Author Topic: Critically in need of critique - iStock problems (Read 6813 times)

waterrabbit13 · « **on:** March 27, 2010, 17:49 »

I've tried 4 times to get accepted by iStock. I'm definitely new to stock photography but have managed to get accepted and to have a few sales on other sites.

These are from my last couple attempts - any help would be much appreciated!
( I think I've fixed this link so it should work)

newbielink:http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/sredir?uname=sxyvirgo&target=ALBUM&id=5453457816836818833&authkey=Gv1sRgCMmS6ei5tqi9bQ&invite=CKGGq68C&feat=email [nonactive]

ShadySue · « **Reply #1 on:** March 27, 2010, 17:55 »

Quote from: waterrabbit13 on March 27, 2010, 17:49

I've tried 4 times to get accepted by iStock. I'm definitely new to stock photography but have managed to get accepted and to have a few sales on other sites.

These are from my last couple attempts - any help would be much appreciated!

http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v313/waterrabbit/Latest%20iStock%20rejects/

You seem to need to log in to photobucket to see your images.

Albert Martin · « **Reply #2 on:** March 27, 2010, 18:05 »

As said by previous poster, I couldn't see your photos. But, never mind!

As known iStock is very biased towards their exclusives and they also don't need anyone who applies there.
If you happen to have FULL FRAME camera and excellent eye for light and composition it is not enough. You should have some kind of unique photos to submit to iStock... I advise that you first read all what they say about photographer application. Then see what photos they need and what don't. Then go shoot something what is so good that their content editors will wow about!

You will pass only that way ;-)

Good Luck with earning 20% of sale price - if you pass application!

Dreamframer · « **Reply #3 on:** March 27, 2010, 19:44 »

I can see your photos. Here is what I think. First, all images submitted here are the same subject (except one with a flower). The image number 2 has blown-out sky and the part of the building on the right side. Also, this image looks like you applied too much of contrast, and/or sharpening. You should straighten the horizon on the image taken from the top of the tower. The first image looks blurred on the left side...check that out, I'm not completely sure because I can't see it at 100% size. I don't think this flower will pass the application. If you want to take the image of a flower it should be really extraordinary, and not just beautiful. They have tons of flowers.
Do you need a property release for any of these buildings? Did you erase every logo?
Otherwise, we can't see images at 100%, so we can't judge about noise, artifacts or banding because of overprocessing.

You are not bad at all. These are all small things, but for the application, you have to pay attention on them too.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #4 on:** March 27, 2010, 22:14 »

They strike me as walkaround snapshots. You'll need to make some more effort to capture something with a vision.

Dook · « **Reply #5 on:** March 28, 2010, 02:19 »

I got accepted at Istock not long ago. I also got rejected the first time for one reason - there is no diversity in your photos. That is exactly what happens with you, too. You need something more than just travel photos(lifestyle, still life, sports, food, anything goes). You have to show your photography skills and potentials.

araminta · « **Reply #6 on:** March 28, 2010, 06:58 »

I agree with other comments: you need more diversity and take care of the technical aspect of your photos.

Blown out sky and out of focus flower are not good enough for IS.

I'm afraid microstock agencies no longer need to have more pictures in their database: they need now to have better pictures. This is especially true for IS and even more true for your initial submission.

nancypics · « **Reply #7 on:** March 28, 2010, 08:33 »

Quote from: waterrabbit13 on March 27, 2010, 17:49

I've tried 4 times to get accepted by iStock. I'm definitely new to stock photography but have managed to get accepted and to have a few sales on other sites.

I have a friend in the same boat - accepted to other sites no problem but had so many rejections with iStock that she almost gave up. She finally has been accepted, so keep trying

(For me it's Shutterstock - 8 out of 10 of my initial submission was rejected - ouch!! Meanwhile I've been accepted to iStock, Dreamstime, Fotolia, BigStock, Deposit Photos, and CanStock, so I'm definitely not giving up on Shuttestock

Anyway, I posted these on another thread, but I'll post them again in case it helps... these are the three pics that got me accepted into iStock. Good luck, and don't give up!

Gannet77 · « **Reply #8 on:** March 28, 2010, 09:03 »

I'd agree with Whitechild, you need to make sure your images are different subjects, iStock like to see some variety in your application.

I like the Houses of Parliament one, except it looks like it's oversharpened - in fact, so are the others. I doubt they would get past inspection, once you've been accepted, as they are. Actually though, that may not matter for the application - in my experience, they don't judge it so much on technical details as on your "eye for a picture".

I don't think they'd be bothered about lack of model/property releases for the application either, so by all means include people shots, but you should be aware of these requirements for when you do get accepted!

You should just try three well-composed, well lit, attractive pictures. It looks to me like you can do it. And that's all it needs...

waterrabbit13 · « **Reply #9 on:** March 28, 2010, 10:24 »

Thanks, everyone for the advice and encouragement...I know my pics are not very "microstocky" - I'll try to add some quality still lifes of various objects to the mix. I've also taken to carrying a monopod with me to help with focus issues.

KB · « **Reply #10 on:** March 28, 2010, 11:32 »

Quote from: nancypics on March 28, 2010, 08:33

(For me it's Shutterstock - 8 out of 10 of my initial submission was rejected - ouch!!

One thing I can comment on based on the photos you posted -- SS absolutely hates shallow focus. I've had very, very few images accepted there with shallow DOF. They want every part of the subject to be sharp. I definitely wouldn't submit any of the 3 you posted as part of your initial submission.

FD · « **Reply #11 on:** March 30, 2010, 05:46 »

Quote from: KB on March 28, 2010, 11:32

One thing I can comment on based on the photos you posted -- SS absolutely hates shallow focus. I've had very, very few images accepted there with shallow DOF.

+1 - plus, SS hates shadows. The bridge next to the House of Commons in London was the main focus, yet most is in the shadow. That's a NONO for SS. The OP should learn to shoot with the sun at his back.

nancypics · « **Reply #12 on:** April 03, 2010, 14:11 »

Quote from: KB on March 28, 2010, 11:32

Quote from: nancypics on March 28, 2010, 08:33
(For me it's Shutterstock - 8 out of 10 of my initial submission was rejected - ouch!!

One thing I can comment on based on the photos you posted -- SS absolutely hates shallow focus. I've had very, very few images accepted there with shallow DOF. They want every part of the subject to be sharp. I definitely wouldn't submit any of the 3 you posted as part of your initial submission.

Thank you for that tip - that solves some mystery for me.

Of the 8 that were rejected by SS, only 2 were for technical reasons - the other 6 were "lack of commercial value". That could be shallow DOF for sure. Fyi, of the three images I posted above, I had only submitted one to SS: the red pepper, which has been accepted everywhere else (6 other agencies).

I'm learning that different agencies are looking for different things, and while an image may be rejected by one, it doesn't mean it's not suitable for stock elsewhere. On the one hand you can learn a lot about technical quality and commercial value and be more selective about what you submit, but on the other hand, sometimes you just don't know until you submit.

Still... I want to add SS to my list of agencies, so I'm not giving up!! For my second set of 10 I'll definitely pay more attention to DOF. Thanks

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Critically in need of critique - iStock problems (Read 6813 times)

waterrabbit13

ShadySue

Albert Martin

Dreamframer

Sean Locke Photography

Dook

araminta

nancypics

Gannet77

waterrabbit13

KB

FD

nancypics

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors