Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 26, 2012, 20:38

MicrostockGroup

MicrostockGroup » Forum » Microstock Photography Forum - General » Off Topic » Would the SI Swimsuit Cover be rejected by Microstock Sites?

Microstockgroup Sponsors

« previous next »

Pages: [1]

Topic: Would the SI Swimsuit Cover be rejected by Microstock Sites?

(Read 1416 times)

packerguy

« on: February 17, 2011, 12:38 »

#link

Does anyone think the current Sports Illustrated swimsuit cover would be rejected for lighting if it as submitted to microstock sites?

Here is a link to the cover:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011_swimsuit/more/cover.html


	Ignore \| Logged

disorderly

« Reply #1 on: February 17, 2011, 12:40 »

#link

I don't think so. And if it were, I'd say the reviewer who did it should be sent back for re-education.


	Ignore \| Logged

VB inc

« Reply #2 on: February 17, 2011, 13:39 »

#link

NO WAY... shes hot... and almost naked. very commercial and all agencies will gladly have that shot. Now, if she was average looking, with blemishes, then you would get the usual "lighting" rejection. which basically means no one wants to use this picture in any advertisement.


	Ignore \| Logged

« Reply #3 on: February 17, 2011, 14:02 »

#link

Quote from: packerguy on February 17, 2011, 12:38

Does anyone think the current Sports Illustrated swimsuit cover would be rejected for lighting if it as submitted to microstock sites?

No there's nothing wrong with the lighting.


	Ignore \| Logged

gostwyck

« Reply #4 on: February 17, 2011, 14:16 »

#link

Lighting? Was there something about 'lighting'? Sorry, I just didn't notice.


	Ignore \| Logged

rimglow

« Reply #5 on: February 17, 2011, 15:01 »

#link

The horizon is crooked. REEE-JECTION! Only professional photographs accepted. Grin


« Last Edit: February 17, 2011, 15:10 by rimglow »	Ignore \| Logged

nruboc

« Reply #6 on: February 17, 2011, 15:21 »

#link

Sorry, I just can't get past the pointy elbows


	Ignore \| Logged

Blufish

« Reply #7 on: February 17, 2011, 15:59 »

#link

She has elbows?


	Ignore \| Logged

le_cyclope

Premium Member

« Reply #8 on: February 17, 2011, 17:14 »

#link

Accepted but with 2 model releases; one from her and one from her plastic surgeon for his artwork!

Claude


	Ignore \| Logged

ShadySue

Premium Member

« Reply #9 on: February 17, 2011, 17:20 »

#link

What's wrong with her lip? Looks like she has a big blister on the top lip.


	Ignore \| Logged

cclapper

Premium Member

« Reply #10 on: February 17, 2011, 18:01 »

#link

Quote from: packerguy on February 17, 2011, 12:38

Does anyone think the current Sports Illustrated swimsuit cover would be rejected for lighting if it as submitted to microstock sites?

Depends on who submits it. Wink


	Ignore \| Logged

Suljo

« Reply #11 on: February 17, 2011, 20:25 »

#link

Shes eyes are like from dolphin from oil wasted sea Grin


	Ignore \| Logged

RacePhoto

« Reply #12 on: February 18, 2011, 01:27 »

#link

Quote from: packerguy on February 17, 2011, 12:38

Does anyone think the current Sports Illustrated swimsuit cover would be rejected for lighting if it as submitted to microstock sites?

I won't go into long detail why, but it looks kind of artificial and plastic. Wink

Yes it would be rejected for Micro for a number of reasons. Mostly because Micro isn't art it's marketing.

Heck - Adams, Stieglitz, Feininger and the foundations of photography would be rejected too. Norman Rockwell however was a bridge and would be acceptable anywhere for either. Interesting?


	Ignore \| Logged

getbizy

New Member

« Reply #13 on: February 18, 2011, 07:26 »

#link

Well don't think it would be rejected....but it is rejected it would be surprising to me though.


	Ignore \| Logged

etienjones

« Reply #14 on: February 18, 2011, 08:19 »

#link

Sorry, poor isolation. Please correct and resubmit.


« Last Edit: February 18, 2011, 08:25 by etienjones »	Ignore \| Logged

Graffoto

« Reply #15 on: February 18, 2011, 09:38 »

#link

Typical hard fashion lighting. No rejection. Probably get about 75 downloads over 2 years time, mostly extra small.


	Ignore \| Logged

gostwyck

« Reply #16 on: February 18, 2011, 10:55 »

#link

Quote from: nosaya on February 18, 2011, 09:38

Probably get about 75 downloads over 2 years time, mostly extra small.

... and about 20,000 'views'.


	Ignore \| Logged

Pages: [1]

« previous next »

Jump to:

Related Topics
	Subject	Started by	Replies	Views	Last post
	What are #3 and #4 top microstock sites? General Stock Discussion	GeoPappas	14	3919	April 06, 2006, 16:34 by leaf
	Locations of microstock sites? General Stock Discussion	Jasenka	4	1075	February 17, 2009, 14:27 by borg
	What is the resolution used usually on microstock sites ? General Stock Discussion	Satforce	16	1653	March 25, 2009, 18:26 by sjlocke
	Uploading to new Microstock sites General Stock Discussion	ronyzmbow	4	1053	April 16, 2009, 11:32 by LivingLife
	Alamy and microstock sites General Stock Discussion	cla78	8	1628	September 19, 2009, 05:50 by Adeptris

Microstockgroup Sponsors

MicrostockGroup Email Updates

Microstock Poll Results

Site	Earnings Rating
Top Tier - Big 4
Shutterstock	100
iStock	66.7
Fotolia	34.9
Dreamstime	26.7

Middle Tier
DepositPhotos	21.6
123RF	16.3
Canstockphoto	11.2
Bigstockphoto	9.5
Veer	8.7

Low Earners
PantherMedia	6.7
PhotoDune	5.8
isignstock	4.1
Zoonar	3.5
GLStockImages	2.7
Stockfresh	2.2
YayMicro	1.8
FeaturePics	1.4
MostPhotos	1.3
ScanStockPhoto	1.1
Crestock	0.8
Cutcaster	0.6
AllYouCanStock	0.1
ClipartOf
Pond5
RevoStock
Clipcanvas
DrawShop
ClipDealer
PhotoSpin
VectorStock
GraphicRiver
Pixmac
PhotoCase
The3dStudio
photaki
SuperHug
PhotoKore
iRockStock
Vivozoom
StockPhotoMedia
Regimages
ImageVortex
Imagegate
ViscoImages

More Poll Results Updated: 2012-05-26

Advertise on Microstockgroup.com | Contact: [email protected]