MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Photography Discussion => Topic started by: WarrenPrice on April 08, 2013, 09:35
-
I hope this link isn't too long ...
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=313755965381291&set=a.313755042048050.72382.100002406702728&type=1&theater (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=313755965381291&set=a.313755042048050.72382.100002406702728&type=1&theater)
This is some of the best work I have ever seen.
-
Brilliant :)
-
Beautiful, but definitely not taken by a stock photographer as 90% would be rejected for:
1. Not in focus.
2. Focus is not where it is supposed to be or works best.
3. To shallow depth of field.
4. Blurry image.
:P
-
Beautiful, but definitely not taken by a stock photographer as 90% would be rejected for:
1. Not in focus.
2. Focus is not where it is supposed to be or works best.
3. To shallow depth of field.
4. Blurry image.
:P
In Dreamstime
5 too similar image cut half and submit only one ;D
-
Beautiful, but definitely not taken by a stock photographer as 90% would be rejected for:
1. Not in focus.
2. Focus is not where it is supposed to be or works best.
3. To shallow depth of field.
4. Blurry image.
:P
In Dreamstime
5 too similar image cut half and submit only one ;D
And she almost certainly knows the name of the species she's photographing, which too many stock photographers don't, and the agencies don't seem to care.
-
Too bad the link is to what might be the most boring and photoshopped looking image of the 18. There are some super shots in there! The owls and hawks are really nice.
Dang, all the Metadata is stripped I wanted to see what lens and shutter speeds for those. Great collection.