MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Application Macro Experience  (Read 6876 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: September 29, 2012, 17:21 »
0
Ok, this is not a micro, but i wanted to give some perspective on what im doing. mods can move this if its not in the right place (sorry)

I applied to a common traditional agency which i had never heard of till i started looking around a few months ago.  We just say some of you can guess im sure, but im not going to say.

So, they have a dedicated portal for uploading your test submission.  You upload five images in total.  They ask you for a range of styles.  This makes it a little tougher to decide how to test them.

I select five images, one of which i know will pass, and three i know may, and one i know wont. 

I also note that one of the micros is owned by this company via emails back and forth during my submissions they have listed their company names at the footers.

Coming from the background i'm in, which is mostly working with journalists, i am not surprised by the results, and can make some obvious conclusions.

This agency likes the "handshake", models sell very well in photos, so having model releases and the like, having fresh models with big smiles is where advertising is at.

Again as with SS brighter, snappier images that pop are key, ala naturale seems to be left for editorial work.

I wasnt criticised for my work, but key points to my rejection were,

firstly they dont take editorial work, for which many of my photos show that style, but i know thats my style.  you can see that here http://www.flickr.com/photos/drexxle/

secondly, they didnt see any commercial value in my images.  which is a fair description given the agency and the styles of work that seem to be most popular in general searches.

and lastly, just to have a digg, which i didnt think necessary, was they hit me with poor quality.  I agree with the first two statements, but this is the just like a nail in that coffin.  They were right on the money, respectful and just, then they through this one in. I had touched some images after SS would have passed but were underexposed.

So, all in all, fair, correct, and turn around of about 72 hours from submission to reply, and as with SS they give you another 30 days to reapply.  Obviously i wont be, this is not my "style", so i know i wont fit in.  If anyone can suggest a busy agency that takes the stuff in my flickr, then shoot me a PM, i have thousands of photos like that.

Cheers


ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #1 on: September 29, 2012, 17:40 »
0
What you need to do is realize this aint no Flicker these sites are for semi pros and pros unlike Flicker.

You need to brighten things up and watch shadows, also composition needs work because you cut stuff off which a designer can do so give them the whole image and let them crop it the way the want otherwise it gets LCV.

Stock needs to be able to help sell or promote a product concept or idea and they need to be clean, noise free, free of any distractions, razor sharp at 100% viewing, the lighting needs to be perfect all the way across the subject and they need to pop and watch shadows.

When it comes to shooting for stock they are looking for perfection across the board, lighting, exposure, WB, Focus and composition in the images.

Flicker is for the Arty stuff.


Ed

« Reply #2 on: September 29, 2012, 17:56 »
0
If this is the agency I'm thinking of, they only want model released lifestyle type images.  That's all they will accept....that's just the way it is...and it's why many of us are non-exclusive.

« Reply #3 on: September 29, 2012, 19:58 »
0
None of those photos on flickr were used.  I understand the difference between advermarketing and editorial.  I have a library of both styles of images, i just take alot more editorial stuff in that style.

I posted the link as an example of "style", to demonstrate.  I have some 30 pictures on Alamy which i have been testing with.  And another 20 i havent put online.  50 images selected for the specific job of submissions.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #4 on: September 29, 2012, 21:54 »
0
As you have been told before getting on Alamy means noting.

« Reply #5 on: September 30, 2012, 02:38 »
+1
Kind of confusing.
You refer to an "unknown" agency, we can try guess.
You refer to pictures we cannot see.
You refer to a flicker account with pictures that are not in play.

What is your message?
Do you want us to evaluate the pictures on your flickr account?
Or what do you want?

Poncke

« Reply #6 on: September 30, 2012, 05:13 »
0
Kind of confusing.
You refer to an "unknown" agency, we can try guess.
You refer to pictures we cannot see.
You refer to a flicker account with pictures that are not in play.

What is your message?
Do you want us to evaluate the pictures on your flickr account?
Or what do you want?

+1

Agree with Rux, your photos on flicker are underexposed and wont make the cut. If you hide your good images, whats the use of showing your bad images?

« Reply #7 on: September 30, 2012, 07:08 »
0
actually dont want anything.  Not trying to sell my photos, not trying to become a stock photographer.  I have a collection i will eventually place in one agency RME, but other than that, i am just seeing the reaction to every agency out of 130 i have on a list. I linked you to some photos on Alamy show you kind of images im using and you see from flickr that im not out of a studio.

Thought id share some of them with you guys.  Just pointing out what they are looking for. When im not so busy, ill end up putting it on a blog along with heaps of other stuff on social networking.

« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2012, 07:36 »
0
So you are basically exploring where you cannot sell LCV pictures?

« Reply #9 on: September 30, 2012, 07:47 »
0
heh, not exactly, im exploring two things, building software to run a stock agency, and how users interact from social media so they can sell images from social media, instead of stealing them and sharing them.

Micros are going to die, at least for photographers.  Tradition will come back and a saturated market will get stagnant.  I have some ideas to change that a bit by giving creators a bit more power in social networking.  I am aiming at one specific market place though that isnt that saturated and has been bought out.

« Reply #10 on: September 30, 2012, 08:01 »
0
Micros are going to die, at least for photographers.

When do you think this is going to happen?

Poncke

« Reply #11 on: September 30, 2012, 08:40 »
0
Drexxle, with all due respect, you dont make any sense to me. But that could be me.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #12 on: September 30, 2012, 08:42 »
0
I have a feeling this person is the same one from this thread over on SS!

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=125027&start=0

The way they are talking especially about Alamy make it all to familiar.

Go have a look it's only 6 pages so far and whoever it is also started another OOF Duck post with an excuse for why the Duck is OOF.

So if you want your Sunday morning funnies you wont need the paper for that.

   

« Reply #13 on: September 30, 2012, 15:27 »
0
Heh, nah thats not me.  You altready know who I am.  You could find out enough to work out who i have worked with and more. And just to quash argument, i work in the tourism industry my research is for a site in tourism..


« Reply #14 on: September 30, 2012, 16:16 »
0
In regards to your (OP's) first post:

Why would you even waste an agency's time by applying with (some) images that you already know won't be approved?

Did you want to get into that agency or not?

What is the point of this "investigation"?

I read almost a page of responses and still don't understand what the whole point was in the first place.

Poncke

« Reply #15 on: September 30, 2012, 17:04 »
0
What I still dont is that the OP asks what agency would take his flicker photos. But when you say the flickr photos do not make the cut, he says those are not the photos he wants to submit.


« Reply #16 on: September 30, 2012, 17:09 »
0
The point, is to see who to deal with or not.  The point is to see who performs as an agency properly or not.  the point is to see what terms & conditions they have, how they operate, how they scrutinise images and how they treat contributors.  Its a dead market.  I see that chatting in here.  Incomes are dropping, interest is waning.

I have images that should pass, and some that should pass but may need some work. 

I dont think im wasting an agencies time if they come up higher on my list.  It shows they are doing their jobs.  So far out of 9 agencies, i can complain about three. six of them have performed as expected from a new customer.

I also for my own reasons need to know what they "wont" accept, and the only way to do that is to test them.


« Reply #17 on: September 30, 2012, 17:38 »
0
What I still dont is that the OP asks what agency would take his flicker photos. But when you say the flickr photos do not make the cut, he says those are not the photos he wants to submit.

As you can work out, i am working on something in the tourism sector.  Hence if there are other agencies that are in this area i dont have on my list, i will add them.

« Reply #18 on: September 30, 2012, 22:56 »
0
OK, got your point. Interesting to hear how others approach the macro business.

From my experience I can only tell that, once the macros, that I contacted, found out that I also contribute to micros, they dropped me like a hot potato - regardless of the fact that my macro stuff was completely unrelated to my micro port. Funny - I never really understood that.

Obviously there are plenty of agencies out there, so you can play this games practically forever.

Could be that I would have to change my approach of constantly improving my quality and only submitting my best work to the agents to see if anyone is interested. I never thought of showing images that still need work just to see how the agency would respond.

I don't know if we (contributors) can actually expect an agency to hold us by the hand and let us know how to improve our work to their standards simply because of the fact that there are thousands of better contributors already standing in line. The agencies can cherry-pick the stuff they like.

Either you supply a highly desired niche or you are already some big shot that they urgently would like to represent.

I may be completely delusional but I also appreciate constructive criticism if my point of view is totally out of whack.

« Reply #19 on: October 01, 2012, 00:15 »
0
Appreciate solid feedback.  I think age has alot to do with it to, alot of the people in the journalist field are aging, this will open a new door for alot of future journalists when a gap widens. Not the same in micro, ten years in and saturation is starting to show, prices dropping.

I dont think you can walk a photographer through, i was impressed by SS feedback in their upload portal.  They actually give you solid feedback you can use  to improve and resubmit the same images.  It was the only agency that has done this so far.

Like Getty, which i have applied to for my special collection, you just wont hear back if your not good enough.  I dont think thats unreasonable.  How many people would ask to contribute.

« Reply #20 on: October 01, 2012, 00:56 »
+1
A common mistake from micro stockers is to think the trad Rm/Rf agencies is some sort of a way out of the swamp. Well its not. Its just another swamp but with a much better stench.

Poncke

« Reply #21 on: October 01, 2012, 12:41 »
0
Right, I sort of get the point, and then I would just submit your whole portfolio to all 130 agencies and see what sticks. Your approach doesnt make sense to me.

« Reply #22 on: October 01, 2012, 13:03 »
0
Right, I sort of get the point, and then I would just submit your whole portfolio to all 130 agencies and see what sticks. Your approach doesnt make sense to me.

Why would you submit mine? I only activly work with eight of them, thats enough. No doubt you have your own to submit. Its not my approach, just go to some other forums/discussions etc within the RM or RF agencies and you soon find out what I mean. they fear getting some sort of exodus of photographers fed up with micro, thinking the grass over there is much rosier and greener. :)

Poncke

« Reply #23 on: October 01, 2012, 14:14 »
0
Right, I sort of get the point, and then I would just submit your whole portfolio to all 130 agencies and see what sticks. Your approach doesnt make sense to me.

Why would you submit mine? I only activly work with eight of them, thats enough. No doubt you have your own to submit. Its not my approach, just go to some other forums/discussions etc within the RM or RF agencies and you soon find out what I mean. they fear getting some sort of exodus of photographers fed up with micro, thinking the grass over there is much rosier and greener. :)

I was talking to Drexxle  8) I dont understand his test. He just needs to submit his whole portfolio to all 130 agencies on his list.

« Reply #24 on: October 01, 2012, 14:26 »
0
Right, I sort of get the point, and then I would just submit your whole portfolio to all 130 agencies and see what sticks. Your approach doesnt make sense to me.

Why would you submit mine? I only activly work with eight of them, thats enough. No doubt you have your own to submit. Its not my approach, just go to some other forums/discussions etc within the RM or RF agencies and you soon find out what I mean. they fear getting some sort of exodus of photographers fed up with micro, thinking the grass over there is much rosier and greener. :)

I was talking to Drexxle  8) I dont understand his test. He just needs to submit his whole portfolio to all 130 agencies on his list.

Oh! beg your pardon! didnt read it properly. sorry.

« Reply #25 on: October 02, 2012, 03:04 »
0
Give you some more info

http://www.google.com.au/trends/explore#q=microstock&cmpt=q

Google trend on the word "microstock".  But you can do this on a bunch of keywords and the results are the same.  There is a dive since 2006 and if you click the forecast button it sort of stays level for the next year or two.

The interesting thing i find is if you click further down in regional interest and then choose by city.  you get Milan, New York, London, Madrid.  No LA, no Sydney, no Hong Kong.

Its all come down to fashion, models, the handshake and so on.  General stock is flooded.

I am working on a social media platform that is tied directly to a stock agency, share a photo and click to buy, contribute direct from social media.  Testing is being done for many reasons.  Complicated, but necessary for our research long term. 

Its a long story, but hopefully worth it in the end.

« Reply #26 on: October 02, 2012, 04:12 »
0
Why dont you tell us the whole long story. As it is now your intentions are hard to see.


Microbius

« Reply #27 on: October 02, 2012, 07:38 »
0
Why dont you tell us the whole long story....
Noooooooooooooooooo

« Reply #28 on: October 02, 2012, 11:06 »
0
I see the microstock business as the springboard into the world of imagery which consists out of many more facets than just stock agencies.

Not many people can "just" stay within the microstock boundaries and still expect stellar growth.

IMO, it does require further exploration of new income streams to keep growing, may it be POD, art prints or other forms of licensing your content.



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
3813 Views
Last post March 12, 2007, 04:49
by Daneel
3 Replies
4536 Views
Last post August 17, 2007, 09:51
by w7lwi
19 Replies
19642 Views
Last post May 27, 2015, 13:08
by ArenaCreative
20 Replies
4747 Views
Last post September 29, 2012, 08:52
by Poncke
8 Replies
4261 Views
Last post January 23, 2017, 09:09
by alijaber

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors