MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Isolations at iStock  (Read 12069 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: September 11, 2007, 03:26 »
0
I had the same a couple of weeks ago. I thought just an overpicky reviewer that needed some day of. I haven't uploaded isolations since then, but I will try this week. I'm curious what will happen.

gr Claudia


« Reply #26 on: September 11, 2007, 12:33 »
0
I don' t remember where that was, but in another thread, somebody says that the inspectors were not that picky when you don't use the keyword "isolation" for your image. So only if you actually call it to be isolated it has to be perfect.

I had the some problems with isolated objects at shutterstock, seems to be the same there. On istock I can't tell - just recently startet to isolate images and those are still waiting in my long long queue to upload.

« Reply #27 on: September 11, 2007, 15:58 »
0
I don' t remember where that was, but in another thread, somebody says that the inspectors were not that picky when you don't use the keyword "isolation" for your image. So only if you actually call it to be isolated it has to be perfect.

I had the some problems with isolated objects at shutterstock, seems to be the same there. On istock I can't tell - just recently startet to isolate images and those are still waiting in my long long queue to upload.

I didn't see that thread but I did try not keywording the images as isolations or putting them in that category, just calling them white background. No difference, they still got rejected for poor isolation. Thats when I started pulling out my hair and contacted Scout. The point here is that the isolations are as perfect as possible with Jpeg compression, now if they would accept the files as tif there would be no problem, at least not until they compressed them to jpeg themselves.

« Reply #28 on: September 11, 2007, 16:00 »
0
Your sales to portfolio size ratio is one of the highest I've seen Tomboy, so whatever you are doing......... just do more of it.....!

Yes, sales at IS have been excellent for me, thats the only reason I continue to bother with them.

modellocate

  • Photographer
« Reply #29 on: September 14, 2007, 16:07 »
0
One thing I've been doing is to shoot on a light-colored background - yellow for example... If the designer wants to isolate, they can, otherwise yellow is a nice color :) ... I've never had a yellow background rejected for poor isolation; I have however had white or grey backgrounds rejected for this.

« Reply #30 on: September 14, 2007, 18:07 »
0
I also shoot in colored backgrounds, not necessarily even ones.  This one is part of a series and sells well in IS (for my standards), although the version on white does indeed sell better.

 

This is a case in which I find isolation difficult to do, because of the reflections, so the white was shot over a white paper background.

Regards,
Adelaide
« Last Edit: September 14, 2007, 18:12 by madelaide »

« Reply #31 on: September 14, 2007, 18:19 »
0
Just trying to be helpful, modellocate, but there is a difference between what gets accepted at iStock and what actually sells.  If you look at TomBoy's portfolio, she's achieved over 3,000 downloads with a tight, clean portfolio with nice crisp white backgrounds.  Your own portfolio has not yet achieved 10% of those downloads.  So by all means submit stuff with coloured backgrounds, but the evidence is that 'white sells'.

I had a quick look at your portfolio.  You're clearly very creative.  I like your 'moody' girls and nudes.  But once again there is a difference between what is pleasing to your eye and what buyers actually want to buy.  Moody nudes in withdrawn light simply don't sell.  They might be great artistic photographs, but they don't sell as stock images.

Girls and nudes do sell of course.  But it's the bright, clean, happy, carefree, lifestyle stuff that sells, not the moody stuff.  You're up against stiff competition from some wonderful photographers.  Perhaps the best of them is dolgachov, whose crisp, striking images I admire very much.  Apparently across multiple agencies he sells 10,000 copies a month.  You can see his stuff here:

http://www.istockphoto.com/file_search.php?action=file&text=&oldtext=&textDisambiguation=&majorterms=%7B%22csv%22%3A+%22%22%2C+%22conjunction%22%3A+%22AND%22%7D&fileTypeSizePrice=%5B%7B%27type%27%3A%27Image%27%2C%27size%27%3A%27All%27%2C%27priceOption%27%3A%271%27%7D%2C%7B%27type%27%3A%27Illustration+%5BVector%5D%27%2C%27size%27%3A%27Vector+Image%27%2C%27priceOption%27%3A%27All%27%7D%2C%7B%27type%27%3A%27Flash%27%2C%27size%27%3A%27Flash+Document%27%2C%27priceOption%27%3A%27None%27%7D%2C%7B%27type%27%3A%27Video%27%2C%27size%27%3A%27None+4_3%27%2C%27priceOption%27%3A%271%27%7D%2C%7B%27type%27%3A%27Video%27%2C%27size%27%3A%27None+16_9%27%2C%27priceOption%27%3A%271%27%7D%5D&showPeople=false&printAvailable=false&exclusiveArtists=false&extendedLicense=false&illustrationLimit=Exactly&flashLimit=Exactly&showDeactivatedFiles=&membername=dolgachov&userID=&lightboxID=&downloaderID=&approverID=&clearanceBin=&color=&copySpace=%7B%22Tolerance%22%3A+1%2C+%22Matrix%22%3A+%7B%7D%7D&orientation=Vertical%2CHorizontal%2CSquare&minWidth=0&minHeight=0&showTitle=true&showContributor=true&showFileNumber=false&showDownload=true&enableLoupe=true&order=Best+Match&perPage=20&within=4
« Last Edit: September 14, 2007, 18:21 by hatman12 »

« Reply #32 on: September 16, 2007, 10:33 »
0
I'm going crazy trying to get my isolations accepted at iStock.
All of a sudden I'm  getting rejected for jagged edges.  I think one of the reviewers there is checking the isolations with zero tolerance. Thats plain silly. Even the very cleanest of isolations, once they are compressed, will show slight jagginess at 100% with zero tolerance, so I think its impossible to upload a jpeg-ed isolation that would be clean enough under those conditions.
Oh and that rejection reason of over filtering on images that haven't been filtered just boils my blood  >:(

Just my little venting for the day .. needed that.

Your'e not alone!  Istock is the only agancy my isolations have a problem getting accepted.  The most common rejection being "edges too feathered" even when the feathering is set betwween .05-.08 with a 1 pixel edge width. I include a clipping path to most of my isolations which means I use the pen tool to isolate with. They sell very well at the other agencies I submit to and I'm sure they would at Istock also.  The response time from Scout, if any, is about as long as their review time, approx. 2 weeks for me.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
4158 Views
Last post April 22, 2008, 14:12
by Adeptris
5 Replies
3362 Views
Last post August 29, 2008, 18:23
by icefront
49 Replies
15478 Views
Last post December 11, 2010, 08:47
by kingjon
18 Replies
4233 Views
Last post April 19, 2012, 07:34
by click_click
10 Replies
3111 Views
Last post July 09, 2012, 12:01
by rimglow

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle