MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Infocus1's istockphoto rejection pictures  (Read 9038 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #25 on: August 20, 2013, 19:31 »
0
Sorry, but your isolation still isn't clean enough - easiest to see at the bottom right, but it's problematic elsewhere too.
They used to have a good tutorial on isolations, and it's probably still there somewhere, but I couldn't find it by searching 'pen tool' (bizarre search result) and 'isolation' (no results).

BTW, the tutorials give very good guidance on iStock's (previous) standards. These would be worth a lot of study if you haven't already.

Rimglow's advice is very sound. Look at the opposition and see if you can actually articulate why anyone would buy your photo of subject X rather than what's already there.


« Reply #26 on: August 20, 2013, 19:45 »
0
Sue, do you use the paths tool for isolation?

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #27 on: August 20, 2013, 20:12 »
+1
Sue, do you use the paths tool for isolation?
I did, but I haven't done isolations for a while.

BTW, the 'proper' way to do them is by lighting, but I don't have enough lights or space.

« Reply #28 on: August 20, 2013, 20:40 »
0
How does this look for isolation?

« Reply #29 on: August 20, 2013, 20:56 »
0

« Reply #30 on: August 20, 2013, 21:25 »
0
Luis, can you tell me what that picture is that you linked?

Thanks, I assume it's a way to check the edges?

« Reply #31 on: August 20, 2013, 21:32 »
0
Luis, can you tell me what that picture is that you linked?

Thanks, I assume it's a way to check the edges?

yep, using Curves (click on the right bottom corner)

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #32 on: August 21, 2013, 02:17 »
+1
Here I took another photo and made sure I didn't crop out the sides. I straightened it, and made the background white.


That just shows you can take a photo of someone else's art.  However it shows you are unable to isolate an object - look at the poor isolation work around the bottom of the object.  Also, it has distortion due to the wide angle lens you used.

It doesn't show you're a stock photographer.


Problems of digestion?



« Reply #33 on: August 21, 2013, 05:13 »
0
That article on clipping paths that Liz mentioned can be found here.
http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=89
Be careful though, clipping paths can bring their own set of problems. Particularly if the object to be isolated has changes in the edge focus due to DOF.
As Liz said isolations are better done "in camera" with a proper set up.
I'll repeat, unless I really knew how to do isolations, I'd leave them alone for an application.
I wouldn't use a piece of statuary like that either for an application, set up a still life that has some sort of simple concept. "Going out" "Going fishing" "Making dinner" anything that clearly "says" what is happening in the shot.
The statue is still underexposed "flat and grey" IMO too.
Don't strip the exif for the application shots, or to show here preferably, it will help people see what you are doing.  Save the file at maximum jpeg quality.
Don't be in too much of a hurry to reapply. Get the right set of shots first. If you don't you'll just get another refusal, and a longer wait.

« Reply #34 on: August 21, 2013, 22:18 »
0
Beppe I was thinking kinda the same thing, but either way, I'm starting to begin to see the work that is going to be involved.

Dave, Thanks for the insight again.  As I'm receiving more advice, it's getting more specific, and this is exactly what I need. Thanks for the link.

Do you have any links for lighting, or advice off the top of your head? Otherwise I can look through the  istock tutorials again as Sue offered.

cuppacoffee

« Reply #35 on: August 21, 2013, 23:02 »
0

tab62

« Reply #36 on: August 21, 2013, 23:35 »
+2
This brings back memories of me just a year or so ago- here are my tips (all based on lot's of headaches and upset stomachs):

1. Learn to use the pen tool for isolation on objects (white or black)- master the pen tool!
2. Never push your lens to the extremes - use only the sweet spots (ie 17-55 lens use it around 20 to 50 ranges). Sure you can fix the distortions in photoshop but why not just do it right in the first place. The more you do in the camera the less time processing
3. Study your objects - look for unique ones that are not a trademark concern.
4. Think Commercial all the time. Why would a buyer want my photo? Try to hit multiple platform forms- ie Fish photo (food, health, fishing industry, sport).
5. Hold off submitting to iStock (Get into the smaller and mid tier first to gain experience and confidence)
6. Learn to light- the strobist 101 is  good place to start on the web
7. Never take it personal on what folks tell you- the basically mean well but will be blunt at times
8. Don't go out and buy 20k worth of equipment  to make a few bucks - keep your cost down

Good Luck...

T

tab62

« Reply #37 on: August 21, 2013, 23:49 »
0
did a quick search of 'Budda on White' in Shutter- this what you have to compete against.

http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?searchterm=budda+on+white&search_group=&lang=en&search_source=search_form

tab62

« Reply #38 on: August 21, 2013, 23:54 »
0
Here is  a trout (one white) I recently did- took me a few minutes to isolate via the pen tool -

http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?searchterm=trout&search_group=&lang=en&search_source=search_form#id=146873606&src=E-0Bd5rL2Y9_VV7BUsoK5g-1-38

« Reply #39 on: August 22, 2013, 04:13 »
+1
submit to dreamstime, get some sales and choose the best to submit for your istock application

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #40 on: August 22, 2013, 04:33 »
0
did a quick search of 'Budda on White' in Shutter- this what you have to compete against.

And many times more (6208) when you search on 'Buddha isolated':
http://tinyurl.com/lv4vt9b

'Only' 930 on iStock, though:
http://www.istockphoto.com/search/text/Buddha%20isolated/filetype/photos/source/basic#6438f83

shumicse

  • Nothing is Impossible
« Reply #41 on: August 29, 2013, 23:49 »
0
The pen tool is the best option to select path of any image. If you use magic wand tool the path can be selected easily but here the edge of the image will be imperfect. So pen tool should be use for selecting path.

« Reply #42 on: September 07, 2013, 00:35 »
0
Thanks for the link cuppacoffee.

Tab, great points, that's going to help keep me busy and moving in the right direction, thank you. Nice trout btw, thanks for helping with an example.

qwerty, I kind of enjoy the challenge, so I guess if all else fails with the main sites, I'll look into doing exactly as you suggested as a backup.

ShadySue, I like the competition, but don't you guys see it's not buddha pictures "on white" or "buddha isolation", it's "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil".

Shumicse, I tried the pen tool, and I'm seeing that's what I need to work at next. Thanks for the input.

How is this picture now? I used the pen tool for isolation.




« Reply #43 on: September 07, 2013, 06:20 »
0
can you post 100% samples? it looks like you have some rough edges, you need to feather the selection, still many places not cleaned enough


« Reply #44 on: September 07, 2013, 06:45 »
0
When I was starting out in microstock I found Dreamstime to be the best because the reviews gave specific reasons why an imaged was rejected.

Some other agencies give a list of "possible" reasons which isn't very helpful. 

I also found the community on Dreamstime to be very encouraging and helpful.  There is a lot of knowledge and advice there in the blogs and message boards.

Beyond technical skill, the most important thing is to start developing an eye for what commercial shots needed and look like.  You need to be looking at the agencies, magazines, billboards etc and start to see what types of shots are used.  Reading a book like "Taking Stock" is a good way to learn more about what stock is all about.


« Reply #45 on: September 07, 2013, 09:40 »
0
Luis, thanks for checking that again for me. Actually I'm using gimp and not photoshop, so I looked around and tried to find some tutorials for creating the image you did, but couldn't find one that worked. I linked a 100% at the bottom.

DF_Studios, I guess it would be nice to have them include an explanation for the rejection, thanks for the insight. Thanks for the book recommendation too. Thanks for the encouragement.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/eic1q3era89za42/014_14.jpg

« Reply #46 on: September 07, 2013, 09:56 »
0
I use GIMP as well, when I say 100%, just crop that picture at 100% (left corner at the bottom) and save that so we can see the isolation around a buddha

are you feathering the selection you made around the buddhas?

« Reply #47 on: September 07, 2013, 14:35 »
0
Luis, it seems as if I reposted the same photo. Here's the actual 100%.

Did you want me to crop the photo to eliminate the unnecessary white around the edges?

Thanks.

Oh since you're using gimp can you easily tell me how to do what you're doing or is it more complicated?

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qzxbfns4d9dib1s/014_14_lg.jpg

« Reply #48 on: September 07, 2013, 14:47 »
0

« Reply #49 on: September 07, 2013, 17:38 »
0
I'm not feathering the image btw.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
14 Replies
7741 Views
Last post October 17, 2007, 16:29
by yingyang0
53 Replies
26720 Views
Last post June 09, 2010, 04:36
by drgogineni
41 Replies
18008 Views
Last post March 12, 2010, 09:09
by RT
20 Replies
9757 Views
Last post September 01, 2010, 17:12
by FD
25 Replies
9858 Views
Last post July 22, 2013, 19:03
by JPSDK

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors