Author Topic: Opinions Wanted (Read 15160 times)

Magnum · « **Reply #25 on:** April 13, 2009, 14:49 »

The basics is all about photography. How the camera works. wich lenses to use. aperture/shutterspeed. composition etc etc

You seems pretty eager to get a portfolio up and running at Istock. I´d cool down a bit and get it right first, and save some temper and acceptance rate if I were you. I know, I´m also the eager type

Good luck

null · « **Reply #26 on:** April 13, 2009, 14:54 »

Quote from: tillencik on April 13, 2009, 13:44

I take a ton of pictures of family members and pets, which are useless as stock.

Not at all. Family and generation images in a natural environment are sought after in stock. You just have to "direct" your models well, so they look cheering and happy, or inclusive and caring. Just go to any stock site and look for "family" and check the best selling shots for ideas.

Everybody has to start, but you might try some easier subjects before people shots, where you have to divide your attention between your cam and the people. Your cam mastering should be automatic in people's situations. Or you can try all possible settings in the environment when the models are not there yet, then just keep those settings. Look carefully at the histogram and zoom in to 100% on the LCD (if your cam has one) to check for lighting and focus. If not, just halt the shoot, and look at a laptop at 100%, then adjust if necessary.

You also need some basic digital photography tutorials, like cambridgeincolour and Photoshop tutorials. There are many online if you Google for it.

There are a lot of good stuff, how to handle/guide models, and Photoshop tricks on Youtube too.

tillencik · « **Reply #27 on:** April 13, 2009, 15:06 »

Quote from: Magnum on April 13, 2009, 14:49

The basics is all about photography. How the camera works. wich lenses to use. aperture/shutterspeed. composition etc etc

You seems pretty eager to get a portfolio up and running at Istock. I´d cool down a bit and get it right first, and save some temper and acceptance rate if I were you. I know, I´m also the eager type

Good luck

I read the manual, Scott Kelby's The Digital Photography Book, and Michal Henron's Digital Stock Photography: How to Shoot and Sell. I didn't just jump in, and 7/10 of my photos that were initially submitted to istock and shutterstock would have been accepted if I downloaded a better model release. Just here for some opinions on how to improve.

tillencik · « **Reply #28 on:** April 13, 2009, 15:09 »

Quote from: FlemishDreams on April 13, 2009, 14:54

Quote from: tillencik on April 13, 2009, 13:44
I take a ton of pictures of family members and pets, which are useless as stock.

Not at all. Family and generation images in a natural environment are sought after in stock. You just have to "direct" your models well, so they look cheering and happy, or inclusive and caring. Just go to any stock site and look for "family" and check the best selling shots for ideas.

Everybody has to start, but you might try some easier subjects before people shots, where you have to divide your attention between your cam and the people. Your cam mastering should be automatic in people's situations. Or you can try all possible settings in the environment when the models are not there yet, then just keep those settings. Look carefully at the histogram and zoom in to 100% on the LCD (if your cam has one) to check for lighting and focus. If not, just halt the shoot, and look at a laptop at 100%, then adjust if necessary.

You also need some basic digital photography tutorials, like cambridgeincolour and Photoshop tutorials. There are many online if you Google for it.

There are a lot of good stuff, how to handle/guide models, and Photoshop tricks on Youtube too.

My family members won't sign model releases because they're paranoid about having their pictures for sale on the internet. I doubt my dog would object though.

Magnum · « **Reply #29 on:** April 13, 2009, 15:22 »

Show some nice family/baby shots. And how much there is to earn

They´ll see what it´s all about. I got the same reaction here

Dreamframer · « **Reply #30 on:** April 13, 2009, 16:00 »

tillencik, I know how you feel and I understand your desire to take professional shots immediately. But don't waste your money paying to some other photographers for lighting. There are tons of tutorials and movies on internet about this. Also, I am sure you can take good enough photos outside, without any artificial lighting. You can take a look at my portfolio. You will see there that most of my images are taken outside. After one year and few months in microstock I still consider my self beginner, and I enjoy learning and experimenting. Don't rush...take your time. Take your camera and learn setting by setting. Soon you will see that you are starting to do it easily. Experiment with aperture priority mode, and shutter priority mode on your camera. There is no recipe for instant success. The main point is to enjoy while learning and success will come naturally.... Ask people, search internet, learn from rejections and don't take them too hard. Don't take anyones comment too hard....

batman · « **Reply #31 on:** April 13, 2009, 16:14 »

Quote from: tillencik on April 13, 2009, 13:18

Quote from: Magnum on April 13, 2009, 12:42
You paid a man to set up the lighting? And you have barely learn to control your camera.?? You don´t sound so interested?? If I got my hand on a studio setup. I´d try different settings and positions til my fingers bled. where´s your learning curve?

Why so ignorant?

i don't think magnum was being ignorant, but rather being honest. you seem to be in a big hurry to get good without the effort. the old saying still applies, for earning a masters or learning the ropes of any skill, it's 90% perspiration and 10% inspiration. you seem to get it the other way around.

no one here is out to offend you, just being realistic . remember we were there before.
you need to apply yourself more, and stop taking every word we say personally. it isn't about you, it's just means you have to make the effort to work at it. one session does not make you a pro.
paying a "pro" to set up your lights does not make you any better either, only poorer.
i hope you understand what we are all trying to tell you.

Quote from: RT on April 13, 2009, 14:43

Watch out for singed eyebrows

ouch, too late RT. why do you think i am wearing a mask?

madelaide · « **Reply #32 on:** April 13, 2009, 17:05 »

Quote from: tillencik on April 13, 2009, 15:09

My family members won't sign model releases because they're paranoid about having their pictures for sale on the internet. I doubt my dog would object though.

They would still be a good means of learning before you spend money in studio and models. Natural lighting may lead to great portraits.

What people are suggesting is that you learn photography well before. Learn your camera settings. Learn lighting. Know your lenses, their strengths and weaknesses. Your time is already limited, and it's much worse if you get on a trial-and-error process.

I think someone mentioned here a while ago that there is a niche for images in university environment. Maybe this is something to explore better than studio. I for one don't take studio shots (nor people shots, as a matter of fact).

tillencik · « **Reply #33 on:** April 14, 2009, 09:16 »

Quote

i don't think magnum was being ignorant, but rather being honest. you seem to be in a big hurry to get good without the effort. the old saying still applies, for earning a masters or learning the ropes of any skill, it's 90% perspiration and 10% inspiration. you seem to get it the other way around.

no one here is out to offend you, just being realistic . remember we were there before.
you need to apply yourself more, and stop taking every word we say personally. it isn't about you, it's just means you have to make the effort to work at it. one session does not make you a pro.
paying a "pro" to set up your lights does not make you any better either, only poorer.
i hope you understand what we are all trying to tell you.
o you think i am wearing a mask?

Well it sounded ignorant. I paid a professional to help me achieve the proper lighting and let me use his equipment. I know how to control my camera.. maybe not as well as most of you.. but I'm not some idiot who opened the box and immediately scheduled a shoot. I do my homework.

tillencik · « **Reply #34 on:** April 14, 2009, 09:17 »

Quote from: Magnum on April 13, 2009, 15:22

Show some nice family/baby shots. And how much there is to earn They´ll see what it´s all about. I got the same reaction here

Tried.. still nothing. I posted on craiglist looking for families that might be interested in helping and got a great response, but haven't had time to meet up with any of them yet.

batman · « **Reply #35 on:** April 14, 2009, 09:24 »

Quote from: tillencik on April 14, 2009, 09:16

Quote
i don't think magnum was being ignorant, but rather being honest. you seem to be in a big hurry to get good without the effort. the old saying still applies, for earning a masters or learning the ropes of any skill, it's 90% perspiration and 10% inspiration. you seem to get it the other way around.

no one here is out to offend you, just being realistic . remember we were there before.
you need to apply yourself more, and stop taking every word we say personally. it isn't about you, it's just means you have to make the effort to work at it. one session does not make you a pro.
paying a "pro" to set up your lights does not make you any better either, only poorer.
i hope you understand what we are all trying to tell you.
o you think i am wearing a mask?

Well it sounded ignorant. I paid a professional to help me achieve the proper lighting and let me use his equipment. I know how to control my camera.. maybe not as well as most of you.. but I'm not some idiot who opened the box and immediately scheduled a shoot. I do my homework.

with this sort of "cup full" attitude you 're in the wrong perspective to gain any help from any of us.
i think you are wasting your time and our time if you post threads asking people for help and then
calling their comments idiotic. if it's adulation rather than help that you wanted, why not come right out and say it.

finally, if you are find magnum's comment idiotic, oh believe me, compared to some reviewers like Atilla, magnum's a pussycat.

tillencik · « **Reply #36 on:** April 14, 2009, 09:40 »

Quote from: batman on April 14, 2009, 09:24

with this sort of "cup full" attitude you 're in the wrong perspective to gain any help from any of us.
i think you are wasting your time and our time if you post threads asking people for help and then
calling their comments idiotic. if it's adulation rather than help that you wanted, why not come right out and say it.

finally, if you are find magnum's comment idiotic, oh believe me, compared to some reviewers like Atilla, magnum's a pussycat.

I want opinions.. good or bad.. about THE PICTURES. I don't want assumptions being made about my personality, attitude, or motives.

batman · « **Reply #37 on:** April 14, 2009, 20:38 »

Quote from: tillencik on April 14, 2009, 09:40

I want opinions.. good or bad.. about THE PICTURES. I don't want assumptions being made about my personality, attitude, or motives.

take care

Dreamframer · « **Reply #38 on:** April 15, 2009, 05:30 »

OK tillencik, calm down. Don't be mad at us. I hope you understand that when you mention you didn't know benefits of shooting in RAW you really sound like a complete beginner. I guess that's the main reason why everybody started to give you advices, including me.
We didn't understand what you need and sorry for that.

About the images:
White balance isn't correct. Always shoot in RAW because it helps a lot if you need to correct white balance on your computer after shooting. It also helps a bit if you need to correct improper exposure. You should achieve natural look of your subjects, unless you didn't make it look unnatural with purpose. Every unnatural look that isn't with clear purpose looks odd, and won't be accepted by most agencies.
I hope this helps.

tillencik · « **Reply #39 on:** April 15, 2009, 15:33 »

Quote from: Whitechild on April 15, 2009, 05:30

About the images:
White balance isn't correct. Always shoot in RAW because it helps a lot if you need to correct white balance on your computer after shooting. It also helps a bit if you need to correct improper exposure. You should achieve natural look of your subjects, unless you didn't make it look unnatural with purpose. Every unnatural look that isn't with clear purpose looks odd, and won't be accepted by most agencies.
I hope this helps.

I didn't plan on correction the white balance because I thought the lighting would be right. I know there are sensors to test the balance of the background while shooting.. do many people invest in those?

RT · « **Reply #40 on:** April 15, 2009, 16:21 »

Quote from: tillencik on April 15, 2009, 15:33

I didn't plan on correction the white balance because I thought the lighting would be right.

The lighting had nothing to do with your white balance error, please try and understand nobody expects you to get it right first time, you're constantly blaming the poor guy that set the studio up for you, the white balance problem you've got is because of the way YOU set your camera.

Now I suggest if you want to learn how to do it right next time listen to people who have tried to help you, I presume the sensor you mention is a colour temperature gauge, and the answer would be no I doubt anybody here uses one because you don't need one, you've mentioned you've read your manual - go back and read it again because in there it will explain how to set a custom white balance.

hqimages · « **Reply #41 on:** April 15, 2009, 17:48 »

Hi there! With reference to the original post, yes, you have a good idea of stock photography concepts, the model looks great and very natural, so well done!

When it comes to microstock, manual setting are best, so you need to learn how to do a custom white balance, and then in Photoshop levels and curves are v.useful.. unfortunately one of the worst things you can do for a stock portrait is to blow out highlights, as it is almost impossible to get detail back, but you could get these images up to scratch to get accepted by some of the microstock sites (There's a chance istock will always have issues with the blown highlights no matter how much you improve it with ps).. but well done, great model, nice poses, all you need is white balance, some more teaching about lighting, and definately lots of playtime in photoshop!!

madelaide · « **Reply #42 on:** April 15, 2009, 19:35 »

Is it my uncalibrated monitor, is it hq's edition too cyan?

Regards,
Adelaide

hqimages · « **Reply #43 on:** April 15, 2009, 19:55 »

Quote from: madelaide on April 15, 2009, 19:35

Is it my uncalibrated monitor, is it hq's edition too cyan?

Regards,
Adelaide

Hi Adelaide, I don't want approval from anyone for that edit, it's just an example of what can be done with some experimentation on an image that may seem hopeless (In fact you can make an image that started off yellow, look blue

).. but I do not want approval or a critique from anyone for that, thanks all!

madelaide · « **Reply #44 on:** April 15, 2009, 20:04 »

hq,

I meant no critique, but as it was an edited version and I was seeing it with a cyan hue, I was wondering if my uncalibrated monitor was too off.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Opinions Wanted (Read 15160 times)

Magnum

null

tillencik

tillencik

Magnum

Dreamframer

batman

madelaide

tillencik

tillencik

batman

tillencik

batman

Dreamframer

tillencik

RT

hqimages

madelaide

hqimages

madelaide

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors