|
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 - atramos
Pages: [1]
1
« on: October 18, 2011, 23:19 »
I submitted my first 4 images on October 12, and still see "Awaiting QC". 
2
« on: October 02, 2011, 15:21 »
I read somewhere that the stocksites want "IPTC" keywording... But my favorite software right now is Windows Live Photo Gallery, which I understand uses "XMP" for keywording instead of "IPTC".
Is that a problem? Do I have to dump WLPG and go ahead and get some "real software" now?
This is not as clear-cut as some may think... the specifications ofr IPTC and XMP are inter-related... e.g. from iptc.org: "The IPTC Core standard defines the same set of photo metadata fields as used from IIM but its technical implementation is builds on Adobe's XMP technology."
The other question I have is... How do you organize your photos if you're not allowed to have extraneous tags? For instance, if I submit a photo to shutterstock I'd like to tag it "submitted-shutterstock". I assume they would reject this. How do you manage your collection if you cannot use tags for that purpose?
Thanks
3
« on: October 02, 2011, 15:09 »
You still need to keyword your images on these sites which you didn't seem to want to do on another thread. You really aren't going to make anything if you aren't willing to put in the work. I'm beginning to wonder if you are just trolling!!
I don't mind some level of keywording. But I'm opposed to the more intense keywording which appears to be required by the more stringent sites. Example: If I have a photo of a car on fire, I just want to keyword it "car on fire". I don't want to have to research what kind of car it was or who owns it or why it was on fire. And no I'm not trolling. I'm just really confused.
4
« on: October 02, 2011, 10:54 »
The question is: will you even enjoy shooting stock? Or would you maybe prefer to shoot editorial images? Or take portraits of families and get paid for that?
I appreciate this type of question, because it causes me to think and refine my tastes and defining the role of photography in my life. Thank you. I hope it also helps others on this forum. As I research this stuff a bit more, I realize I'm more of a "photojournalist" who enjoys shooting "meaningful" editorial images (depiction of something happening in the real-world - a specific time and place) far more than the staged product/model stuff, which actually I have never really done (except to test out my equipment and to sell stuff on eBay). I also enjoy taking "visually striking" photos which may or may not be editorial (I haven't quite figured it out yet). I would not enjoy commissioned photography of any sort - weddings, baby portraits, etc. That would feel too much like WORK - like my day-job! Right now I'm leaning towards giving Alamy a try with editorial images. Only problem is my large collection taken prior to DSLR ownership is not eligible, so it'll have to be all new photos.
5
« on: October 01, 2011, 21:00 »
they are photographers and work around the limitations. it's not about the camera. it's about you.
I've heard this advice many times before and I've always found it questionable. A good camera will let the beginner practice the basics, like composition, without having to worry about other stuff. A crappy camera will force the beginner to not only master the basics but also figure out the workarounds to the limitations, before he can get decent results. It is unlikely.
6
« on: October 01, 2011, 20:50 »
why do you think you want to do stock photography?
Good question. I'm interested in stock photography mostly because it sounds like I could get paid for something I already do for free. I take lots of pictures already, I have expensive gear that I know how to use well, and I've been doing it for fun for 15 years. Many of my photos are stock-type images, especially editorial ones, without even trying it. How about you? You're in the newbie forum... why do you think you want to do stock photography?
7
« on: October 01, 2011, 20:36 »
I've heard these two have no QC at all:
mostphotos.com
shutterpoint.com
And alamy.com only checks image quality, not contents.
Are there any other sites with lenient or non-existent QC?
I figure I should start with one of these sites, then take only the best-selling images to the more picky sites like IS, SS.
Thoughts?
8
« on: September 28, 2011, 23:09 »
You are kidding right? This image has the date on it...http://www.flickr.com/photos/atramos/6168128264/#in/set-72157627717036088.
Yes, I know about these imperfections like the date-stamp, also one shot taken with iPhone4 the HDR is blurred (if you really look closely), etc. I will avoid these problems if I start shooting for stock. But how about the general composition and "feel" of the photo? Do I have any talent and a general good idea of what makes a good photo? The other stuff like small imperfections can be learned and practiced. Thanks
9
« on: September 28, 2011, 22:44 »
Hi All, I take lots of pictures - for my own enjoyment, using as screen-savers, sending to family members, remembering an exotic vacation, etc - even before getting interested in stock photography. I recently applied to iStockPhoto and got what seemed like a generic rejection letter (no image-by-image critique). I'm interested in finding out if my subjects and shooting style are suitable for stock. I know my images are not perfect, because I did not shoot them with Stock in mind, and also I did not do any post-processing besides very simple one-click image corrections, and also I did not spend much time tagging them. Here are a few photos I selected: http://flic.kr/s/aHsjwiaF5uWhat do you think? Are any of them "stock material"? What if I do some post-processing? What if I re-shoot these same compositions with more attention to detail? Or should I just give up on this stock thing and stick to photography as a hobby... Thanks!!
10
« on: September 28, 2011, 22:10 »
mostphotos.com seems interesting. It appears they don't review / censor their images at all, sort of like Flickr... Any thoughts? I see they're at the bottom of the Low Earners. Which, wouldn't be a problem for me, I value convenience over income :-) (and no I'm not actually lazy, I just happen to have other stuff going on, such as a full-time job)
11
« on: September 23, 2011, 21:14 »
Thank you. From all the responses this was the most helpful and "eye-opening". That you don't know the name of the person isn't particularly relevant, but if you take a look at the enormous amount of photos of women on beaches in bikinis with releases which are available with releases you'll see what you're up against. You'd have to ask yourself why someone would buy your photos without releases when they have such a huge choice of photos which have releases.
Search: woman, bikini, beach, photos only:
14,406 on iStock
31,142 on Shutterstock
22,585 on Fotolia
19,509 on Dreamstime
12
« on: September 23, 2011, 18:18 »
Hi all. I have a photo of some women at the beach, taken at my last vacation overseas. Do these have any value as stock photo? Do I need a model release? How about for Editorial Use Only? Thanks
13
« on: September 23, 2011, 09:14 »
If so, would you mind to share which photos sold and/or for how much?
I'm interested in this microstock business but just not sure how much effort to put in.
Thanks!
14
« on: September 22, 2011, 22:59 »
I have a collection of 30,000 images spanning 20 years of amateur/family photography and international travel AND international living (residents get different pictures than tourists).
The first 10 years are all film scans (which I plan to re-scan in higher resolution).
The second 10 years are mostly digital in progressively higher resolutions... 3MP, 5MP, 7MP, 12MP, 16MP.
The photos are tagged by country (includes U.S., Caribbean, South America, Europe, Middle East).
Any photos with people in them don't have model releases. Any photos from private places don't have property releases.
Where is the best macro/micro-stock site where I can simply "dump" all these images without having to organize them, and let the potential buyers sort through them?
Ideally the site should provide statistics so I can slowly over time tag the images that I think would be in higher demand.
Thanks
15
« on: September 20, 2011, 20:30 »
test the camera before you pay him...
Pages: [1]
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
