Author Topic: Istockphoto Hot Shots (Read 8205 times)

Dreamframer · « **on:** May 14, 2010, 13:12 »

Take a look at IS top 8 images called "Istockphoto Hot Shots" http://links.mkt2173.com/servlet/MailView?ms=Mjk2MTIxNgS2&r=NTMwMTQ2NzgzNAS2&j=MTc4MDMwNjczS0&mt=1&rt=0

Honestly, I never had courage to process image to this level because I always thought IS will reject them. Maybe I should try my self out. Really nice images...some of them especially.

Elenathewise · « **Reply #1 on:** May 14, 2010, 13:28 »

I was always wondering why these were called "Hot Shots" when some of them had 0 a just a few downloads. "Editor pics" would be a better name for them in my opinion.... And yeah, how some of them pass the review without being rejected for "overfiltered" is a mystery... ;-)

stockastic · « **Reply #2 on:** May 14, 2010, 13:36 »

I really don't get the one of the guy working out with the weight. What's with the blue halo all around him? I don't think it's a shadow on a background, it seems to be post-processing.

cathyslife · « **Reply #3 on:** May 14, 2010, 13:56 »

I get over-filtered rejections on images I haven't even filtered let alone over-filtered! There must be a trick but I sure don't know what it is. Are they all exclusives? Top sellers (overall)?

pet_chia · « **Reply #4 on:** May 14, 2010, 14:01 »

This seems to be the problem. The most obviously remarkable photos are the ones that are the most jazzed up, as if a graphic artist has been working on them and they are practically print-ready, lacking only the ad copy or whatever. But the istock philosophy is that the photos should be more plain and muted, having latent possibilities rather than looking like a finished product.

I guess that some customers, the ones with more time and a bigger budget, look for plain vanilla photos so that they can mold them and punch them up as required for their project (fog, halos, saturated, sepia or whatever), whereas the customer who's really in a hurry for a quick photo wants one with instant appeal so they can just paste it into their document (or whatever they're working on) and make their deadline.

Or so I gather ... any customers who are reading this are welcome to set me straight.

I recognize however that curbside appeal must count for something, so lately I've been pumping up the saturation of my photos before converting from raw, instead of using the "faithful" or "standard" option or whatever. If you look at the biggest-selling photos for many searches, among other factors it appears that bright, saturated colors are the most frequent purchased.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #5 on:** May 14, 2010, 14:47 »

Quote from: stockastic on May 14, 2010, 13:36

I really don't get the one of the guy working out with the weight. What's with the blue halo all around him? I don't think it's a shadow on a background, it seems to be post-processing.

I think it's just a ring flash. It certainly isn't one of his better images.

cathyslife · « **Reply #6 on:** May 14, 2010, 15:02 »

Quote from: cclapper on May 14, 2010, 13:56

I get over-filtered rejections on images I haven't even filtered let alone over-filtered! There must be a trick but I sure don't know what it is. Are they all exclusives? Top sellers (overall)?

I was curious so I did a tally myself and I am actually surprised. Of the IS Top 8, 4 are exclusives, 4 are not. 4 are top selling contributors, 4 are not.

gostwyck · « **Reply #7 on:** May 14, 2010, 15:12 »

Quote from: cclapper on May 14, 2010, 15:02

I was curious so I did a tally myself and I am actually surprised. Of the IS Top 8, 4 are exclusives, 4 are not. 4 are top selling contributors, 4 are not.

Yes, I noticed that too. Until recently they virtually never included non-exc images as this sort of promotion was supposed to be a perk of exclusivity. The non-exc images are all from fairly new contributors with small portfolios though so maybe they're hoping they will go exclusive over time. I'd guess that this sudden change of attitudes is all to do with the new prices as they probably don't want to give the impression that all of their images are at Vetta/Exc+/Exc price levels.

stockastic · « **Reply #8 on:** May 14, 2010, 15:47 »

Quote from: cclapper on May 14, 2010, 13:56

I get over-filtered rejections on images I haven't even filtered let alone over-filtered! There must be a trick but I sure don't know what it is...

The answer is, it will be rejected if it's too processed-looking - unless it's approved. The question I have is: does a highly processed image get approved simply because someone thinks it's cool, or because someone thinks it will sell?

Unfortunately for me, the taste I see in evidence at IS is often very different from mine. To me, a lot of those Vetta images look artsy and contrived, and I can't imagine who buys them, or for what reason. And obviously I don't know jack.

crazychristina · « **Reply #9 on:** May 14, 2010, 16:43 »

ElenaViverskaya has had over 600 dls since she joined in feb, and nearly all her work is Vetta. There must be a market for it.

stockastic · « **Reply #10 on:** May 14, 2010, 19:04 »

Quote from: averil on May 14, 2010, 16:43

ElenaViverskaya has had over 600 dls since she joined in feb, and nearly all her work is Vetta. There must be a market for it.

That is exactly the sort of material I'm talking about. It's not my sort of thing, but I'm in awe of the skill, and the time that was obviously spent on this work. And I have no clue who would buy it. Seriously, if someone knows of an example of this person's work appearing in a publication, pass it on.

One obvious fact - all these shots are about good-looking young models. If I submitted a photo of a pipe wrench with a similarly artistic treatment, would it get in?

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #11 on:** May 14, 2010, 21:07 »

Her stuff is really artsy crazy. I like the new milk man/woman shot a lot. And then she has 2 shots of a grass placemat and a video of self-eating cupcakes. Weird.

pet_chia · « **Reply #12 on:** May 14, 2010, 21:12 »

Quote from: stockastic on May 14, 2010, 19:04

One obvious fact - all these shots are about good-looking young models. If I submitted a photo of a pipe wrench with a similarly artistic treatment, would it get in?

Which reminds me. Years ago, I was thumbing through a book in a camera store aimed at amateur photogs called "How to Take Better People Pictures". It only took a minute or so of flipping the pages before a light bulb came on. The secret of better people pictures is to find better looking people! Humans seem to be hard wired to enjoy looking at images of young and above-average looking people, and everything else is like, meh.

Now when I flip through pages of similar stock photo shots, from best to worst selling the only really key differences that strike me are (1) good looking models, as opposed to uglier models in worst-selling pictures (and of course I don't mean ugly at all but the models are very ordinary, *regular* looking folks), and (2) extremely simple, clean composition. With pictures of pipe wrenches it's the same thing - the new, clean and shiny pipe wrench in a simple bold composition with a clean background will get the downloads every time.

stockastic · « **Reply #13 on:** May 14, 2010, 21:23 »

Quote from: pet_chia on May 14, 2010, 21:12

The secret of better people pictures is to find better looking people!

Unfortunately I'm over 50 and no longer know any good looking people.

Sure I could do the simple clean pipe wrench, but I want to go Vetta. I'm thinking of painting the wrench red, white and blue and having it tumbling in a dreamy sky filled with poofy, soft-focus clouds that look like cotton candy...

Graffoto · « **Reply #14 on:** May 14, 2010, 22:48 »

Unfortunately I'm over 50 and no longer know any good looking people.

Hey, I'm over 50 as well and I know a ton of good looking people!
They are the friends of my young adult children. They only problem is getting them to pose for me

gostwyck · « **Reply #15 on:** May 15, 2010, 06:08 »

Quote from: pet_chia on May 14, 2010, 21:12

Which reminds me. Years ago, I was thumbing through a book in a camera store aimed at amateur photogs called "How to Take Better People Pictures". It only took a minute or so of flipping the pages before a light bulb came on. The secret of better people pictures is to find better looking people! Humans seem to be hard wired to enjoy looking at images of young and above-average looking people, and everything else is like, meh.

Now when I flip through pages of similar stock photo shots, from best to worst selling the only really key differences that strike me are (1) good looking models, as opposed to uglier models in worst-selling pictures (and of course I don't mean ugly at all but the models are very ordinary, *regular* looking folks), and (2) extremely simple, clean composition. With pictures of pipe wrenches it's the same thing - the new, clean and shiny pipe wrench in a simple bold composition with a clean background will get the downloads every time.

As somebody wise once observed;

"Stock photography is not about portraying the world as it is but how we would like it to be"

Dreamframer · « **Reply #16 on:** May 15, 2010, 07:57 »

^^^ Well said

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Istockphoto Hot Shots (Read 8205 times)

Dreamframer

Elenathewise

stockastic

cathyslife

pet_chia

Sean Locke Photography

cathyslife

gostwyck

stockastic

crazychristina

stockastic

Sean Locke Photography

pet_chia

stockastic

Graffoto

gostwyck

Dreamframer

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors