MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Are you shooting with a mobile phone yet?  (Read 9299 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: September 07, 2012, 10:25 »
0
Well, since IS opened the door to mobile phone photos and I just bought a new iPhone 4s, I thought I would give it a go. My first shoot was actually some test shots at a local music store where I was planning a full on 5D-with-strobes shoot. The iPhone shots came out pretty good for an iPhone using Camera+ app and some light post in LR and PS. All were accepted but one. Surprising.

Yesterday I was at Oceanside Pier and snagged a bunch of nice photos and just ULed them. I got some, IMO, nice shots with good compositions and subject matter. BUT while doing post, I kept thinking, why . didn't I just bring my 5D and not have to deal with all this noise, color distortion, jpeg format, and other issues inherent in a freaking iPhone sensor.

I guess my point is, just because you can doesn't mean you should.

I am looking at beautiful captures that have a 50/50 chance of acceptance depending upon an inspector's tolerance of all this iphone stuff. With a FF sensor and speed light fill, that goes up to 85%+ chance of acceptance.

Anyway, that is my morning ramble and first experience with mobile phone shooting.

What you got?


« Reply #1 on: September 07, 2012, 11:03 »
0
I submitted a couple of experiments shot with an iPhone 4 and Instagram and they were both accepted. I think I'd submit them with borders next time to make it more obvious what their origins were.

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-21398451-mobilestock-child-with-missing-front-teeth.php

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-21398452-mobilestock-mother-and-child-reunion.php

* sight easier than lugging 10kg of DSLR equipment around I can tell you. I notice iStock are accepting editorial images filtered in this way as well if you search 'mobilestock'. That's great news for street shots in cities where a DSLR will get cops buzzing round you like flies.

« Reply #2 on: September 07, 2012, 14:00 »
0
Nice stuff FV.

Yeah a real advantage is the stealth and non-intimatadation factor  you don't get with a DSLR. Suddenly, grocery stores, retail, bars etc... are fair game -- well, let's say in the game.

What is kinda cool too is that you don't have to mess with all the camera settings in these point-and-shoots. Shooting with an LCD in sunlight sucks though.

Damnn, I am starting to waffle on this. Sean will be ripping me a new one before dawn!  ::)

« Reply #3 on: September 07, 2012, 14:13 »
0
Uhhhh...


vonkara

« Reply #4 on: September 07, 2012, 14:13 »
0

Yeah a real advantage is the stealth and non-intimatadation factor  you don't get with a DSLR. Suddenly, grocery stores, retail, bars etc... are fair game -- well, let's say in the game.

What is kinda cool too is that you don't have to mess with all the camera settings in these point-and-shoots. Shooting with an LCD in sunlight sucks though.


I agree on this, I know for asking that I can't take out my camera with the 24-70 on it in a mall without having the security at least looking at me.

The question is, does a small point and shoot camera can be reviewed with the same standards as an iphone picture. I really have no need of an iphone at the moment and certainly won't pay a monthly fee only for taking pictures in malls and grocery stores. I guess that's a Istock forum question...

« Reply #5 on: September 07, 2012, 14:16 »
0
Uhhhh...




OHMYGAWD... the walls are crumbling as I speak!!  :o

vonkara

« Reply #6 on: September 07, 2012, 14:17 »
0
Uhhhh...




LOL, square with a white frame and a tweeked wrong color balance only hipsters can achieve. It be funny if it even sell once.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #7 on: September 07, 2012, 14:19 »
0
Nice stuff FV.
 Suddenly, grocery stores, retail, bars etc... are fair game -- well, let's say in the game.
Don't you need a permission release for them for editorial?

Are the acceptance standards much lower for phones than for p&ss?

« Reply #8 on: September 07, 2012, 14:21 »
0
Don't you need a permission release for them for editorial?

But not for commercial.

Lol, I know, I know.  As I said, I'm sure there's a market, but hopefully they will find a way to segment these out so they don't affect the regular collection standards.

traveler1116

« Reply #9 on: September 07, 2012, 14:24 »
0
Nice stuff FV.
 Suddenly, grocery stores, retail, bars etc... are fair game -- well, let's say in the game.
Don't you need a permission release for them for editorial?
I just browsed the collection and don't see anything from grocery stores or bars.  I would assume those standards will be the same as the other collections.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #10 on: September 07, 2012, 14:25 »
0
Don't you need a permission release for them for editorial?

But not for commercial.

Lol, I know, I know. 

Yeah, but how often would you find a shop or bar with no IP issues? By the time you'd drawn attention to yourself getting into weird positions or moving stuff around, you might as well pull out your dSLR. And if you're going to have to spend ages cloning out stuff, again you might as well have taken it on your dSLR and had more size options.

I just don't see (m)any photos coming through that couldn't have been taken on a p&S or dSLR.

EmberMike

« Reply #11 on: September 07, 2012, 14:51 »
0
Anyone know if, hypothetically, a new photographer applied to istock, could they use iPhone photos to pass the initial application process?

I'm not planning to try it. Just curious.


« Reply #12 on: September 07, 2012, 14:59 »
0
Don't you need a permission release for them for editorial?

But not for commercial.

Lol, I know, I know. 

Yeah, but how often would you find a shop or bar with no IP issues? By the time you'd drawn attention to yourself getting into weird positions or moving stuff around, you might as well pull out your dSLR. And if you're going to have to spend ages cloning out stuff, again you might as well have taken it on your dSLR and had more size options.

I just don't see (m)any photos coming through that couldn't have been taken on a p&S or dSLR.

sue -- i've done undercover produce section and got accepted without IP.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #13 on: September 07, 2012, 15:04 »
0
Anyone know if, hypothetically, a new photographer applied to istock, could they use iPhone photos to pass the initial application process?

I'm not planning to try it. Just curious.


I'm guessing so. EvilClown, an iStock admin posted:
"It can be sure and the point of this is not to make everyone put down their DSLR and start using phones... but what if you don't have your D800 with you? Or you don't own a DSLR and only have a mobile phone.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=346647&page=3  (3rd post on that page)

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #14 on: September 07, 2012, 15:05 »
0
Don't you need a permission release for them for editorial?

But not for commercial.

Lol, I know, I know. 

Yeah, but how often would you find a shop or bar with no IP issues? By the time you'd drawn attention to yourself getting into weird positions or moving stuff around, you might as well pull out your dSLR. And if you're going to have to spend ages cloning out stuff, again you might as well have taken it on your dSLR and had more size options.

I just don't see (m)any photos coming through that couldn't have been taken on a p&S or dSLR.

sue -- i've done undercover produce section and got accepted without IP.

Fruit and veg? I've done that with my dSLR!
But the advantage of phone is that they don't seem to expect a proper white balance.

« Reply #15 on: September 07, 2012, 17:13 »
0
Here's the thing, a picture is a picture and you either have standards or you don't and differing standards are the same as no standards.

« Reply #16 on: September 07, 2012, 18:16 »
0
Here's the thing, a picture is a picture and you either have standards or you don't and differing standards are the same as no standards.

Yes and no. Buyers have differing standards regarding technical requirements vs image content and style etc. Buyers also have money to spend on what they like. I only pick up a camera to make money. I am a whore but love the lifestyle.


« Reply #17 on: September 08, 2012, 02:16 »
0
The mobile phones with a decent camera cost too much at the moment.  I'd like to have one but there's always something I'd rather have instead.  Broke the lens on my Fuji compact and I'll probably get a Fujifilm FinePix Z1000EXR.  It's about the size of a mobile phone and can be used like one, with a touch screen but has better image quality than most phone at a much lower price.  And I wont have a phone ring tone going off while I'm taking photos.

EmberMike

« Reply #18 on: September 08, 2012, 10:51 »
+1

I'm still wondering why the phone is preferred over a DSLR and then using some filters like these to create that vintage Instagram look.

The phone is just a tool. What they seem to want is a certain look, which can be easily achieved in a much higher resolution image from a DSLR. But visually, there's nothing preventing someone from capturing the same image on a DSLR that would be had with a phone and then giving it that phone look in post.

« Reply #19 on: September 08, 2012, 11:35 »
+1
The phone is just a tool. What they seem to want is a certain look...

I think that behind all this 'mobile photography' nonsense, what they really want is photos that look like they were taken by young people.  I am totally serious when I say this. 




vonkara

« Reply #20 on: September 08, 2012, 11:50 »
0
The phone is just a tool. What they seem to want is a certain look...

I think that behind all this 'mobile photography' nonsense, what they really want is photos that look like they were taken by young people.  I am totally serious when I say this.

 :D

« Reply #21 on: September 08, 2012, 12:32 »
0
I think that behind all this 'mobile photography' nonsense, what they really want is photos that look like they were taken by young people.  I am totally serious when I say this.

You're right! They're looking for people under thirty making faces at the camera, awkwardly holding their bikes, scooters, skateboards or bottles of water. Pants drooping, perhaps held up with a buckly belt, loose t-shirts and old trainers. Their bodies should be all elbows and wrists and wobbly knees, and the make up on the girls should look vaguely goth. Their hair should be pointy or flattened, the boys' a carefully arranged mess. They should look like they are on their way somewhere, but not in a hurry, like from point A in the park to point B in the park. Or they're at a festival and just hanging out in front of their tent. At least one of them should be laughing, another look confused, while the rest are making faces. You'll get rich if you shoot that!

« Reply #22 on: September 08, 2012, 12:35 »
0
Cool and "edgy" like the downtime page  ;D

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #23 on: September 08, 2012, 13:03 »
0
I think that behind all this 'mobile photography' nonsense, what they really want is photos that look like they were taken by young people.  I am totally serious when I say this.

You're right! They're looking for people under thirty making faces at the camera, awkwardly holding their bikes, scooters, skateboards or bottles of water. Pants drooping, perhaps held up with a buckly belt, loose t-shirts and old trainers. Their bodies should be all elbows and wrists and wobbly knees, and the make up on the girls should look vaguely goth. Their hair should be pointy or flattened, the boys' a carefully arranged mess. They should look like they are on their way somewhere, but not in a hurry, like from point A in the park to point B in the park. Or they're at a festival and just hanging out in front of their tent. At least one of them should be laughing, another look confused, while the rest are making faces. You'll get rich if you shoot that!

And why couldn't you shoot that shakily on a dSLR or p&s and leave it to the deeziner to add several colour casts and take down the contrast?

NB, I'm not 'against' mobile phone pics as such, except if pics similar in IQ to those I had rejected for poor light are accepted. I still don't see any photos coming through that could only have been taken on a 'traditional' camera. However, people do seem to be taking less stock-y pics, which I like, but it remains to see what the buyers will think.

« Reply #24 on: September 08, 2012, 13:12 »
+1
I think that behind all this 'mobile photography' nonsense, what they really want is photos that look like they were taken by young people.  I am totally serious when I say this.

You're right! They're looking for people under thirty making faces at the camera, awkwardly holding their bikes, scooters, skateboards or bottles of water. Pants drooping, perhaps held up with a buckly belt, loose t-shirts and old trainers. Their bodies should be all elbows and wrists and wobbly knees, and the make up on the girls should look vaguely goth. Their hair should be pointy or flattened, the boys' a carefully arranged mess. They should look like they are on their way somewhere, but not in a hurry, like from point A in the park to point B in the park. Or they're at a festival and just hanging out in front of their tent. At least one of them should be laughing, another look confused, while the rest are making faces. You'll get rich if you shoot that!

LOL although I'm not quite sure if you're really agreeing with me... :-)

I'm not necessarily thinking in such negative ways.   There's an ongoing change in ideas about photographic imagery.  When I was a kid my Dad had the camera (kids didn't) and he carefully lined us up for formal portraits.  Today, 15-year-olds all pack cameras and shoot by sticking the phone out at arm's length, unannounced. To sell products to kids today, you need photos that look like they were taken by their peers, not their parents.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 14:24 by stockastic »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
10583 Views
Last post January 14, 2012, 01:25
by RacePhoto
17 Replies
8994 Views
Last post December 12, 2012, 15:24
by RacePhoto
9 Replies
3836 Views
Last post April 30, 2012, 22:05
by RacePhoto
0 Replies
2258 Views
Last post February 20, 2013, 18:57
by Microstock Man
28 Replies
5047 Views
Last post January 08, 2019, 13:31
by justinmullet

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle