MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: My Style  (Read 23654 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: July 15, 2011, 06:05 »
0
I like your images, but the bw ones seem a bit flat and are unlikely to do well in the land of supershiny. It may be an idea to start learning one of the black arts of photoshop - frankenscaping. Frankenscaping means ignoring reality because that's too piffling and just creating the world like a jigsaw.   Keep a box of skies, and have a box of foregrounds and sprinkle in windy paths and lonely trees and terrifyingly powerful sunrays.  

There seems to be tons of frankenscapes on the front pages (unless I'm massively confused about what reality normally looks like) - and most them just seem to be fields, so you don't have to climb annapurna, canoe through the sundarbans at the risk of tiger attacks OR get up at 3am in order to land the one shiny quarter dollar that many agencies assert as being appropriate recompense for our intensely hard labour.


lagereek

« Reply #26 on: July 15, 2011, 06:11 »
0
Will!  everything is too flat!  this is not atmospheric lighting, its flat. You must understand, Micro today is not an archive for dust or leftovers. Youre up against Pros, etc.
This stuff will never pass the IS inspectors.

« Reply #27 on: July 15, 2011, 06:16 »
0
I am also going to be buying Photoshop CS5 and Lightroom soon to help aid my photos. My current photo gallery has no computer editing and was taken with a Sony Cybershot Camera and my old Sony Ericsson Mobile.

I sure hope you're not planning on submitting mobile phone photos!  As a former image reviewer who once was charged with approving/denying contributor applications, I can guarantee your images won't be accepted...ever.  And good luck with the Sony Cybershot.  I denied about 1/3 of the applications submitted primarily because of problems generated by these types of cameras. 

« Reply #28 on: July 15, 2011, 06:18 »
0
Will!  everything is too flat!  this is not atmospheric lighting, its flat. You must understand, Micro today is not an archive for dust or leftovers. You're up against Pros, etc.

This stuff will never pass the IS inspectors.

I have to agree.  Will, you would be best served taking a photography class or two (plus Photoshop) before getting into commercial stock photography.  Just being honest.   

« Reply #29 on: July 15, 2011, 06:50 »
0
Likely, micro isn't something you really want to do, if this is the kind of thing you like to shoot.  You just think you want to do it.
Microstock is defiantly something I want to do, the fact is just prior to today I thought I could waltz in and start selling my images. All the feedback from family and friends was good, obviously they don't live up to the standards in the industry and have already been shot a million times.

« Reply #30 on: July 15, 2011, 06:56 »
0
First rule of photography:  RTFM
Second rule: Never listen to family and friends.

« Reply #31 on: July 15, 2011, 06:59 »
0
First rule of photography:  RTFM
Second rule: Never listen to family and friends.
Lol, something to brighten my day.

As many have stated I think it is best that I sign up for a online photography course. Does anyone know of a good course?

Thanks

« Reply #32 on: July 15, 2011, 07:11 »
0
I like your images, but the bw ones seem a bit flat and are unlikely to do well in the land of supershiny. It may be an idea to start learning one of the black arts of photoshop - frankenscaping. Frankenscaping means ignoring reality because that's too piffling and just creating the world like a jigsaw.   Keep a box of skies, and have a box of foregrounds and sprinkle in windy paths and lonely trees and terrifyingly powerful sunrays.  

There seems to be tons of frankenscapes on the front pages (unless I'm massively confused about what reality normally looks like) - and most them just seem to be fields, so you don't have to climb annapurna, canoe through the sundarbans at the risk of tiger attacks OR get up at 3am in order to land the one shiny quarter dollar that many agencies assert as being appropriate recompense for our intensely hard labour.

Ha! That's an excellent word for those shots.

Quote
Posted by: sjlocke
First rule of photography:  RTFM
Second rule: Never listen to family and friends.

Excellent advice!

As far as online photography courses, I personally think you would be far better off 1. taking your DSLR and going out and shoot, shoot, shooting until you know what each and every setting on the camera is for and what it does. Because there are a ton. 2. If you want to take a course, sign up for one at your local college so that you get to shoot with a bunch of others in your same situation. The feedback from other students and the teacher will help tremendously. And you will get to see how and what others do both from a technical standpoint and from a creative standpoint.

« Reply #33 on: July 15, 2011, 07:36 »
0
Hi Will/John!

I guess you need to open a few agencies and see what "stock" really is, you have said before that it may mean not what you like to shoot and that is true (I do actually shoot what I want but I am doing mainly studio stuff, not the long term plan but..), give it a little time with research and look for the content there is already on agencies and see if it will work for you :)

« Reply #34 on: July 15, 2011, 14:12 »
0
Likely, micro isn't something you really want to do, if this is the kind of thing you like to shoot.  You just think you want to do it.
Microstock is defiantly something I want to do, the fact is just prior to today I thought I could waltz in and start selling my images. All the feedback from family and friends was good, obviously they don't live up to the standards in the industry and have already been shot a million times.

Ask yourself honestly: Are you sure you want to get into the stock photography business?  There's a lot more to it than just shooting whatever you like with whatever camera you have on hand.  Get ready to:

1) Spend tens of thousands of dollars on equipment and continuing education.  The camera body alone should be replaced every few years.
2) Spend significantly more time on editing, keywording, uploading, and dealing with the daily details of running a business than you will actual photography time.
3) Have agencies regularly tell you that your photos look like crap (you'll need a really thick skin).
4) Compete against some of the best stock photographers in the world.   

« Reply #35 on: July 15, 2011, 14:18 »
0
I would also recommend a photography class with real people. You need to practise how to shoot, how to light, how to set up your equipment. An online class is good for photoshop.

Once youve signed up with an agency you can ask around in the forum to see if there is another newbie in your area that you can team up with.

Learning stock is great fun and even if after a year you decide you want to go back to shooting flowers and family, you will have learnt a lot. It certainly forced me to become a much better photographer.

« Reply #36 on: July 15, 2011, 18:19 »
0
Will,

I think your priorities are inversed. If you are looking after a photography course, it appears that your photo skills are too basic. Family and friends are not the best to give advice, and the samples you provided show you have a long way to learn just in terms of composition (most images have very centered horizon lines, to begin with). Try this 13-question quiz to see how you go:
http://www.shutterpoint.com/Home-Quiz.cfm

It's nice that you've embraced photography, and I hope you go on with this passion, but it's a long way before you can take it to the commercial level, IMHO.

I agree with the others that a real life course is better. I've never done one myself, but I was taught photography by my father, who knew a lot about composition and exposure - and those were film days in which you really tried to get the right exposure in just one or two shots.

Give it time, learn, try, shoot a lot. Digital cameras make it much easier to learn by trial-and-error, but it should not be a try-and-hope-one-is-good. Understand what you are doing with the different setting, what results you get, then learn to choose the settings you need to obtain what you want. Once you are past this point, then you can try your skills for commercial purposes - microstock, macrostock, art photo, whatever suits you better.

« Reply #37 on: July 15, 2011, 18:32 »
0
Will,

I give you huge cudos for coming into this forum and asking for help.  And taking the high road for the feedback you're getting.  It's called having think skin.  If you keep listening to these fine photographers' advice, create a plan (tiered plans each with a desired outcome and metric that helps you understand whether you met that outcome) you can make it.

1. Skills (shooting and key wording)
2. Initial Shooting Plan
3. Shoot
4. Post process
5. Upload to a couple of agencies
6. Assess any rejections (get critique)
7. Start building a port around your new competencies
8. Grow competencies = grow port
9. Make a few bucks

I think you have the attitude to make something work for you.

Good luck.

« Reply #38 on: July 15, 2011, 19:21 »
0
1. Skills (shooting and key wording)
2. Initial Shooting Plan
3. Shoot
4. Post process
5. Upload to a couple of agencies
6. Assess any rejections (get critique)
7. Start building a port around your new competencies
8. Grow competencies = grow port
9. Make a few bucks
I think that is a good plan that I should set up and follow. I hope to purchase a DSLR Camera soon.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #39 on: July 17, 2011, 19:59 »
0
I am also going to be buying Photoshop CS5 and Lightroom soon to help aid my photos.
Although if you're a student you can get these at a great discount, seriously consider buying Elements and using the savings to add to your camera/lens fund.

« Reply #40 on: July 17, 2011, 21:28 »
0
I am also going to be buying Photoshop CS5 and Lightroom soon to help aid my photos.
Although if you're a student you can get these at a great discount, seriously consider buying Elements and using the savings to add to your camera/lens fund.

I didn't think you could use (officially) student versions for commercial works even if you are a student.

« Reply #41 on: July 17, 2011, 21:32 »
0
I didn't think you could use (officially) student versions for commercial works even if you are a student.
All they need is a student ID card.

« Reply #42 on: July 17, 2011, 22:06 »
0
They keep on changing the terms and conditions of the student/education versions. 
Ah, here we are. the education FAQ
http://www.adobe.com/education/students/studentteacheredition/faq.html

"Can I use my Adobe Student and Teacher Edition software for commercial use?

Yes. You may purchase a Student and Teacher Edition for personal as well as commercial use.


Can I use Adobe Student and Teacher Edition software on more than one computer?

Adobe Student and Teacher Edition software may be used on two computers only. This is ensured through a product activation procedure, which is performed online.

Can I upgrade my Adobe Student and Teacher Edition software?

Adobe Student and Teacher Edition software can be upgraded to a commercial version when the user is no longer a student or teacher. "

TheSmilingAssassin

    This user is banned.
« Reply #43 on: July 17, 2011, 22:32 »
0
Will,

I'm going to be brutally honest with you cause that's what you're looking for, yes?

Your enthusiasm is great but you're a long way away from uploading, I believe.  Looking at your photos, the only one that's stocky is the balloon as other's have mentioned, but even that needs work.  People are saying that the images are too small for them to critique them but I say if they're not obviously beautiful in the size you've provided then they're not good enough in any size.  From what I've been reading, I don't think microstock is for you or perhaps microstock alone isn't for you.  You're more interested in photographic art rather than commercially oriented photos.  If you improved your technique, you might be better off selling printed versions of your work rather than just microstock.  

That peach rose is pretty boring and looks like a photo everyone typically has of a flower in their backyard.  The purple rose could have had some potential if done properly.  You should have wet it first, taken a close up and possibly sold prints of it.  As it is, it's just a poor photo of a really nice rose.  The B&W image between the two flowers could have had some potential if done properly.... again not so much for microstock, but for print.  You should get rid of the person in the background for starters and perhaps manipulate the photo to add contrast.  If you really enjoy monochrome photography, you might want to pick up some HDR skills.  The rest of the images in your gallery are just terrible and not worth a comment.  If you can't see that they're terrible on your own then you really need to spend some time looking at quality images and learn from them.

Here's some B&W photos of a designer pal that I've featured in my poor neglected blog.  I love his stuff and he does really well selling prints...

http://sunnymarsdesigns.blogspot.com/2010/11/featured-photographer-highton-ridley.html

Also check this link out...

http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/2E4fzQ/www.hongkiat.com/blog/water-photography-black-white/

Compare your work with some of the best and ask yourself, do you measure up?  You really don't even need to be asking questions in here because the best of the best photographers aren't here... there's some really good microstock photographers here though but from what you seem to be interested in shooting, I think you need to compare your work with artists who produce similar work and figure out what they're doing with them, how and where they're selling them.  If you have a passion for shooting artistic photography then stick to that and bugger off micrstock.  There's probably more money in the other anyway.

Make use of googe :)

Cheers and good luck!

SNP

  • Canadian Photographer
« Reply #44 on: July 17, 2011, 23:49 »
0
so, pseudo...didn't you just recently state in another thread that you're not even a photographer? to the OP, look...you seem to want to give this a go. quit asking questions and go do it. see if you have the knack. if not, go do something else. good luck  ;)
« Last Edit: July 17, 2011, 23:51 by SNP »

TheSmilingAssassin

    This user is banned.
« Reply #45 on: July 18, 2011, 00:39 »
0
so, pseudo...didn't you just recently state in another thread that you're not even a photographer? to the OP, look...you seem to want to give this a go. quit asking questions and go do it. see if you have the knack. if not, go do something else. good luck  ;)

Didn't I also say that one doesn't need to have a clue in producing photos to be able to review photography?  Looks like you don't have much experience outside of microstock... or outside of iStock for the last 4 years.  iStock isn't what it's cracked up to be.  Actually it's pretty crap lately and at the end of the day, it's just microstock.  I don't think iStock's 15% commissions will help finance Will's desire to travel lol. 

If this guy has a preference for producing fine art, then he should consider other avenues outside of microstock because there's more to gain outside of it (not just financially).  Joining microstock four years ago is a lot different to joining it now.  Also it's up to him whether he wants to take my advice, not you.  Personally, I find it difficult to bother with the opinion of anyone that's been kept in a bubble for the last four years.  It's probably difficult for you to believe, but a lot goes on outside of iStock :)

« Reply #46 on: July 18, 2011, 01:25 »
0
Pseudonymous,

Your reply is excellent, many have asked me the question if I really want to do microstock...and well the answer is I do! I am working hard on building up knowledge, techniques and skills that best suite microstock photography.

However, I loved the photos in the links you sent me (Especially in the second link). Some of those Black and White images were breathe taking.

The reason I want to do microstock is because it allows me to build up a genuine photography foundation. Of course I want to travel and take amazing shots like those featured in your links, hopefully one day if I work hard and excel in microstock I will have the funding to do so.

Also my current work is just down right rubbish, mostly taken with my mobile phone. I do have plans to purchase a DSLR and start producing some "quality" shots.

Thank your for your reply,

Sincerely
-Will Dutt

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #47 on: July 18, 2011, 04:25 »
0
I am also going to be buying Photoshop CS5 and Lightroom soon to help aid my photos.
Although if you're a student you can get these at a great discount, seriously consider buying Elements and using the savings to add to your camera/lens fund.

I didn't think you could use (officially) student versions for commercial works even if you are a student.
You couldn't back at PS7, but you can now.

« Reply #48 on: July 18, 2011, 05:38 »
0
Will
I only came across this website today and have been browsing out of curiosity at the forums and discovered your threads. Although having been a professional photographer for over thirty years I am fairly new to the 'micro' stock image market albeit having been aware of it's growing existence for a number of years, PS Don't be fooled by my user name I have never sold stock images I just made the name up - my cat's called Roxx! Amongst many of my fellow professional and accredited press photographers stock photography seems to have a reputation of being a bit low end - the sort of place you go to when your either retire or don't have any commissions. Basically, if you're looking for a picture of a kettle isolated on a white background or a toothy cheesy model smiling at the camera you go to a microstock site. The growth in these sites is mainly due to non-too-fussy companies looking to buy cheaper images for ad campaigns and equally non-too-fussy advertising agencies looking to buy cheap images and upscale their charges to their client basically ripping them off.

Photography is a profession and one that can give you a great deal of satisfaction and money too. If your looking to develop a proper career in photography the last place you should look is toward stock sites. I say this for one reason, these places are where budding amateur snappers aspire to go with their cheap low/mid end DSLR's, where they can make a few dollars each month. Will, you must have a higher ambition than that. I guess from your posts your a youngster just getting into this area, take the advise of a seasoned pro - don't set your sights too low. Photography is not about a perfectly lit, sanitized pretty picture. It's about capturing a moment in time that stands the test and marks a record of that time.  Photography is not about taking pictures of kettles, keyboards, staged business meetings with cheesy models for a few bucks.

In regard to equipment, keep your mobile phone to make telephone calls and buy a decent camera. It is not going to be cheap to get started but you can always grow your 'kit' over time. I started out with good cameras over thirty years ago and believe me, it makes a big difference. In those days we used film SLR's, and I had an Olympus OM1 and an Olympus OM2N - still have them and even use them sometimes now and again when teaching. When the world went digital most professionals were wary until the resolutions could match our beloved Kodachrome 25. When they did (and in some cases exceed) many pro's switched. Today I use Nikons for nearly everything, D3, D3X, 700 and an older D40 (for teaching and snaps). If you can, get one of the newish Nikon's - their 7000 it's nearly as good as the 700 and less than half the price. Check out a useful website www.kenrockwell.com he does very useful comparisons and generally supports the Nikon brand. Personally, I would stay well clear of anything from Canon, Sony, Olympus - the quality is low end and don't be tempted just because their cheap - their aimed at the amateur market, at least with Nikon, even the mid price ones, you're getting into a stable of professional kit which you can grow. Bear in mind also, as you are starting out, switching brands later when you realise you made a mistake is going to be very expensive. Painful as it might be, start out on the right foot now if you can. Don't skimp on lenses either, generally, stay clear of the compatible lenses like Sigma and Tamron - their never as good (I am generalising a bit) as a branded lens - Nikon make really good lenses but so do Canon, albeit the Canon camera bodies are poor and therefore, for me, a non-starter.

I noticed you mention a particular stock site, iStockphoto. Even with my limited experience in the microstock market even I have heard about these folks. In the pro world their called iFlop - as they are rapidly diminishing their market share and treat both customers and I also believe contributors very badly. I was sent a link to one of their forums recently by a pal and I have to say it was laughable how the 'admins' (which they are called) treat people on the discussion boards. I work with Getty images (who own iflop) and I have heard some horror stories from the guy's there! One stock site that I understand does have good reputation is called Shutterstock.com - they are the biggest stock site and I understand act very professionally.

Get your feet wet by getting in touch with some local professional photographers and ask if you can spend some time with them watching, observing and helping. Most pro's will probably allow you a few days. I have guy's and girls regularly helping me out and it actually is quite fun, particularly during semesters and holidays. Or approach your local paper and volunteer to supply pictures to them, if your pictures are good enough maybe they'll use them and probably pay you for them as well.

Forgive the irony, but I would not take too much notice of what you read on forums either - even after a day of reading a few posts a lot of it (albeit basically good advice) is the blind leading the blind. Amateurs, even gifted ones, are amateurs and pro's are pro's. There is a difference and you need to mix with real photographers which means getting out there and seeing how they work, I doubt you'll derive much wisdom here, again forgive the irony.

Finally, Good luck in your ambitions, I wish you well and remember one thing, it isn't about taking a picture that sells something else - it about a picture that sells itself.

TheSmilingAssassin

    This user is banned.
« Reply #49 on: July 18, 2011, 05:55 »
0
Will
I only came across this website today and have been browsing out of curiosity at the forums and discovered your threads. Although having been a professional photographer for over thirty years I am fairly new to the 'micro' stock image market albeit having been aware of it's growing existence for a number of years, PS Don't be fooled by my user name I have never sold stock images I just made the name up - my cat's called Roxx! Amongst many of my fellow professional and accredited press photographers stock photography seems to have a reputation of being a bit low end - the sort of place you go to when your either retire or don't have any commissions. Basically, if you're looking for a picture of a kettle isolated on a white background or a toothy cheesy model smiling at the camera you go to a microstock site. The growth in these sites is mainly due to non-too-fussy companies looking to buy cheaper images for ad campaigns and equally non-too-fussy advertising agencies looking to buy cheap images and upscale their charges to their client basically ripping them off.

Photography is a profession and one that can give you a great deal of satisfaction and money too. If your looking to develop a proper career in photography the last place you should look is toward stock sites. I say this for one reason, these places are where budding amateur snappers aspire to go with their cheap low/mid end DSLR's, where they can make a few dollars each month. Will, you must have a higher ambition than that. I guess from your posts your a youngster just getting into this area, take the advise of a seasoned pro - don't set your sights too low. Photography is not about a perfectly lit, sanitized pretty picture. It's about capturing a moment in time that stands the test and marks a record of that time.  Photography is not about taking pictures of kettles, keyboards, staged business meetings with cheesy models for a few bucks.

In regard to equipment, keep your mobile phone to make telephone calls and buy a decent camera. It is not going to be cheap to get started but you can always grow your 'kit' over time. I started out with good cameras over thirty years ago and believe me, it makes a big difference. In those days we used film SLR's, and I had an Olympus OM1 and an Olympus OM2N - still have them and even use them sometimes now and again when teaching. When the world went digital most professionals were wary until the resolutions could match our beloved Kodachrome 25. When they did (and in some cases exceed) many pro's switched. Today I use Nikons for nearly everything, D3, D3X, 700 and an older D40 (for teaching and snaps). If you can, get one of the newish Nikon's - their 7000 it's nearly as good as the 700 and less than half the price. Check out a useful website www.kenrockwell.com he does very useful comparisons and generally supports the Nikon brand. Personally, I would stay well clear of anything from Canon, Sony, Olympus - the quality is low end and don't be tempted just because their cheap - their aimed at the amateur market, at least with Nikon, even the mid price ones, you're getting into a stable of professional kit which you can grow. Bear in mind also, as you are starting out, switching brands later when you realise you made a mistake is going to be very expensive. Painful as it might be, start out on the right foot now if you can. Don't skimp on lenses either, generally, stay clear of the compatible lenses like Sigma and Tamron - their never as good (I am generalising a bit) as a branded lens - Nikon make really good lenses but so do Canon, albeit the Canon camera bodies are poor and therefore, for me, a non-starter.

I noticed you mention a particular stock site, iStockphoto. Even with my limited experience in the microstock market even I have heard about these folks. In the pro world their called iFlop - as they are rapidly diminishing their market share and treat both customers and I also believe contributors very badly. I was sent a link to one of their forums recently by a pal and I have to say it was laughable how the 'admins' (which they are called) treat people on the discussion boards. I work with Getty images (who own iflop) and I have heard some horror stories from the guy's there! One stock site that I understand does have good reputation is called Shutterstock.com - they are the biggest stock site and I understand act very professionally.

Get your feet wet by getting in touch with some local professional photographers and ask if you can spend some time with them watching, observing and helping. Most pro's will probably allow you a few days. I have guy's and girls regularly helping me out and it actually is quite fun, particularly during semesters and holidays. Or approach your local paper and volunteer to supply pictures to them, if your pictures are good enough maybe they'll use them and probably pay you for them as well.

Forgive the irony, but I would not take too much notice of what you read on forums either - even after a day of reading a few posts a lot of it (albeit basically good advice) is the blind leading the blind. Amateurs, even gifted ones, are amateurs and pro's are pro's. There is a difference and you need to mix with real photographers which means getting out there and seeing how they work, I doubt you'll derive much wisdom here, again forgive the irony.

Finally, Good luck in your ambitions, I wish you well and remember one thing, it isn't about taking a picture that sells something else - it about a picture that sells itself.


ROFL!  iFlop, that's even better than iSuck.

Your post by far is the best I've read in here so far :D  Thank you!!


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
3547 Views
Last post November 26, 2006, 10:03
by Pichunter
7 Replies
3699 Views
Last post July 02, 2009, 16:21
by madelaide
24 Replies
7054 Views
Last post October 03, 2011, 19:13
by PaulieWalnuts
21 Replies
9591 Views
Last post July 04, 2012, 18:20
by luissantos84
6 Replies
2879 Views
Last post October 18, 2012, 05:20
by ShadySue

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors