Author Topic: Can anyone help me to select 3 images for Istockphoto? (Read 2437 times)

vireakchandara · « **on:** January 28, 2012, 10:11 »

Dear all

this is another round to submit 3 images to istock, I really don wanna get fail again. so can u advise if below images is posible?

Can you help to pick three of them?

Thanks and regards,

Dara

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #1 on:** January 28, 2012, 10:20 »

Nope, because I'm not spending time to "download" them from that page. Just find a host that can let you display the images at full size with one click.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #2 on:** January 28, 2012, 10:26 »

you can always link to your DT portfolio no?

vireakchandara · « **Reply #3 on:** January 28, 2012, 10:38 »

oh, sorry

So, can you comment on above images.

thanks alot.

Dara

m@m · « **Reply #4 on:** January 28, 2012, 11:26 »

Quote from: vireakchandara on January 28, 2012, 10:38

oh, sorry

So, can you comment on above images.

thanks alot.

Dara

We all could, if there was no danger involved, as they said, "curiosity kill the cat", I just view just a couple of your images and Pup-ups started to come into my computer, to the point that I had to run my Malware software just to get rid of all the crap that got in my computer...thanks alot to YOU!.

You want feedback? take it to the Is forum...

vireakchandara · « **Reply #5 on:** January 28, 2012, 11:41 »

I had already modify my post and it is now current diplay on IS forum.

your kindly feed back is really appreciated.

Dara

FD · « **Reply #6 on:** January 28, 2012, 11:52 »

Quote from: vireakchandara on January 28, 2012, 11:41

your kindly feed back is really appreciated.

I don't need to see your illustrations full size if they're vectors. They look great to me. But why waste time on an ailing business like iStock. Soon enough the will recycle/mirror you in their garbage bin called Stinkstock for 0.25$. Don't you think your work is worth more? Just a thought. Great stuff you have!

Perry · « **Reply #7 on:** January 28, 2012, 13:10 »

I like the two last ones (the crabs on the beach and the christmas-bell-thing). I'm not sure which one I'd pick for the third one.

stormchaser · « **Reply #8 on:** January 28, 2012, 14:22 »

Crabs, roulette and red christmas tag. I would buy the crabs myself, but I don't buy at iStuck anymore.

Micro1 · « **Reply #9 on:** January 28, 2012, 16:23 »

The bottom three. You're a talented illustrator and should do very well!

mtilghma · « **Reply #10 on:** January 28, 2012, 19:28 »

loooove the crabs.

would pick crabs, roulette, and christmas tag.

digitalexpressionimages · « **Reply #11 on:** January 29, 2012, 09:37 »

Yes it's very important to view vector at full size because Illustrator is infamous for noise, compression artifacts, chromatic aberration and lens distortion. That last sentence was sarcasm btw. I feel it necessary to point that out these days.

The only reason to see vector at 100% would be to see if the lines are clean and really even if they're not, it's illustration and that just gives it a more human look which i prefer over super clean machine precision.

I like the first one for the intricate pattern and the last two.

oops, I wanted to add that the work is quite good. Good luck.

wiser · « **Reply #12 on:** January 30, 2012, 20:31 »

The roulette wheel, the crabs and the Christmas illistartion are the best ones. They show some diversification, which is what the application looks for. The application is not that fussy re: perfect lines and tech issues.

The application imeages will however be rejected if there are open paths or rasterazation of objects or transparencies, etc. Best bet is so send the cleanest files possible for your application so as to avoid a quick reject for technical glitches.

However, once you are accepted you will need to submit your application illustrations again and they can be rejected for technical issues like clean lines, etc.

.

Suljo · « **Reply #13 on:** January 30, 2012, 21:49 »

Why da hack someone this days (years) want to be contributor on IS ?!?
Oh I see...
There always peoples who likes pain in the ass...

Carl · « **Reply #14 on:** January 31, 2012, 06:04 »

I'm wondering the same thing. Everyone else is jumping ship, so why would anyone jump aboard?

Noodles · « **Reply #15 on:** January 31, 2012, 07:32 »

I would go through the Do's and Don'ts again. For example, the proportions on the girl don't look right with the arm as long as the leg. http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=367&Page=4

michealo · « **Reply #16 on:** January 31, 2012, 08:40 »

Quote from: csproductions on January 31, 2012, 06:04

I'm wondering the same thing. Everyone else is jumping ship, so why would anyone jump aboard?

Because it stills makes incremental income for non exclusives

Susan S. · « **Reply #17 on:** January 31, 2012, 20:28 »

If the istock critique forum questions are anything to go by, I think you need more examples that shows off your drawing ability. These are perfectly competent illustrations but a bit simple for istock applications - and some are fairly heavy on non-subtle gradient use (I have a lot of illustration rejections for that on istock).

The first one is too heavy on non-subtle gradients; the roulette wheel is nice but looks a bit like it comes from an illustrator tutorial on how to draw shiny objects rather than observation of how the things actually look with bright light shining on them - the shine shape doesn't follow the curvature of the components of the wheel, making it look like a shiny icon rather than an individual illustration. I like the chinese dragon, but patterns often get rejected as too simple for application.

The figure won't fly -the drawing is a bit too simple, falling a little awkwardly between being trendily stylised and realistic figure proportions and the gradients don't do a very good job of rendering a three dimensional shape with consistent lighting; I very much like the crabs, but I suspect for istock you might be better doing a version with less gradient use and more flat colour shading; the Christmas one is again nice, but somewhat cliched. I'd expect most of them to get through into the collection once you are accepted (especially if you tone the gradients down a bit) but I'm not sure they are sufficiently complex to get through the initial application process.