MicrostockGroup

Why do you think "stock photography" is something you want to do?

1. Just about any DSLR from any manufacturer would be a good start. New or used. I've had a few different brands and currently shoot Canon.

2. You will need more than Lightroom. Elements could work but full Photoshop would definitely offer more tools to speed up processing.

3. Either/both.

4. I use Spyder but any will work. I doubt it would damage your monitor unless you handled it pretty roughly.

Duane - you're asking some pretty 101 level questions here. It sounds like you need to learn how to use a DSLR, Lightroom, and Photoshop which all will require a lot of time to just get familiar with. Then, there's everything else. A few years ago when I got into this I already was pretty advanced with all of those things and I found stock photography itself to be a huge learning curve. I'm not trying to be discouraging but it looks like you have a massive amount of learning to do to just be able to understand the basics. Then you need to get accepted into a stock site. Then you need to get an image accepted. Then you need to create images that will sell. All of this can be done but I think you have a pretty long list of obstacles you're going to run into. Best of luck.

Ah, the old "answer a question with a question", and its a good one. Let's see if you get an answer ;-)

Always nice to see trolls on a forum!

Hey Dude,

I am just looking for some answers to my questions... not receiving replies/questions that are OFF TOPIC and as a result are useless.

Keep in mind all of you (no matter how "professional" you think you are), were beginners at photography at some point in your life. 

It wasn't like you were born with a camera in your hand.

So if you can't provide any useful information, then quit trolling!!

Thanks for your cooperation, 

Duane

I SERIOUSLY doubt that!!

None of your postings to this thread have been useful so far. 

Makes me glad there's an Ignore button.  Looks like I will be using it.

Duane

P.S. For a successful photographer, you sure like to conduct yourself in an unprofessional manner. Makes me wonder if you are who you claim to be.  Online Identities are easy to fake.

It's a valid question, and probably the most important one to answer.

You have come here with the same old same old noob questions which could have been easily answered using a search function here or on the web at large. So, the only interesting question that remains is the "why?". What are your goals, and what is your motivation here? That one of your original concerns is the ability to remove telephone poles tells me that your views of photography are bit skewed. There are no instant solutions, and no standard answers to your questions. Are you looking to be a photographer or a retoucher?

The Rebel is good. The Nikons are good. Either will satisfy amateur needs. All you need is a good lens and the ability to dump the files. Expose properly, compose properly, learn to work with light - you will get good pictures.

I disagree. The initial question and the subsequent posts from this person were not valid, nor were they helpful.

As for my questions about removing telephone poles... I don't expect to be removing them very often from a photo as proper composition, exposure, etc can save a lot of editing time... but I definitely want my software to have the capability to remove unwanted items, should the need arise.

Duane

I have to respectfully disagree. It certainly holds more validity than the statement

From someone who has been involved with all aspects of stock for many years including agency, buying, shooter, and illustrator, the Why is the most important question. Is it money? Is it art? Is it seeing your name on a credit line?

And why Canon? Why not Pentax K-5? 

Sean definitely gave you the best answer.
Imagine if I went onto a pro tennis forum and, arriving completely out of thin air, I posted, "I want to be a pro tennis player, which raquet and shoes should I get?"

Duane,

I think you are having the wrong understanding regarding some answers you got here, maybe because indeed they may sound a bit harsh (some people like to act grumpy, even when they have a generous heart   ).

The questions about your previous experience with photography are valid. Getting into microstock today is much harder than years ago. With so many contributors, sites are very selective, very picky, rejecting images for the slightest flaws. I know many people who were disappointed with the results they got just because what they produce isn't much "stock". Some because ther photo skills are not as good as they believed, others because they like to shoot waterfalls and birds, which are not very popular in the microstock business (they may however sell well as prints, I know many people who sell prints in fairs).


Yes, I convert JPEG to TIFF, then work on it until I am satisfied. I take notes on the steps used, so I can repeat them to other images. Then I save the final image as JPEG for uploading. I don't use noise reduction software, on rare occasions I apply PSP's tools in selected areas only.

In fact most of my microstock stuff was shot with a compact camera. The DSLR images I upload basically as macrostock, mainly RM.

Being a camera fanboy gets you nowhere.

So let's pose another question? What does your vision offer besides multiple versions of the isolated tomato? Because as mentioned above, what you decide to shoot dictates what type of camera you need, not camera brand.