1
Photo Critique / Re: Critique request for 3 photos rejected as IStock application.
« on: January 23, 2010, 19:21 »
Hey everybody, thanks so much for the critiques. We understand much better now why the photos were rejected and now we don't feel bad about it at all. (We were, naturally, a little stung, initially.) My wife and I, as I said, are nature photographers. Fine art is what we strive for and it actually does quite well in our gallery in the little tourist/artist community of Door County, Wisconsin. We're clearly not technicians or experts with the cameras or the editing software. We'd love to get better (and you all have helped us a great deal by pointing out what we need to improve as far as technicality) and we're going to work at it. But things like a bit of noise just don't concern us, though we understand why they concern you. We've never lost a sale because of noise. Our photography is just artistic expression; just trying to make something pretty that people will want to hang on their wall or send as a greeting to a friend. Sometimes we force our eyes to blur or look at tiny thumbs to evaluate composition! Details are important too, but more for us than for our customers. One of our best selling images was shot with a rebel with a kit lens when we were just starting out and even I can see that it is technically a disaster. Doesn't matter, it just keeps selling.
We are concerned about the detail we're apparently losing in our Lightroom workflow. If any of you have any suggestions on where we could learn more about this that would be great. I've read and watched every tutorial I can find but I found nothing on this issue.
We've decided not to pursue stock photography right now, and we're fine with that. We never wanted to change our style or choice of subject for this. We just (naively) thought we could put some of the thousands of images we have to use, and make a bit of extra money. We're doing what we love and couldn't be happier. Thanks to all of you for the time you put into helping us. We know you didn't have to. You just helped out a random stranger because he asked for it.
BTW, that road is locally famous and often photographed. The story goes that it started out as a trail that wound around the telegraph poles going up to the tip of our peninsula. When they paved it, they kept the curves and the road wound around the electric poles until the late '80s when they removed them, probably for safety. That shot has been by far our best selling, outselling the rest of the photography combined the first year we showed it!
We are concerned about the detail we're apparently losing in our Lightroom workflow. If any of you have any suggestions on where we could learn more about this that would be great. I've read and watched every tutorial I can find but I found nothing on this issue.
We've decided not to pursue stock photography right now, and we're fine with that. We never wanted to change our style or choice of subject for this. We just (naively) thought we could put some of the thousands of images we have to use, and make a bit of extra money. We're doing what we love and couldn't be happier. Thanks to all of you for the time you put into helping us. We know you didn't have to. You just helped out a random stranger because he asked for it.
BTW, that road is locally famous and often photographed. The story goes that it started out as a trail that wound around the telegraph poles going up to the tip of our peninsula. When they paved it, they kept the curves and the road wound around the electric poles until the late '80s when they removed them, probably for safety. That shot has been by far our best selling, outselling the rest of the photography combined the first year we showed it!