MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Composition rejection  (Read 7193 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Caz

« Reply #25 on: January 28, 2012, 07:51 »
0
 I think it's just a matter of taste - and a lot of the reviewers at the micros don't have a taste for this sort of image.  

bugger! my most absolute fav thing in the whole world is to shoot f&v at farmer's markets... *sigh* I'm still forcing myself to grasp the notion of "natural/authentic" and accept that I have to change if I want to make successful images.

Don't confuse getting images accepted with success. Success is having an image that sells (well) . I see many people who seem to think that the main point of microstock is a battle to get images passed inspectors. It's not, the point is to produce images that are useful to a broad range of designers, thus bringing each image multiple sales on a regular basis.


ShadySue

« Reply #26 on: January 28, 2012, 08:02 »
0
[the poitn of microstock] ...  is to produce images that are useful to a broad range of designers, thus bringing each image multiple sales on a regular basis.
Which is why you have to make a calculated guess at which images to set as micro and which to set as macro (might only sell a few times, but at a hopefully higher rate. In theory).

KB

« Reply #27 on: January 28, 2012, 16:49 »
0
Take Bananas - most of the best match bananas on iStock, for instance, are yellow or yellow-green; yet eating them like that would be likely to give you indigestion and the taste wouldn't be as good.
OT (but then the topic is done, really), and I'm almost afraid to ask, but: What color are the bananas that you eat?  ;D

Our bananas are generally bought & eaten as yellow (not always -- sometimes they are mostly green, and you have to put them in a paper bag with another fruit and hope they'll ripen and soften).

Ed

« Reply #28 on: January 30, 2012, 09:00 »
0
[Success is having an image that sells (well) .


I see many people who seem to think that the main point of microstock is a battle to get images passed inspectors.

I don't shoot microstock....I shoot stock.  The point is to cater to the buyers.  Unfortunately, in microstock, many of the inspectors are recruited from contributors that have a higher approval rating and who's images are technically correct.  These inspectors are NOT seasoned creative directors with a background in that area.

I've said it before...I'll keep saying it.  There is a reason why people like Jeff Greenberg on Alamy are making more than $100,000 per year on "crap" images that would not get accepted at the micros.  It's because he's shooting STOCK not microstock.  90% of his portfolio would be rejected for not having commercial value at the micros....I would consider him successful.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
11 Replies
5714 Views
Last post February 07, 2008, 18:24
by ChasingMoments
50 Replies
13057 Views
Last post February 22, 2010, 17:37
by Dreamframer
18 Replies
3616 Views
Last post May 13, 2013, 07:44
by Poncke v2
7 Replies
2456 Views
Last post March 11, 2015, 13:47
by cascoly
8 Replies
2697 Views
Last post October 17, 2017, 10:08
by Pauws99

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results