MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: Eco on January 08, 2008, 02:13
-
Just started to do some images of subjects on a white background using a diffuser softbox. Unlike a cutout where you select the subject and delete the background, my images (like so many others) are photographed on white and the levels adjusted in PS until the background is absolutely white (255), EXCEPT for a faint and diffused shadow just beneath the subject. I like this better than deleting the whole background since it gives the images a bit more depth and a 3D look.
I am just a bit concerned about my description and keywording of these images. When is it an isolation and when can you use the words “isolation” and “isolated” in the description and keywords? To quote Steve-oh in another post: “If in your keywords or description you say the image is isolated against white and it isn't, then it will be rejected. You need to make sure the whole white isolated background is pure white (255, 255, 255). Make sure there are no off-white spots any where, no matter how small”. Looking at many “isolated” images on all the big stock sites I could not determine any consistent criteria. Just don’t want to have my images rejected for naming it an “isolation” while there is a shadow area that is not pure white.
Any opinions or suggestions on this?
-
My opinion is that you're an awesome nature photographer who has access to gorgeous wildlife and nature, so why do isolations?
-
Thank you for the compliment yingyang.
Not to worry, I will stick to nature with my isolations - just expanding and diversify my portfolio a bit. My son study Zoology and he often collects all sorts of interesting insects and other small creatures for his projects. These I want to photograph before their release. Macro photos normally don't sell that well, but as isolations they may do much better.
-
My understanding, is that most microstock sites will reject an image that is keyworded as "isolated", unless it is cutout via the pen in Photoshop or some other technique.
IS has stated that they "will be more rigorous in our inspection of isolated product shots" (see http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=392).
-
I have many images on pure white but with shadows in which "isolated" is a keyword and is part of the description, and they were never rejected for this (they have been rejected if white is not pure white or has some stray pixels which are not 255-255-255).
Here are recent examples (in IS, StockXpert, DT, FT and others):
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=4940500
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=4548303
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=3590669
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=4398678
(http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/4940500/1/istockphoto_4940500_usb_flash_drive_1.jpg) (http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/4548303/1/istockphoto_4548303_stethoscope_on_white_1.jpg) (http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/4398678/1/istockphoto_4398678_mini_gift_boxes_5.jpg) (http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/3590669/1/istockphoto_3590669_flower_corner_2.jpg)
Regards,
Adelaide
-
I have many images on pure white but with shadows in which "isolated" is a keyword and is part of the description, and they were never rejected for this (they have been rejected if white is not pure white or has some stray pixels which are not 255-255-255).
That has been my experience too. IS is more forgiving on that than others.
-
Notice that all these four examples are in IS, DT, StockXpert, FT, BigStock (except for the 3rd one in StockXpert, but their rejection was for some technical issue not related to keywording).
Regards,
Adelaide
-
Thank you for the compliment yingyang.
Not to worry, I will stick to nature with my isolations - just expanding and diversify my portfolio a bit. My son study Zoology and he often collects all sorts of interesting insects and other small creatures for his projects. These I want to photograph before their release. Macro photos normally don't sell that well, but as isolations they may do much better.
Have a look at the portfolio by GlobalP on iStock, a lot of wildlife isolated shots. I think you'll be impressed.