifeless, some serious exposure/noise problems in the shadow areas.
What kind of camera and lens?
-
It was taken with a Nikon D200 and an Nikon VR 18-200.
Thanks. I realize the noise is a problem but don't know what to do about it. I now have a D7000. Hope that will help.
The last time I was into serious photography, I used film. Digital is a whole different story. I have to figure out how to do as well with digital as I did with film! Also, I have to figure out what stock wants since it is totally different from what I used to do. :-[
-
I wish you luck. It's a steep learning curve for sure.
-
Microstock is about making money with every single shot you upload otherwise you are wasting everyone's time including yourself.
Try to understand and learn why successful images are successful. Just shooting what's around you is not going to make it worth your while.
Every submitted shot has to be properly focused, exposed, composed and show a strong concept to make it fly off the shelf.
Think before you shoot and don't try to work your magic in Photoshop after you wade through hundreds of snapshots.
-
It was taken with a Nikon D200 and an Nikon VR 18-200.
Thanks. I realize the noise is a problem but don't know what to do about it. I now have a D7000. Hope that will help.
The last time I was into serious photography, I used film. Digital is a whole different story. I have to figure out how to do as well with digital as I did with film! Also, I have to figure out what stock wants since it is totally different from what I used to do. :-[
Since you have experience it will get better as you learn what Micro is about. But think sharp and clean, don't even bother with shallow depth of field unless it's behind the subject, until you get going. Crisp, bright colors, excellent exposure, it's not like "art" photography or news images. The image should tell a story so the buyers will want to license it and use it. (not that I'm any good at that) And having models and people in the shots is about 1000 times better than stuff and things.
Read what the others here have to say, they know.
-
Thanks for the advice. The learning curve for anything worthwhile is steep. I just have to learn a different way of doing things and thinking about photography. :)
-
It's not the camera my friend. The D200 is still a very worthwhile camera. my pardner is one of the best food shooters out there > thats all he uses. But....he's a photographer. I teach Doctors and lawyers here in Los Angeles. They show up with $45,000 Hasselblads and still Can't shoot. learn photography first then worry about a camera.
-
Most of my sales I had with a D200. I still use it for events and weddings. How on earth you can have such noise and blurriness with a D200? Bad lens? ISO too high? Don't quit your day job for now and if you can take frank advice, stick to it.