Author Topic: Need stock photograph professionnal view (Read 9078 times)

Morphart · « **on:** February 16, 2011, 21:25 »

Hi!

I do mostly Illustrations. Some illustrations I do will only pass at iStock as "PHOTOS" as the EPS8 vector format has too many things that rasterize due to unsupported effects.

I want to buy a few copyrights of pictures off professionnal photographer to pass the PHOTO application (posted 2 illustration and want a photo as last time they said the subject of photo is too similar.

Someone sent my images, which are great, but I suspect that looking at them at 100% there is too much noise, artefact and or off focus.

Can you pros help me know if the images are OK or not? I have other submission with better subject and quality for stock, but I am also trying to learn in the process as to what are the technical requirements so that when I start shooting myself I shoot the right way:

Image 1: http://www.morphartsolution.com/1.jpg
Image 2: http://www.morphartsolution.com/2.jpg
Image 3: http://www.morphartsolution.com/3.jpg

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #1 on:** February 16, 2011, 21:27 »

None of those will get you into IS.

Morphart · « **Reply #2 on:** February 16, 2011, 21:32 »

Hi!

Thanks for the answer. That much I knew, but the real question is, can those image even be used as stock photography. I am trying to grasp the standards and technical requirements. But since I am buying those images (or not if the technical requirements aren't met), I would like to know if they would pass at Shutterstock or other stock agencies with decent standards (technically speaking). I know the subjects isn't that great.

Thanks again.

cobalt · « **Reply #3 on:** February 16, 2011, 21:37 »

None of these will make it. Out of focus, overfiltered, lighting/underexposed etc...and then of course who are the buyers you are targetting? Which insurance, software company, lawyer will buy these images? What service or product will they advertise with them?

I suggest you spend a bit of time reading around the critique forum on istock to get a feel for why images are rejected and maybe post yours there before you upload. It will save you a lot of time.

Stock photography is it´s own genre and you will have to adapt your workflow for it. You can learn it, we all did.

ShadySue · « **Reply #4 on:** February 17, 2011, 03:39 »

Quote from: Morphart on February 16, 2011, 21:25

Hi!

I do mostly Illustrations. Some illustrations I do will only pass at iStock as "PHOTOS" as the EPS8 vector format has too many things that rasterize due to unsupported effects.

I want to buy a few copyrights of pictures off professionnal photographer to pass the PHOTO application (posted 2 illustration and want a photo as last time they said the subject of photo is too similar.

Someone sent my images, which are great, but I suspect that looking at them at 100% there is too much noise, artefact and or off focus.

Can you pros help me know if the images are OK or not? I have other submission with better subject and quality for stock, but I am also trying to learn in the process as to what are the technical requirements so that when I start shooting myself I shoot the right way:

Image 1: http://www.morphartsolution.com/1.jpg
Image 2: http://www.morphartsolution.com/2.jpg
Image 3: http://www.morphartsolution.com/3.jpg

These are images a 'pro' was going to sell you to try to get in to iStock???!!! Did they take them on their cellphone - at least the first two?
Maybe you could find out if iStock has a policy of not allowing an application of only raster art. It seems weird that you'd have to submit a 'regular' photograph if you'd never be submitting them.
On hearsay evidence only, I've heard that iStock isn't wild on raster art (many rejections) and it doesn't sell as well there as it can on other sites. Maybe others with experience could chip in and confirm/refute this.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #5 on:** February 17, 2011, 05:03 »

They look like scans of old photographs?

I don't understand. You are going to buy photos to get into the agency, and that will make up for the inability to get your own work accepted? Then lets say hypothetically you get into the agency, they still won't take your photos and if they do, the photos won't sell.

Getting in is the first step. Getting something accepted is the second, and neither makes any income. Only sales make money.

lagereek · « **Reply #6 on:** February 17, 2011, 06:46 »

Sorry to discourage you but the pics are down out bad, both in subject and technically and you bought these??? frankly, today there is no room for dilletants in this business and IMO it should never have been but thats another story.

The big ones like IS, SS, FT and DT, have raised their standards way beyond this.

Morphart · « **Reply #7 on:** February 17, 2011, 09:17 »

Hehe,

Thanks everyone for your comments. No I did NOT buy those pictures. By checking them at 100% I realized the quality wasn't there, but I guess I wanted a professionnal view on it, which I clearly got here, and you saved me a few dollars

.

As for raster art policy, I do not know if they have one, but here is the rejection reason they gave me. I provided raster art of different subjects (business, environment, global warming), and they said:

Quote

BusinessFinance.jpg View

GreenFuture.jpg View

GlobalWarming.jpg View
Status: Rejected
Admin Note:
Two or more of these images are very similar in subject matter, perspective or style. We would like to see a demonstrated range of diversity in technical ability and a variety in subject matter. So if you have anything else you can show us we would love to see it. We welcome you to return after the number of days specified and upload fresh samples of your work and we will re-process your application. Please note that you will not be able to upload new samples until this waiting period has passed.

So this time, I decided to upload 1x raster art, 1x 3d art as this is what I do good, and 1x photography. For the photography, I have one good photographer now willing to sell me copyrights of some of her work. I do no feel like waiting 14 days again or more to upload my raster art. Maybe you can look at: http://web.me.com/barbararevelli/photography

In nature I was thinking about the lettuce or the offshore tree. I LOVE her people images, but they will all go as Editorial. But I think they can pass me through application process (since I don't think they require Editorial?).

And for the one who was asking, no I do not plan on making stock photography anytime soon. I have a lot of technical readings and practice to do to get the technical requirements right (purple fringing, noise, lighting, etc. etc.). I'm a videographer, 2d/3d animation and illustrator, I did a lot of photography also but I never took care of those technicality. Will first try to get a decent ammount of pictures approved at Shutterstock before trying to sell some at iStock.

Thanks a lot for your time.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #8 on:** February 17, 2011, 09:25 »

You can be accepted with raster or 3d art. Trying to use another photographer's work in your application is just silly.

Morphart · « **Reply #9 on:** February 17, 2011, 09:29 »

Quote from: RacePhoto on February 17, 2011, 05:03

Getting in is the first step. Getting something accepted is the second, and neither makes any income. Only sales make money.

Yes I understand this. I don't want to make income out of photography but out of Illustration. Half my current Illustration work would need major touchup as they were compatible with EPS10. Breaking them to EPS8 makes some gradients or transparency get rasterized, so this is why I have to pass the "photo" application.

Morphart · « **Reply #10 on:** February 17, 2011, 09:36 »

Quote from: sjlocke on February 17, 2011, 09:25

You can be accepted with raster or 3d art.

Can you be accepted in the Photo section with only this? I will try again then with only Rasters and let you know on the post here.

Quote

Trying to use another photographer's work in your application is just silly.

Thanks for pointing it out... Now that I stop and think about it, yes it is

. I just felt it might help me get through without having to wait another 2 weeks for 1 rejection or something. Will try again, thanks again everyone ;p

Morphart · « **Reply #11 on:** February 17, 2011, 16:48 »

Maybe I am not that stupid...

Again:
Two or more of these images are very similar in subject matter, perspective or style. We would like to see a demonstrated range of diversity in technical ability and a variety in subject matter. So if you have anything else you can show us we would love to see it. We welcome you to return after the number of days specified and upload fresh samples of your work and we will re-process your application. Please note that you will not be able to upload new samples until this waiting period has passed.

Here are the 5 files (business used on both submission tries) that I tried:
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-69040426/stock-vector-building-a-green-future-community-working-together-to-build-a-green-and-self-sufficient-future.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-71191678/stock-photo-a-very-realistic-view-d-illustration-of-a-cruise-ship-similar-to-the-freedom-of-the-sea-ship.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-69040594/stock-vector-illustration-of-business-professionals-with-an-arrow-showing-increase-sales-over-a-global-earth.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-69952774/stock-vector-vector-illustration-of-a-young-and-attractive-brunette-woman-with-short-hair-wearing-an-attractive.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-69212083/stock-photo-an-illustration-on-global-warming-and-climate-change-showing-a-boiling-tea-kettle-earth-being.html

How different can they be? Ask me again why I thought to use a photography for the application. Maybe a 3D, a raster and a photography would be "different" enough?

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #12 on:** February 17, 2011, 22:25 »

Mr Phart - those look pretty different to me.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #13 on:** February 18, 2011, 07:35 »

Yeah, nice work. Don't know what the issue would be.

Morphart · « **Reply #14 on:** February 18, 2011, 09:36 »

Thanks !

I posted this on iStock forum, and a contributor there clarified it for me. For those who are interested and don't want to waste time like I did:

... well the post was deleted since I posted my links to Shutterstock hehe... they deserved it.

Basically, the contributor said that for the photo application, all submitted Raster should NOT look like it could have been done in vector. It can be 3D, or graphic design or photo effect, or "collage" art. I guess they really want to separate the Vector from the other digitally created imagery.

Hope it helps someome

Morphart · « **Reply #15 on:** February 18, 2011, 09:37 »

Quote

Mr Phart - those look pretty different to me.

My name is Fart... Mr. Fart

Hehe...

It's more like Morph Art ;P

cathyslife · « **Reply #16 on:** February 18, 2011, 10:22 »

Quote from: Morphart on February 18, 2011, 09:37

Quote
Mr Phart - those look pretty different to me.

My name is Fart... Mr. Fart Hehe...

It's more like Morph Art ;P

LOL!

lisafx · « **Reply #17 on:** February 18, 2011, 13:16 »

Quote from: Morphart on February 18, 2011, 09:37

Quote
Mr Phart - those look pretty different to me.

My name is Fart... Mr. Fart Hehe...

It's more like Morph Art ;P

Thanks to you and Paulie for a really great laugh

red · « **Reply #18 on:** February 18, 2011, 13:23 »

And it's refreshing to find someone who laughs along with the joke when it's on them instead of getting mad. Kudos Morphart!

Morphart · « **Reply #19 on:** February 18, 2011, 15:43 »

Quote from: cuppacoffee on February 18, 2011, 13:23

And it's refreshing to find someone who laughs along with the joke when it's on them instead of getting mad. Kudos Morphart!

Hehe :p When you like to joke about people you have to be able to laugh about yourself too ;p

Phil · « **Reply #20 on:** February 18, 2011, 19:28 »

yes istock dont like raster art. I wouldnt even dream of trying to get accepted using it.

After being accepted look at high (50++%) rejections for stuff that is accepted at every other agency. I know at least half a dozen people that have given up uploading raster art, now just send vectors or photos. re sales like any site, some images do great some die, usually different ones on each site

Susan S. · « **Reply #21 on:** February 18, 2011, 20:11 »

That was me on the istock forum commenting about vectors as rasters - looking at those vectors it shouldn't be too hard to get them to work in EPS8 - it's a pain faking transparency effects (enough of a pain that I haven't uploaded many illustrations) but perfectly possible. When I was submitting illustrations to istock I ended up just doing things which were really based on brush work and opaque shading like I would use in acrylic or goache painting as it requires a lot less effort than reworking the transparency. Unfortunately it doesn't sell very well - people like the high gloss web 2.0 stuff more and I really can't be bothered producing that in high volume in EPS 8 format. (and I get too many rejections, often for picky stylistic stuff that I don't agree with)

Mark Evans also made a few comments on the illustrations, which I agree with if you are going to get them accepted at istock as vectors - istock are really big on consistency of style - so mixing flat stick men with the 3D boxes in the green one won't fly; and I'm not sure about the retro cartoon figure in front of the grunge buildings - it looks a bit like random putting together of elements to me: there are also some perspective errors on the tea pot (the vanishing points implied by the handle and spout don't match up). And the flames and the earth and the truck all are different in style again. It's all pretty picky stuff but if you don't adhere to their guidelines, like them or not you don't get illustrations accepted.

Morphart · « **Reply #22 on:** February 18, 2011, 21:36 »

@Susan

Yes I agree with the details you pointed out.

Actually my ILLUSTRATOR application went pretty well... 3 submitted and 3 approved, which I am relieved ;p

For the Raster Art part, I will stick with the EPS10 at other websites.

I changed some Illustration transparency and radial with some good mesh work, but the business illustration when converted to EPS8 rasters 98 elements... Not really worth the time even tho I like the selling potential of this image. This is why I tried is as raster.

Thanks again for your insight and critique, will use it to grow!

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Need stock photograph professionnal view (Read 9078 times)

Morphart

Sean Locke Photography

Morphart

cobalt

ShadySue

RacePhoto

lagereek

Morphart

Sean Locke Photography

Morphart

Morphart

Morphart

PaulieWalnuts

Sean Locke Photography

Morphart

Morphart

cathyslife

lisafx

red

Morphart

Phil

Susan S.

Morphart

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors