pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: SS Application Critique, Please...  (Read 6650 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.



sc

« Reply #1 on: January 19, 2012, 19:43 »
0
For ShutterStock Editorial images need to be newsworthy.
You should read their articles on ShutterBuzz before you consider uploading editorial images in your initial 10.
If you don't follow their format to the letter they will bet bounced.
http://www.shutterstock.com/buzz/creating-the-perfect-editorial-caption

« Reply #2 on: January 19, 2012, 19:54 »
0
Thanks!

But in the ShutterBuzz I also found

Ask yourself: why is this newsworthy? Remember, all photos of famous landmarks or cities can be newsworthy, even if they are not taken during a particular event. You simply need to find the news angle (Example 4)

« Reply #3 on: January 19, 2012, 19:58 »
0
http://www.dreamstime.com/office-building-image19428468
http://www.dreamstime.com/office-building-and-blue-sky-image19434932
http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-photography-sesame-cracker-image18611472
(perhaps too bright on the  top)
http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-photo-the-city-and-the-art-image20238250
(crop the tents below and the arch on the right, you have another pic from the same place but sky not as vibrant as this one)
http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-images-view-of-milan-image21726114

http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-image-dried-dates-image22523886
(not the best isolation, we see some of the "plate" but like it perhaps they will too)
http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photography-instant-coffee-image18820907
(or this one, again, top of the picture, isolation doesnt look very nice, for SS is acceptable)

http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photos-boat-trip-image19757718
(like it a lot but dont know, low commercial value perhaps but show some artistic side from you)
http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-images-meazza-stadium-image17701614
(dont know about the noise and it does need a top cleaning, make it pure white)

http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photo-accessories-street-stand-image20566205
(like this one too but perhaps lcv, I actually see tons of uses for it)

it would be nice to send a portrait too but not needed, overall you need to approach more stock pictures, tons of editorial and I dont see many success browsing agencies sales, hope that I have helped a little
« Last Edit: January 19, 2012, 20:00 by luissantos84 »

« Reply #4 on: January 19, 2012, 21:05 »
0
Thanks Luis!

You are totally right about my portfolio not being very stock oriented. The thing is that I really enjoy the editorial/hand-on camera photography. I am moving the first steps in the in-studio, but it will tak years. For now I would just like to make myself visible, enjoy, learn.
I agree on many of your picks, except for the sesame cracker, the coffee and the stadium shot...I would choose others instead of those 3.
Anyway thanks a lot!

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #5 on: January 20, 2012, 00:20 »
0
Standards at SS are very high and are continually going up higher yet every year if not sooner.

What you have on DT SS will probably only accept 50% if that.

Each site is different with different rules.

« Reply #6 on: January 20, 2012, 07:30 »
0
Thanks, Rux. In fact this tread was to help me in choosing 10 files among that 50%!

« Reply #7 on: January 20, 2012, 09:11 »
0
I checked your port, and its full of trademarks, they will never get in on SS. Why in the world do you only photograph trademarks.

I picked a few out , that I think might have a chance, IF they are well exposed, noise free and sharp. You DO have to check at 100%:

ID: 20829984
ID: 18695491
ID: 22008920 (change the colour and the trademark)
ID: 17701614
ID: 17995124 + MR
ID: 18378668
ID: 18141644 I think no MR needed, but check licenceplates
ID: 19757718
ID: 20805623
ID: 19208470 Check for trademarks

« Reply #8 on: January 20, 2012, 12:00 »
0
Why so many trademarks?
Why not? As I said, I like to walk and take street photos. I know that the artistic street photography is not commercial, so I use those shots for exhibition in cafes. But when I see a brand I take a shot and noticed they sell on agencies...

Thanks for the feed back! So, I reviewed the 10 shots list and, after your suggestions, I am thinking to send:

http://www.dreamstime.com/earning_det.php?imageid=19428468
http://www.dreamstime.com/earning_det.php?imageid=19982122
http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photos-boat-trip-image19757718
http://www.dreamstime.com/caribbean-resort-image18378668    blurred faces and deleted logo
http://www.dreamstime.com/directions-and-distances-image20805623
http://www.dreamstime.com/earning_det.php?imageid=18953468    deleted logo
http://www.dreamstime.com/earning_det.php?imageid=21287376
http://www.dreamstime.com/earning_det.php?imageid=22557990
http://www.dreamstime.com/earning_det.php?imageid=21477768
http://www.dreamstime.com/earning_det.php?imageid=19465420

please let me know what you think and what I should change in your opinion!

Thanks!

« Reply #9 on: January 20, 2012, 12:10 »
0
ja, they seem OK.
Except for the second: http://www.dreamstime.com/earning_det.php?imageid=19982122
which has no direct trademarks, but the shop owner can recognize it and might make a claim. Thats a risk. Shutterstock might not take it or they might. For the first 10 i wouldnt take that risk.
The rusty car might also be danged,  try it later, its risky in the first 10.

Important is that all pictures should hold water in 100%, and I cannot judge that.
You can sitemail me, and we might take it over skype, or something. If you want?

« Reply #10 on: January 21, 2012, 08:30 »
0
Thanks JPSDK!!! I really appreciate, but I ended up sending the first 10. Couldn't wait anymore, the wait was killing me...let's see what is the outcome! I will keep you posted!

« Reply #11 on: January 21, 2012, 09:24 »
0
Thanks JPSDK!!! I really appreciate, but I ended up sending the first 10. Couldn't wait anymore, the wait was killing me...let's see what is the outcome! I will keep you posted!

sorry to tell but you should have taken our advices, best of luck anyway

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #12 on: January 21, 2012, 10:39 »
0
If you have submitted your ten then you already have your answer by now.

They look at newbies pretty quick.

Only thing is you didn't post in the Critique / Tips / Tricks forum for I and a few others to check and let you know if they will make the cut!

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #13 on: January 21, 2012, 10:50 »
0
For ShutterStock Editorial images need to be newsworthy.
Have they ever explained why they think 'newsworthy editorial' is a good angle for micro?
(how fast is their inspection?)
Surely secondary editorial is a better match for micro? (if indeed the micro model is a good one for editorial)

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #14 on: January 21, 2012, 11:00 »
0
I checked your port, and its full of trademarks, they will never get in on SS. Why in the world do you only photograph trademarks.
They seem to be what sells best for him/her.

« Reply #15 on: January 21, 2012, 12:44 »
0
Thanks JPSDK!!! I really appreciate, but I ended up sending the first 10. Couldn't wait anymore, the wait was killing me...let's see what is the outcome! I will keep you posted!

sorry to tell but you should have taken our advices, best of luck anyway

I was not clear! I followed your advice, of course! I uploaded the last list I wrote with a couple of exceptions...not sent yet, though, I am carefully tagging the images...
If you have last minute tips, let me know!
thanks!

« Reply #16 on: January 21, 2012, 13:12 »
0
you got 2 of my 10 picks.. seriously good luck

« Reply #17 on: January 21, 2012, 13:28 »
0
last minute advice would be to check them in 100%
Its impossible to see via DT, they are super over sharpened there.

« Reply #18 on: January 21, 2012, 13:33 »
0
did it already!
Also 200%!

That is why I did not considered some of your suggestion. Some small chromatic aberration, some not really sharp image...I tried to get the best. Anyway, they are all images approved by DT in the last year, so they shouldn't be so bad, technically...am I correct? Maybe SS is stricter, but I don't see big tech faults...

« Reply #19 on: January 21, 2012, 13:47 »
0
none are stricter, they are different. So you cant count on anything.
When first you get used to the agencies, its pretty easy to predict what they might like, and then suddently you get unexpected rejections. So you cant really predict at all.
There are no guarantees.

Fx I have quite many rejections at FOT whenever I postprocess, fx with HDR, they dont like that. SS does, they like all kinds of fancy pictures, as long as there is no noise and shadows.

DT is super easy, and then suddently sometimes, they reject a whole bunch for an unexpected reaqson. Istock are the worst, they are completely unpredictable, when you are an indie....
They take all kind of crap right out of the camera, but are hard to satisfy with postprocessing. I dont know how many times I have had the "either to feathered or too rough" rejection.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2012, 13:50 by JPSDK »

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #20 on: January 21, 2012, 13:49 »
0
Thanks JPSDK!!! I really appreciate, but I ended up sending the first 10. Couldn't wait anymore, the wait was killing me...let's see what is the outcome! I will keep you posted!

sorry to tell but you should have taken our advices, best of luck anyway

I was not clear! I followed your advice, of course! I uploaded the last list I wrote with a couple of exceptions...not sent yet, though, I am carefully tagging the images...
If you have last minute tips, let me know!
thanks!
If you want to save yourself a headache i suggest that you post them in the Critique / Tips / Tricks forum on SS so the pros can tell you what will and or will not pass and what you will need to do to gat accepted.

And as said before by someone here (JPSDK) they need to be highly scrutinized at a 100% view for focus, noise, artifacts, fringing and more because SS is very strict.

And if luissantos84 only picked two of your shots then your chances are slim because he knows the standards at SS as do I.

You posted while i was typing and you will know more than likely within an hour maybe. It is hard to say how long but for some reason sometimes newbies trying to get accepted get reviewed quicker then those of us who have been there for awhile. They also have separate reviewers for non editorial and editorial.

« Reply #21 on: January 21, 2012, 13:51 »
0
Rux.
JPSDK = jps

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #22 on: January 21, 2012, 13:59 »
0
Rux.
JPSDK = jps
Holy Bejolies! :o

This is Jens? My God.

« Reply #23 on: January 21, 2012, 14:13 »
0
he he.

« Reply #24 on: January 21, 2012, 17:41 »
0
I will follow the force and dare the submission in the next coming days. I am learning a lot of things searching similar images already on SS.
For example, I learned that the majority of the shots of the Colosseum in Rome are RF. Only few are Editorial, the ones with some people around the image. In my pic some tourists are visible veeeery far, so I will play safe and submit it as Editorial...
I also noticed that many photo with people in the shadow and not recognizable are submitted as RF. Strange...I wouldn't risk. I think DT is more strict about people in images and they want them to be submitted as Editorial...


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
58 Replies
20399 Views
Last post February 27, 2008, 17:45
by PecoFoto
25 Replies
7891 Views
Last post October 04, 2012, 05:03
by Microbius
4 Replies
2145 Views
Last post November 07, 2012, 16:05
by bdspn
2 Replies
1891 Views
Last post July 15, 2013, 07:46
by Bang-images
3 Replies
1941 Views
Last post August 16, 2013, 21:40
by disorderly

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle