|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - ale1969
101
« on: December 22, 2007, 20:24 »
That's my 2008 goal: - Learn to shoot. The rest will come accordingly 
102
« on: December 19, 2007, 19:21 »
Nazdavie, in addition to sharply_done's suggestions, please check that you are not using colour space sRGB either in your camera or in Adobe (or other processing application). sRGB uses a more limited colour bandwidth. You camera and Adobe should be set to use Adobe RGB.
Naturally you shouldn't be using 'web colours only' when you save files.
You shouldn't be getting these problems with your Nikon so it is something in your processing method.
Take in count that if you shoot in raw, color profiles are decided upon conversion time. Raw files don't have an embedded color profile so the camera settings just influence their jpg preview. At the very end you have to grown accostumed to the LCD display of the D80 and don't blindly trust it. For example most of the time when it warns you about overexposure it's not likely so, there is a "safe" zone before real overexposure and I sometimes managed to gain about a 2/3 stop exposing to the right (with the obvious great results in natural noise reduction and expanded color dynamic range). I'm still messing with it and there's really very little rules beside experience, so when in studio shots I feel free to bracketing to the right as much as possible, in "shot now or never" situations better feel safe and maybe just add the 2/3 stop of the d80 underexposure meter.
103
« on: December 06, 2007, 20:05 »
They look fine on my monitor (windows OS)
104
« on: December 06, 2007, 19:59 »
I contacted support twice in DT asking more details on the rejection reason (so I didn't contested the rejection in itself). Both of the time DT support gave me a deeper explaination and both of the times the files went live with very little modifications toward the directions DT pointed out.
105
« on: December 06, 2007, 19:51 »
As in every other "not-protected" market prices move with demand and supply. First people coming into MS got nice earnings because it was a "fresh" market. Now most of their worse shots would probably be rejected or very scarcely downloaded considering the supply of more and more professional-looking shots. When people will see how hard is just to gain a bunch of bucks with their snapshots they'll turn their time to something else more profitable while the ones really interested in a professional approach will continue to study and improve to reach the best seller ones. So I expect to: a) in the short term: 1) a lot more contributors will apply 2) most of them would get tired before reaching the first payout because high rejection rate and scarce downloads 3) the hard workers ones will accept to stay instead working hard to increase their quality b) in the medium term: 1) The hard workers who will succesfully reach a good quality probably would also have the skills to get assignments outside MS, so they can also decide to dedicate less time to MS shooting. 2) There will be less new applicants because the "easy money" myth surrounding MS now will shatter. 3) less supply, with higher quality, means higher prices IF (underlined) also the demand will stay at the same level c) in the long term: 1) who cares. As Keynes (the economist) said, in the long term we'll be all dead The ones who talked about the automotive market could notice that after the oriental brands entered the market the american and european brands raised their quality, lowered their prices but right now here in Europe a car, even if it's japanese or korean, is proportionally more expensive than 15-20 years ago.
106
« on: December 03, 2007, 13:13 »
Canon. Of course, what kind of question is that?! haha... 
Bah Canoners  ! I use Nikon but the quality is pretty consinstent in both the brands. You have to consider the lens system too when you have to make a choice, they play a bigger role than sensors most of the time. So at the end it all comes down to personal preference, I prefer the flatter colors of the nikons and play with saturation in postproduction, canons seem to deliver more saturated colors from start, but maybe it's just my wrong assumption (btw, I tend to lower to minimum most of the saturation, contrast and sharpness settings on the camera). Btw, I played a bit with the Hasselblad 22mb digital back and it does wonders but it really shows off how much the noise is lens-dependent. The difference in noise using it with a view camera with digital Schneider lenses and with a Mamiya RZ67 with seikkor lenses is very very noticeable.
107
« on: December 02, 2007, 21:08 »
Congratulations! A not humble achievement at all.
108
« on: November 29, 2007, 02:53 »
The D300 is at 1 kilometer from me now in that store, and I promise to myself I'll wait for the D400...About 2 long years to wait whit this temptation 
*... your post transmitted that temptation to me either... I'm trying to repeat to myself "I'll wait till the first Nikon full frame under 2500 dollars... I'll wait till... etc"
109
« on: November 25, 2007, 20:27 »
Last saturday I assisted an "old school" photographer in a session for a fashion catalogue.
In an afternoon we ended up with over 300 shots of whom we selected 44 to be submitted to the client.
So there are the ones accostumed to work for just 10 shots and the ones accostumed to work hard even before the digital revolution.
"Strangely" that photographer rarely has a day without some work to do despite the cheapo microstock images.
110
« on: November 24, 2007, 22:07 »
You're not alone. All my renderings were rejected too for being "not stockworthy" and of course they are my best sellers on DT. The peak of fun was one of them ( http://www.dreamstime.com/digital-encounter-image3324146) being rejected for "overfiltered". At least SS would have rejected it for mistaking the skin texture with noise I have the suspect that both IS and SS don't want to expand their collection too fast, which is a reasonable commercial choice at some moments. So they want to include just top notch stuff (and my renderings obviously aren't). All in all with my little stock experience I found out that the most consistant reviews are the ones from DT, when they decline a submission 99% they are right.
111
« on: November 24, 2007, 18:35 »
I've spent a lot of time looking at images available at the RM agencies, and I am not impressed at all. Most of those would be refused at microstock agencies. So would most of the photographers.
So true. Being a stock photo noob I browsed what i thought were high professional photos (considered the price those agencies we all know charge to their customers) to learn lights, composition and so on. Every time I bounced back or to the microstock photos or to the rare real pro who still are miles ahead the others. Just search the food imagery on those huge RM agencies then go to Lou Manna or Michael Ray web sites to notice what food photos really are.
112
« on: November 18, 2007, 19:23 »
Same here, rejected for the first time mainly because of noise issues.
I'm a mediocre photographer but I know what noise is as I often do retouch work for pro photographers and when people said they are super picky on noise I assure they REALLY are (one of the rejected image was a rendering faking a giant LCD screen and they took the screen pixelation as noise, LOL).
I assume that they want very polished images. I think you have to pay attention to use contrast curves or the usual hi-pass sharpening with images with fine bokeh for example.
It seems that they are also very picky on shadows and illuminations. At least in the first ten images.
In my next attempt I'll use a different post-production path, shooting with very diffuse illumination, no post sharpening and selective use of noise reduction.
Every site has a different approach, you have to change your products according to it at your very start, it's normal procedure like with every job.
113
« on: November 16, 2007, 12:27 »
I got approved today by IS. Thanks for the past inputs and suggestions that really made me look at my images with a different (and more critique) eye.
Now, next step is SS.
114
« on: November 01, 2007, 14:07 »
My humble advice
Thanks a lot for the time you did put into reviewing my portfolio on DT, not being myself even remotely the new Cartier-Besson it wouldn't have been great fun for sure browsing my images . I choosed that artichokes shot in my first submission... rejected together with the other 2 (they were the rose in the natural spotlight into the church and the putto angel) . Maybe it was because the other 2 but I wouldn't risk submitting it again though.
115
« on: November 01, 2007, 11:32 »
I also have some images on DT that you can include on at least 3 of your maged collections. I'll PM you the details.
116
« on: October 31, 2007, 21:27 »
I'm not necessarily a professional but, the second mango is much better than the first one(s) (the one in situation). It will be difficult in my point of view to make some good pics whit these particular pasta...
Do you still are in review mode whit IS, because I find your overall DT portfolio, OK to easily pass whit at IS
Well... IS rejected what I thought were 3 of my best images on DT. The problems weren't technical but composition and "stockability" and on the last one I tend to agree with them. I mainly loved to shot monuments, castles, churches etc, not the best stock images you know Anyway I'd be happy to know which you think could be the best images to submit to IS out of your experience. About the mangoes I also liked the second shot a lot more, they're for different purpouses though, the isolated ones I tried to gave them a "fresh" feeling spraying them with liquid (not just water, you know, water don't stand still) and trying to arrange them the best I could into the shot.
117
« on: October 31, 2007, 20:59 »
Ok, I prepared another shot for that handmade pasta (last call as tomorrow their capital sentence will probably happen... yummm ) 
118
« on: October 30, 2007, 22:12 »
These mangoes are perfectly isolated. But the colors look unnatural to me. they looked like mangoes have been cooked in oil.
vphoto.
LOL, well... the colors are theirs, i just enhanced the contrast and saturation through curves. Take in count that I sprayed them with liquid exactly to enhance colours. This is another shot I just prepared with on of them inside, so you can judge the colours in a more complex contest together with other props.  (btw, this is the Istock bestselling image of isolated mangoes... just to talk about colours...  )
119
« on: October 30, 2007, 18:57 »
While I collect some props I try to get some images from these two mangoes:  Be cruel as usual please 
120
« on: October 30, 2007, 18:10 »
maybe try on a wooden counter, with soft window like lighting and a little flour and eggs and perhaps a few kitchen utensils in the background.
Precisely what I was thinking about, the setting I used is more suitable to pastries and chocolate than raw handmade pasta.
121
« on: October 30, 2007, 17:22 »
... hope I haven't been too harsh, but that's my honest opinion.
No problem, I want harsh opinion because they usually go to the point. It's right, they're on a still life table and they're raw (this is the main reason for the color, which is pretty close to original). Thanks for the inputs, I'll try to come out with a different setting.
122
« on: October 30, 2007, 11:58 »
I'm working to collect some suitable images to pass both IS and SS application and I really need some help from most experienced members here to criticize to death those images. If it's not a problem I'll use this thread to post the images further up my road to reach an accetable quality. Thanks in advance to anyone so gentle to take the time to help me to improve my stock skills. Here we go with the first image: 
123
« on: October 30, 2007, 02:38 »
You have to wait 3 days before you can submit again but you can wait longer if you want to. 3 days is the minimum it's not that you have to submit something in 3 days time. I think that's what you were asking.
Yep, this is exactly what I was asking because I'd also prefer to have a better portfolio before trying again. Thanks.
124
« on: October 29, 2007, 19:20 »
I'm trying to get approved from Istock and my first submission was rejected with " we did not feel the overall composition of your photography or subject matter is at the minimum level of standard for iStockphoto". They also added "You're welcome to return in 3 days, upload some new samples and we'll re-process your application."
I'm not entering the discussion about how wonderful my images were (pretty pointless), I think that at least they proved to be technically correct.
I'd just like to know what do they mean with this 3 day limit. Do i have to send them my new, (irony on) exceptional (irony off) images in that time frame? What will happen if I couldn't do it? If you can confirm this I think I'd really need some help and advices.
Thanks in advance.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
