I come from a portrait background but have recently moved and I'm trying to get the ball rolling with setting up a stock portfolio.  I do not currently have photos with any agency although I did get accepted about 2 years ago to the Flickr Getty Pool.  Every time I decide I'm about to submit images there, Getty ends up in the news again for something shady so I keep coming here and trying to find out my next step.  I have really enjoyed seeing the excitement around Stocksy and love the look and feel of their collection as well as Offset.  Unfortunately I come from an off camera flash background and think I'm probably not suited to either. 

I did submit a collection to Stocksy and was rejected.  I went back through the collection and found a ton of mistakes and tried to clean it up a bit.  I just submitted the new version to Offset but after following this forum for a while I am pretty sure I'd fall more into a "traditional" stock track rather than a Stocksy or Offset.

My next step is to try submitting to Shutterstock because of all the good feedback but I also understand that they are the most difficult to be accepted with.

Also for traditional stock agencies should I ditch all the photos where people are looking directly into the camera or is that more of a Stocksy/Offset thing?

My collection is here:  newbielink:http://melissashelby.com/stock [nonactive]  If anyone can take a quick look of it's overall picture and tell if any agency jumps out I would appreciate it.  I would love to try submitting to Shutterstock but if I'm heading down the wrong road and would be better suited to the Getty flickr thing or another agency it would be beneficial feedback and greatly appreciated.

Really nice. I am surprised Stocksy didn't want you.

No, I think the people images are overly posed and lit.  It looks like an ad for a portrait studio (which is good based on the OPs statement )  I'd say about 5-10% looks like Stocksy material.

I'm not well versed enough in the other places to hazard a guess.

Quote from: bunhill on February 18, 2014, 16:02

Really nice. I am surprised Stocksy didn't want you.

No, I think the people images are overly posed and lit.  It looks like an ad for a portrait studio (which is good based on the OPs statement )  I'd say about 5-10% looks like Stocksy material.

I'm not well versed enough in the other places to hazard a guess.

I found a lot of humour. Some of them made me smile. Eg G6A8670 where the boy looks like he is struggling not to grin. That's natural.

I did not think that the woman in the hat on the rock was especially strong - but other than that I think that almost every series has some very strong shots.

Where you see over-posed ... I think I see deliberately posed. Though some of them seem very natural to me.

Anyhow - isn't posed the new not posed ?

I come from a portrait background but have recently moved and I'm trying to get the ball rolling with setting up a stock portfolio.  I do not currently have photos with any agency although I did get accepted about 2 years ago to the Flickr Getty Pool.

.......

My collection is here:  http://melissashelby.com/stock  If anyone can take a quick look of it's overall picture and tell if any agency jumps out I would appreciate it.  I would love to try submitting to Shutterstock but if I'm heading down the wrong road and would be better suited to the Getty flickr thing or another agency it would be beneficial feedback and greatly appreciated.

you also might consider symbiostock - either setting up your own site or joining the new symbiostock co-op described here & over in symbiostock.org recently

...  I've actually been trying to "shoot for stock" but I think I'm still way off on understanding what sells...

I think the big difference between portraits -which are for the people who love the subject - and stock - which are for conveying messages is that you want your people to be either doing something - playing, doing crafts, sports, eating, at a party, etc. - or representing some emotion or message. With many of the images you posted, I can see that the clients would like the pictures, but they don't convey any messages that a stock buyer could use.

So, for example, this image is IMO much better stock than this one.

For a number of the outside portraits with a flash/strobe, the balance between the ambient light and the subjects is such that the background looks more like a studio backdrop than the outdoors - like this one as an example. I think for stock, even if you had people doing useful stuff, you'll want the light to be less obtrusive, possibly even using a reflector to fill rather than flash.

Good luck. You've clearly got a lot of what it takes (as long as you can take rejection well )

Very nice work

Sent from my C6603 using Tapatalk