MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Big learning curve for this over the top girl...  (Read 2813 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: January 21, 2011, 11:14 »
0
I admit it...my name is Beth and I have a heavy hand when it comes to PS editing. I love the topaz filter, and I love HDR. I love to break the rule of thirds and many others. I spent years overcoming my desire to please others with my work. When I finally learned the balance between constructive criticism and simple difference in taste I discovered the microstock market and it blew my progress all to heck. I have to say it has pushed me to become a more technically proficient photographer. I still have miles to go. However, I do find that some images are simply rejected for differ in taste. I'm not deluded in the fact that most of the images I have rejected are for valid reasons, but there are times that I believe great images are rejected because the reviewer does not have the same affinity for the over the top. I say this because I see other over the top landscapes that sell. Anyone else find that some of their images are rejected due to differing taste?


« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2011, 12:08 »
0
I would like to also add the I joined microstock a little over a year ago, added some images and then stopped due to time consumption. Now that both are my children are in school I may have more time to practice and add images to my portfolio. It's the upload process that kills the dream. I don't mind the rejection quite as much as I mind filling out 50 descriptions only to have 10 or so accepted or less. I so wish they could approve images before all the painstaking work was poured in to them...Anyone learn tricks to ease the pain?

« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2011, 12:14 »
0
Input your IPTC data before submitting if you're not doing that. Send in smaller batches to test the waters for what they want. Usually HDR stuff if not desirable for buyers unless the image has that "X" factor. Serious designers would much rather have the clean photo and put the fancy effects in themselves. You need to submit for the market, and sometimes it's not what you like.

ShadySue

« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2011, 12:30 »
0
I spent years overcoming my desire to please others with my work.
Sorry to say, that's why artists starve in garrets.
I've got one at home.
If you're trying to sell, you have to please the market. In microstock that's especially true as you need many sales of each image to make it worthwhile, you're not looking for the one person who connects with your vision.

« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2011, 14:39 »
0
I'm not sure what your dial is set to on over the top, but it took me quite a while to find a level of post processing that I could regularly get accepted. One of the things I'd suggest is that doing as much as possible with adjustment layers and making layer comps for each variation. So you can have a knock-your-eyes-out version that you prefer and a toned-down-a-bit version for stock.

If my porfolio looks very "plain jane" to you, then your definition of over the top might need a bit of softening to get things accepted. You can try the iStock critique forum for help on specific images if you don't mind posting your rejects publicly and hearing just what other people think :)

« Reply #5 on: January 21, 2011, 15:15 »
0
You need to submit for the market, and sometimes it's not what you like.

Exactly. Sorry but you appear to be thinking of stock agencies as some sort of 'camera club'. It's not like that. The agencies only want images that they consider to have commercial potential. Images have to fulfill a need for the buyer __ not the photographer.

Which would you rather produce?
a) Basic image of an apple that happens to sell 1000x
b) A technically difficult image that turns out spectacular enough to hang on a wall but which hardly sells at all

Most of us here would choose answer (a) everytime. There is a joy in providing for the market too and earning lots of money for comparatively little time or outlay. Of course that's not usually easy either which is why it is so satisfying when it works out.

« Reply #6 on: January 21, 2011, 15:44 »
0
Yes, i understand all of your comments, which is why I said microstock blew my theory all to heck. You must produce work everyone like to sell. I didn't mean to sound as if I didn't understand that aspect of the work. Thank you your posts!


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
11 Replies
4571 Views
Last post February 18, 2009, 10:53
by jim_h
8 Replies
2055 Views
Last post April 15, 2013, 15:37
by Dan_Wiedemann
4 Replies
1856 Views
Last post November 04, 2013, 12:36
by roede-orm
4 Replies
2836 Views
Last post March 08, 2018, 14:52
by Brightontl
0 Replies
1065 Views
Last post May 24, 2018, 13:22
by KuriousKat

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results