MicrostockGroup

2+3+6

But hey what do I know...
Soon the pros will join and give you a more explained opinion.

I agree with a lot of what Perry said. Don't know that any of these would make it.

1) Woman...no copy space and with her being dressed in white in front of white snow really doesn't do much. Just not enough Pop. It also doesn't look real sharp at this size. And there is a logo on the string on the zipper. That would have to be removed.

2) Red building...absolutely no copy space. They would more than likely reject it for bad composition.

3) The benches are a nice composition but the first place my eyes went to was the blur in the foreground, then the eye goes to the benches then right back to the blur. It should lead your eye to the benches not pull it back to the blur. If you could crop that out a little this one might be a possibility.

4) The gazebo in the water looks just like that...a gazebo in the water. It needs something in the foreground. The lighting is also off.

5) The Christmas ornaments won't work. The cropping on them just isn't right and with the number that you have the focus should be on the front bulb and the blur on the rear bulbs, especially since the blurred front bulb is smack dab in the middle of the picture.

6) The composition on this one would never make it. It's a very nice shot but I can't see it being used for anything. And again no copy space.

7) Like Perry said there is no separation between the cards. You can't tell when one card stops and another one begins. They don't appear to be in focus either.

iStock is very strict and as the years have gone by they have gotten stricter. Don't give up just because we didn't find any we liked. You never really know unless you submit, but in my opinion I don't think any would make it through. Think advertising and what the photo could be used for. If you can't think of anything then it will probably not work. You need to crop less also. Some of the sites consider that bad composition.

Good luck and I hope we didn't offend you in any way.

I actually liked those photos.  If you were showing them to me just as photos, I'd say you have a photographic sensibility, and you appreciate color - although for my taste they're a bit too saturated. 

But I don't think they'd do much as stock.   You need to look at a lot of successful microstock shots to get a sense of how that game is played. 

The Christmas ornaments, for example: to you (and maybe to me) it's interesting to see the middle-distance objects in focus, not the foreground; but microstock would just reject that image as bad focus.   Think of microstock as a very literal-minded child without a lot of imagination.  Think of the cliches you see every day in advertising and promotional literature.

Agree with the others; time to choose a new batch.  I recently applied and was accepted; the guidelines are getting tighter as the agencies restrict those that can submit to higher quality images.

Hello Tomeks89,

Image no.3 is great but again as informed in the earlier post " It should lead your eye to the benches not pull it back to the blur."

If you are planning to upload images to Istock I would recommend you to go through their submission guidelines. Also, do a bit of research on the type of images which are sellable.

Once the images are clicked you might (not saying you will) find some impurities in the images but then again you have image editing softwares to help with color balancing and removing any odd object (If you feel there are any).

Thanks,
Punit

I like 2,3,6, great photos, 4 also.
I cannot tell for sure from the small sizes, but there seems to be artifacting, noise, and perhaps dust spots in the background areas.  I personally like it, but iStock may well think they are over filtered (too highly saturated), either by your processing or your camera settings. At this point in time, I highly recommend spending lots of time with the iStock tutorials, and especially on their critique forum.  You will learn a lot about what is meant by artifacting,filtering, and noise.  I would not be worried about finding a saleable niche until you figure out iStocks idea of a technically acceptable photo.
For iStock, I recommend you closely check you camera settings and use neutral picture style with everything set to 0 if your camera allows.  ISO 100, and downsize all your initial shots to 1600X1200.  Try to avoid bright skies to begn with.  Your camera will do lots of processing you may not intend (and iStock dislikes) otherwise.  The red Christmas ornaments are an example.  Good luck

yep like them, only not much the apple but the tulip is lovely, sort of is style

I don't think iStock will accept these.

The first looks to me as if you added a sunburst into a photo with sky and clouds but no sun. The light's wrong for the sun in the frame. If you did do this in post processing, I'd suggest staying away from that for application photos unless you can do a truly seamless job.

The apple is fine and in focus, but I think the subject matter (portion of an apple with water drops) is likely not going to cut it.

The post processing on the photo isn't the sort of thing iStock typically accepts and a flower shot is already an iffy subject for an application photo.

Sorry to be blunt, but I've had a lot of  acceptance/rejection experience on which I'm basing my guesses.