MicrostockGroup

Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: melastmohican on June 12, 2009, 13:47

Title: Not a stock material
Post by: melastmohican on June 12, 2009, 13:47

Is there any definition or standard what is stock material? It cannot be only fake studio shots of business situations ;-)

Title: Re: Not a stock material
Post by: madelaide on June 12, 2009, 16:35

To me the definition would be more about images being created without a customer in mind, as opposite of commissioned work.  Instead of having someone ask you to photograph a smiling business woman for his client, you photograph a smiling business woman and save it (stock it) somewhere in case someone may be interested sometime.

But of course my definition doesn't fit the "this is not stock-oriented material" rejection.  :D

Title: Re: Not a stock material
Post by: stockastic on June 13, 2009, 08:39

Seriously though - I still find it hard to believe the apparently endless, limitless demand for fake-y-looking shots of young models dressed up as "business" people.    

Where does all this stuff end up?

Title: Re: Not a stock material
Post by: Dreamframer on June 13, 2009, 15:17

I think I sold every "not stock" image I submitted...of course on sites that don't use this type of rejection very often.

Title: Re: Not a stock material
Post by: penywise on June 15, 2009, 13:47

Stock photography must serve a purpose and display a concept, have good technical execution, and have a marketable application.  For me, if I can picture it on a billboard next the freeway... it's a go!

Title: Re: Not a stock material
Post by: MikLav on June 15, 2009, 15:13

Quote from: melastmohican on June 12, 2009, 13:47

Is there any definition or standard what is stock material? It cannot be only fake studio shots of business situations ;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_photography (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_photography)