MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Food photos ?  (Read 14412 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Old Hippy

    This user is banned.
« on: May 27, 2009, 12:03 »
0
OK !

i want to sell food pics on micros.

BUT ... check this for instance
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_search.php?action=file&text=chicken+tandoori

they're all professional pix !
how can i sell my scruffy food images taken in real street restaurants ?
is there any chance or the only things selling good are these fake food plates
made in a studio with perfect lighting etc ?

my pics are real deal, you can see the cigs packet next to the beer too,
stains on the table, dirt, and mosquitos included ...


« Reply #1 on: May 27, 2009, 12:07 »
0
my pics are real deal, you can see the cigs packet next to the beer too,
stains on the table, dirt, and mosquitos included ...

I'm sure there are lots of people who want to advertise their business with images like that, yeah.

bittersweet

« Reply #2 on: May 27, 2009, 12:15 »
0
OK !

i want to sell food pics on micros.

BUT ... check this for instance
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_search.php?action=file&text=chicken+tandoori

they're all professional pix !
how can i sell my scruffy food images taken in real street restaurants ?
is there any chance or the only things selling good are these fake food plates
made in a studio with perfect lighting etc ?

my pics are real deal, you can see the cigs packet next to the beer too,
stains on the table, dirt, and mosquitos included ...


professional? studio? perfect lighting?

on microstock??!

surely you jest.

Old Hippy

    This user is banned.
« Reply #3 on: May 27, 2009, 12:18 »
0
i'm not expert at all regarding food photography but to me those pics look very good.

even searching for the least downloaded ones, i can't find a single "real" food picture on istock.
i think they don't even accept them ?

« Reply #4 on: May 27, 2009, 12:37 »
0
i'm not expert at all regarding food photography but to me those pics look very good.

even searching for the least downloaded ones, i can't find a single "real" food picture on istock.
i think they don't even accept them ?

I do food and it's getting tougher every week. Basically if your images aren't amongst the very best in their subject matter then you will be wasting your time. But that's microstock for you, it's getting to be the same with every subject to be honest __ you have to specialise and you have to be amongst the best in your particular niche to be successful.

Microstock food images are far better than 90% of what's on the trads and far more numerous too. You'd probably have more success on the trads. Just try a few simple searches on both to see what I mean.

Xalanx

« Reply #5 on: May 27, 2009, 12:55 »
0
so let me get this straight - food on macrostock is mostly shots of exactly what was there at the moment? with the available light? just the "real life"?

Then it's bad news. Because microstock food shots are done in studio, using controlled light and perfect looking products. Even if they're not studio shots they look like they sell that product.

Keep this in mind: microstock food shots aim to make people BUY that food.

Do not mistake editorial for commercial. Editorial is what you do, commercial is what it sells on micro. And it has to be perfect, did I mentioned that? :D

« Reply #6 on: May 27, 2009, 14:47 »
0
so let me get this straight - food on macrostock is mostly shots of exactly what was there at the moment? with the available light? just the "real life"?

Then it's bad news. Because microstock food shots are done in studio, using controlled light and perfect looking products. Even if they're not studio shots they look like they sell that product.

Keep this in mind: microstock food shots aim to make people BUY that food.

Do not mistake editorial for commercial. Editorial is what you do, commercial is what it sells on micro. And it has to be perfect, did I mentioned that? :D


I do a lot of food photography (one of my shots comes up in the link to "chicken tandoori"  :)).  My shots are generally of home-cooked food, with natural lighting.  Usually I shoot it, then eat it.  You don't have to have a studio set-up - just need to make the food look appealing.

Xalanx

« Reply #7 on: May 27, 2009, 15:34 »
0
You don't have to have a studio set-up - just need to make the food look appealing.

That's what I said.

Even if they're not studio shots they look like they sell that product.

« Reply #8 on: May 27, 2009, 21:41 »
0
The odd food shots I have are available light and usually are either restaurant meals or something I made myself (shot on the kitchen table with one el cheapo flash bounced off the white kitchen cupboards plus a reflector for fill). Getting reasonable food images acceptable to istock is easy. Producing high volumes of the good stuff that really sells is much harder.

Mine sell from time to time, but not in the volumes that the shiny happy food specialist images sell. There are some pretty good food photographers there, and some of them use food stylists to get the effects they need to make difficult subjects look pretty. They do that because they can shift the volume to make it pay. Not worth my while as I don't have the volume - it's just a hobby for me. Every now and then I see a gap and fill it with a found image. To make money at this stuff you have to provide high volumes of images. I don't. It's a hobby.

« Reply #9 on: May 27, 2009, 22:59 »
0
Need to think of what will sell. Take hamburgers  ;) Would you rather buy an image that looks like perfection (glossy ads) or the mashed, crushed, mushed burger that you'd unwrap from a burger joint? ;D

« Reply #10 on: May 27, 2009, 23:42 »
0
Judging from his/ her/ it's posts, I'd say Old Hippie is just messing with all of you.

Old Hippy

    This user is banned.
« Reply #11 on: May 28, 2009, 02:06 »
0
Judging from his/ her/ it's posts, I'd say Old Hippie is just messing with all of you.

i'm just curious about certain niches i could target on micros and i'm realizing
micros are definitely not my cup of tea.

on the other side, no offence, but i'm as well surprised by your sheer ignorance
towards macrostock but hey to each his own.

« Reply #12 on: May 28, 2009, 02:53 »
0

on the other side, no offence, but i'm as well surprised by your sheer ignorance
towards macrostock but hey to each his own.
[/quote]

If what you say is true then please let the oh so mystical well of knowledge runith over!

Old Hippy

    This user is banned.
« Reply #13 on: May 28, 2009, 03:06 »
0

on the other side, no offence, but i'm as well surprised by your sheer ignorance
towards macrostock but hey to each his own.

If what you say is true then please let the oh so mystical well of knowledge runith over!
[/quote]

i know crap about micros
you know crap about macros

but at least i'm trying to research about micros.

« Reply #14 on: May 28, 2009, 03:58 »
0

on the other side, no offence, but i'm as well surprised by your sheer ignorance
towards macrostock but hey to each his own.

If what you say is true then please let the oh so mystical well of knowledge runith over!

i know crap about micros
you know crap about macros

but at least i'm trying to research about micros.
[/quote]

And when asked about macros you offer nothing but criticism of micros, seems to be a strange way of doing research.

Old Hippy

    This user is banned.
« Reply #15 on: May 28, 2009, 06:48 »
0
of course i do.

you only talk about the money you get from micros at the end of the month.
but this is a blind view on the phenomenon.

if the micro virus expand out of its natural borders it can very well destroy
the whole macro industry as we know it.

any macro photographer is rightfully scared by micros for very very good reasons.
one thing is to sell for few bucks your leftover pictures, another is selling Pro
for less than a coffee and in plus with RF licence !

it seems to me you don't grasp the big mistake you're doing with RF.
all you care is about money but one day you'll understand.

« Reply #16 on: May 28, 2009, 21:46 »
0
Hi Hippie
Just for you I find some acceptable motives for micros  ;D
I hope that you recognize that comic and it will be helpful for you...

http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/8426/42153447.jpg

or

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/8052/28507869.jpg


puravida

  • diablo como vd
« Reply #17 on: May 29, 2009, 09:18 »
0
This blog is obsolete now
http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/old-hippy-quits-!/msg100467/?topicseen#new

Old Hippy has left the building  ;D
or should it be "flown the coop"  8)

« Reply #18 on: June 03, 2009, 11:38 »
0

RacePhoto

« Reply #19 on: June 03, 2009, 12:46 »
0
Old Hippie is this you  ;D

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/abt62785.html



No it's some other clueless person. Although I suspect that Old Hippy was just yanking some chains to see what kind of reaction he got.

Here's part of the thread you linked to... The photos here were rejected 20 min after uploading and the comments had nothing to do with the actual photo, like: "You need 7 out of 10". So may I assume the person didn't read the submission policy or anything and just uploaded some photos? Then wrote, I don't have time to submit ten photos.  ??? Not even accepted yet and he's writing notes on the BB saying I'm quitting. Pretty much the standard for people who complain before they read things, or think them out.
 

« Reply #20 on: June 04, 2009, 00:29 »
0
hi food photographers

I read this stuff on color psychology:

Quote
While blue is one of the most popular colors it is one of the least appetizing. Blue food is rare in nature. Food researchers say that when humans searched for food, they learned to avoid toxic or spoiled objects, which were often blue, black, or purple. When food dyed blue is served to study subjects, they lose appetite.

Green, brown, and red are the most popular food colors. Red is often used in restaurant decorating schemes because it is an appetite stimulant.

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/colors1.html

Quote
Physiological Effect: Violet has shown to alleviate conditions such as sunburn due to its purifying and antiseptic effect. This color also suppresses hunger and balances the body's metabolism.

http://library.thinkquest.org/27066/psychology/nlcolorpsych.html

What has been your experience with the use of color in food images?  Is what is being said relevent to the success of different food images? Do you stay away from using purples and blues in your images?  What do you think?
Lucy x
« Last Edit: June 04, 2009, 00:30 by luceluceluce »

« Reply #21 on: June 04, 2009, 00:34 »
0
woah. only just read the whole thread.

Posted the last post in the wrong thread. Apologies for not realising what this was really about, currently backing away with my hands in the air...
x

« Reply #22 on: June 04, 2009, 01:55 »
0
Actually Lucy your post maybe the most relevant and insightful one yet!  ;D

« Reply #23 on: June 04, 2009, 11:35 »
0
I'd ordinarily try to help you and answer your questions, Old Hippy, but after reading numerous posts where you called us "microtards," I'm not feeling so inclined.

Old Hippy

    This user is banned.
« Reply #24 on: June 04, 2009, 11:47 »
0
I'd ordinarily try to help you and answer your questions, Old Hippy, but after reading numerous posts where you called us "microtards," I'm not feeling so inclined.


ho ho ho

maybe becayse you are ?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
4388 Views
Last post November 23, 2010, 11:57
by mtkang
16 Replies
4995 Views
Last post July 29, 2013, 23:56
by Leo Blanchette
8 Replies
5824 Views
Last post December 26, 2016, 04:26
by dpimborough
0 Replies
1300 Views
Last post June 09, 2020, 17:18
by zequinao
0 Replies
1847 Views
Last post December 12, 2020, 16:13
by fotoluminate

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors