|
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 - Image Diversity
1
« on: May 21, 2013, 03:54 »
there's plenty of such stuff on sale if you just pay a bit more, search "food bank" on Alamy for instance.
Not so, depending on use.
Alamy, 'food bank' photos only: 8362 results, which from the first page sorted on relevance have many authentic, 'real' photos.
BUT
With MR and PR, only 31, mostly irrelevant other than one set which is available on the micros.
However, it's all moot, as we now know the OP doesn't want 'real', she wants attractive models in a tidy background, evenly lit; just not on a white background grinning inanely at the camera. Big difference.
Not so. I do want 'real', not attractive models in a tidy background, evenly lit. But as a freelance GD I can't usually afford Alamy's pricing and know other freelance designers can't either, even if we pass that cost onto the client. I can't buy RM.
2
« on: May 21, 2013, 00:18 »
Ok well thanks everyone for your input.
3
« on: May 20, 2013, 17:48 »
Sure, you can direct people to pretend they aren't being photographed... http://www.stocksy.com/42921
Your photos on Stocksy are great - a good combination of candids and people looking at the camera. And they don't look so posed and fake. I will have to search Stocksy more now that they've launched!
4
« on: May 20, 2013, 17:39 »
Bear in mind that as well as model releases, you'd have to either have food / boxes etc with no labels (fruit, veg etc) or make your own labels to go around cans/make your own boxes etc. Unless you can get food brands to give you releases. Or shoot with such a shallow dof that you can't read any brand names. All of that conspires to make the image look 'unreal', but it's inevitable.
I would definitely have to take all of that into consideration for sure and find a way to get around it to maintain the authenticity.
5
« on: May 20, 2013, 17:37 »
Does "food bank" have a different meaning somewhere? iStock's "food bank" search is pretty awful too, as is DT and FT. Is an isolated can with no label a "food bank"? In MR / PR images, Alamy surprisingly only has that same set that's everywhere else, plus two irrelevant couple pics. They do have a lot of 'real' but unreleased food bank images.
See what I'm talking about? And that's just one 'food bank' search. It's pretty abysmal. And I know other designers who do np work and they have the same problems finding the right images too. So it seems there is an opening for a niche site to offer these kinds of images don't you think?
6
« on: May 20, 2013, 17:27 »
That search is the worst SS search I've seen for ages. What a huge percentage of totally irrelevant images. SS search isn't usually that bad.
And that is what I find basically every time in my searches for np projects. That's what leads me to believe there are so many kinds of photos that are not being listed. That's why it takes me 10-15 hours sometimes to find the photos I need for most projects. I search up to 5 sites sometimes before I find the right photos. Even in the 'relevant' searches. I'm so tired of it.
8
« on: May 20, 2013, 17:06 »
why 'real' people may not be interested in signing.
Mostly because it sounds like you think "real people" don't want to be paid? Well that, and "real people" - candids (?) - are people who weren't expecting to be photographed and used in commercially licensed images, whereas "models", people that seek out opportunities to be paid to be in image, are likely ok with it.
Not at all, of course they want to and would be paid. They would be models and would be expected to be photographed but the shot would be set up so that it wouldn't look set up. Can't that be done?
9
« on: May 20, 2013, 17:00 »
There are no candids and no average looking or low income people. And so many were shot in the park - what's up with that?
What should they be candidly doing? What makes an average looking person? What designates "low income"? Where should they be?
By candid I mean interacting with one another not paying attention to the camera. Kind of like a snapshot but technically better. Ok, maybe 'average' looking person is not what I mean. It's more of the people not looking so perfect and high end. If I'm doing a brochure for a food bank or a nonprofit that provides basic needs I can't use photos that don't relate/fit in to the context.
10
« on: May 20, 2013, 16:37 »
Would you be restricting your sales to education, charities and nonprofits? Or will you be allowing businesses to buy also?
Whatever, your 'real people' may not agree to sign MRs. If your non-profit's staff and volunteers won't allow their photos to be used to promote their own projects, where are your 'real people' going to come from?
No restrictions, of course anyone can buy. That is more of the issue - if the 'real' models will agree to sign MRs and thoroughly understand what they are signing so it doesn't become a future problem. Thanks for bringing that up in the other thread. I have a lot more research to do in the licensing area of what the images can be used for and why 'real' people may not be interested in signing.
11
« on: May 20, 2013, 16:26 »
When you say real people, do you mean average looking people, who may be overweight, with large noses, double chins, and yellowish teeth, or do you mean people who are in the top 15% for good looks? Maybe not the top 2%, which is what we see now, but still, really good looking?
I have seen these requests for real people over the years, and in the past have photographed a few and uploaded them, but they don't sell.
TBH I think you will find photos of real people on line, but they are probably way down the sort order because no one wants them.
Exactly. The market is already providing for what the market actually wants. Contributors watch what sells (or doesn't sell) like hawks and modify their shoots accordingly. If you want really niche stuff you might have to shoot it yourself or hire someone to do it for you.
I am thinking of niche stuff - mainly focusing on providing images for the nonprofit industry. I know corporations and big media agencies primarily buy and want the images that are currently in the market now so they are not as much of a focus. Obviously I still have A LOT of research to do.
12
« on: May 20, 2013, 16:19 »
Anyone that poses for images is a "model". I use "real people" as my "models". They don't smile all the time, and I try to get them to strike "natural" poses. I'm not sure what you plan on being able to shoot that others aren't already doing. Give us an example.
SS said it isn't financially feasible, because to hire a large group of multi-ethnic "models" costs a lot of money.
For example, I just searched Shutterstock for "Mexican Family". I picked "relevant", started at the last page (12) and worked forward. In most of the photos the people were posing, smiling and looking into the camera. They are affluent and very good looking. There are no candids and no average looking or low income people. And so many were shot in the park - what's up with that? A Canstock search pretty much resulted in the same and usually the other sites are similar too. So just in this search, there isn't much variety. There seems to be a lot of missed opportunities - I can't imagine that what's there is all that sells?
13
« on: May 20, 2013, 14:58 »
I mentioned in another thread that due to being unable to quickly find the types of images I need for my graphic projects I am doing research into the viability of starting yet another microstock site. Yes, I am crazy. But I am finding other designers expressing their request for diversity and not so many perfectly polished (fake looking) photos also so there seems to be a good demand. And I have ideas for unique selling points that no other agencies are doing.
The images would be the type that so far no other stock site is interested in posting large quantities of - authentic, real people - not models - that are of different ethnicities, age, class, profession, you name it. And that are not too refined and perfect technically. Because when it's too perfect technically it loses some authenticity. And that are candid shots, not people smiling into the camera. These images would contain many non-smiling serious people as well as smiling. I found a site doing this for other countries but not so much in the US so that would be my focus in the beginning.
Shady Sue mentioned it's not financially sustainable to build a site around these images so I am interested in everyone else's thoughts and opinions. Please try to keep the comments constructive so I can get a true idea of whether this will work or not.
I'm curious why so little of these images are found on the current sites when the demand is rising? Would it be financially sustainable for the agency?
Thank you for your input!
Rana
14
« on: May 20, 2013, 03:14 »
For nonprofits, they never want to use their own staff and rarely have good hi res photos of their population so I have to use stock most of the time.
More and more I'm seeing the total difference in culture between the US and here. Whereas I can't find any local person who will model for stock, even on MM and PS, I've never found anyone working for or volunteering for a charity to be reluctant to have their photo appear in the charity's collateral. I must have upwards of 20 newsletters of different groups coming in, and they inevitably use photos of their own people and work. (Occasionally they might use a stock photo of a location or species in the case of wildlife charities, but never people.) I photographed a big charity event at the end of last year, with hundreds of participants, who obviously had to be given the right to opt out of publicity photographs. I was a bit concerned about that, because in group scenes, it would be difficult to remember who couldn't be used, especially as I knew none of them. However, not one opted out.
As an end user of these newsletters, I certainly don't want to see random photos of irrelevant people. I'd rather see no photos than that. I want to see the people and/or the projects. Reality is far more important than hi-res or high production values.
But clearly, it is just a totally, totally different culture and expectation. Over here, at the AGM, supporters would question why money was being spend on stock photos!
I hope you find what you want. 
@SS - Well you actually hit on something I've been thinking about. Since I'm really tired of not quickly finding the images I continually need to use and finding other designers that have the same issue, I'm doing research about the viability of jumping in the microstock pool and starting my own agency focused on these kind of images. I have some ideas for unique selling points that I know no other agencies are doing know it's crazy to start anything with the industry the way it is but I believe there is a huge need for images the other agencies don't/won't sell. So I will eventually find what I want, even if it's a few years away. But until then thank you, I hope I do too! @Xanox - nah those sites aren't worth the time. I spend enough hours searching through the pro photos, I'm not wasting any more on free ones. But thanks!
15
« on: May 19, 2013, 01:40 »
@ SS, yeah, I always forget to check how the search comes up - popular, relevant, etc. I will start my searches from the last page now and look at the older photos.
This project wasn't for a nonprofit, it was corporate but even then I prefer photos with realistic backgrounds. For nonprofits, they never want to use their own staff and rarely have good hi res photos of their population so I have to use stock most of the time.
@gillian - totally forgot about stocksy since I never received anything when I signed up for more info. now that they have launched i will see what they have. thanks!
16
« on: May 17, 2013, 17:20 »
I buy a lot of lifestyle stock and I rarely use models isolated on white. What I am always looking for are natural looking people, not posing, not looking at the camera. I want to see an instant of real life captured. I want great lighting, and artistic flair. As the boomers age, there is definitely a growing market for good looking, active older people. Shopping, golfing, eating, drinking, biking... It sounds cliche, but I need those images all the time, and most of what is available is awful.
I thought of this thread today as I was searching SS/Canstock for some realistic photos of a business meeting and all I could find in the first 5 pages were with a white background and people looking fake and smiling at the camera. So I wanted to chime in PLEASE no more isolated on white photos!! I'm sure people use them but the market is over saturated with them. I agree with fiftyfootelvis - I'm always looking for candid photos of people in realistic situations and backgrounds for my graphic projects. I do a lot of non-profit work and that's the worst because it's hard to find 'real' looking diverse people to fit the not-happy-shiny-smiling content I'm designing for.
17
« on: February 12, 2013, 04:27 »
One big problem is that such images need to be model released and the model needs to have a physical as well as an email address and a phone number. Generally the types of people in the images you are describing don't have some or all of these things, so you can't submit the images. For some sites you could do them as editorial, but they don't sell much.
That is good to know, I hadn't thought about the address or phone number for the release. That is something I will have to work on as the images will be for commercial use. Thank you.
18
« on: February 12, 2013, 04:23 »
In course of covering political and civic events, I have collections of news photos that include diverse people participating in events such as this on news wire service, my own site, and alamy, but am I correct that you're referring to diverse models for commercial photos, rather than diverse people in editorial photos?
- Ann
You are correct Ann, I am referring to diverse models for commercial photos, not editorials. I am finding many other graphic designers in need of diversity in microstock for commercial use in printed materials. So, I am hoping that many of you already have large collections of these types of images so I will not have to commission photo shoots because that will take me longer to launch.
19
« on: February 11, 2013, 20:31 »
Great article! That is one of the reasons I am interested to see how many photos you all may have that you haven't submitted because the current agencies aren't interested in them and focus mainly on "white" photos. I am looking to change that and my first step is conducting research on what's available and what I have to commission. Also I love that you're an organic gardener, I'm a greenie too! Happy to find a like-minded soul here. If you're willing to consider illustrations...
http://www.shutterstock.com/sets/88413-people.html?rid=620377
http://www.shutterstock.com/sets/88415-religion.html?rid=620377
http://www.shutterstock.com/sets/537935-the-green-line.html?rid=620377
http://www.shutterstock.com/sets/88423-whitty-concepts.html?rid=620377
A lot of these sell in Asia, Mid-East, Africa and Latin America. I wrote an article about the importance and usefulness of including so-called minorities in every-day contexts, along with the travails of discrimination: http://blackrhinoillustration.blogspot.com/2010/12/creating-positive-images.html
I am collecting research on the availability of photos I can't seem to find very many of at most stock sites: candid shots of everyday people - minorities, homeless, low-income, developmentally challenged, etc. And if I do find some photos of minorities they're immaculate shiny happy people wearing white and perfectly composed. There aren't that many realistic photos out there - everything I find is posed, smiling and conceptually unbelievable.
I would like to know if you, as microstock photographers, ever take photos of these forgotten that you just haven't submitted to the current providers? Do you have a large catalog of these photos you want to submit but the current websites reject them?
Do you know there is a demand for this kind of diversity?
Would you shoot more of these kinds of models?
What are the issues you've encountered if you've tried it before?
Thanks!
Rana
20
« on: February 11, 2013, 20:23 »
Thanks The Black Rhino but for now I'm focusing on just photos. Vectors/illustrations possibly to come later. If you're willing to consider illustrations...
http://www.shutterstock.com/sets/88413-people.html?rid=620377
http://www.shutterstock.com/sets/88415-religion.html?rid=620377
http://www.shutterstock.com/sets/537935-the-green-line.html?rid=620377
http://www.shutterstock.com/sets/88423-whitty-concepts.html?rid=620377
A lot of these sell in Asia, Mid-East, Africa and Latin America. I wrote an article about the importance and usefulness of including so-called minorities in every-day contexts, along with the travails of discrimination: http://blackrhinoillustration.blogspot.com/2010/12/creating-positive-images.html
I am collecting research on the availability of photos I can't seem to find very many of at most stock sites: candid shots of everyday people - minorities, homeless, low-income, developmentally challenged, etc. And if I do find some photos of minorities they're immaculate shiny happy people wearing white and perfectly composed. There aren't that many realistic photos out there - everything I find is posed, smiling and conceptually unbelievable.
I would like to know if you, as microstock photographers, ever take photos of these forgotten that you just haven't submitted to the current providers? Do you have a large catalog of these photos you want to submit but the current websites reject them?
Do you know there is a demand for this kind of diversity?
Would you shoot more of these kinds of models?
What are the issues you've encountered if you've tried it before?
Thanks!
Rana
21
« on: February 11, 2013, 20:22 »
I have a few
Awesome I'll add you too. Thanks dbvirago!
22
« on: February 11, 2013, 20:21 »
When you guys say you have some, are we talking about tens, hundreds or thousands?
23
« on: February 11, 2013, 20:16 »
I've some images of this topics as well....and?
and...I'll add you to my list of potential contributors. Thanks m&m!
24
« on: February 11, 2013, 19:37 »
Thanks for your reply Ed. I know new microstock sites come and go but if one was created that wanted these kinds of images it's good to know there are photographers who already have these kinds of images in their catalog.
25
« on: February 11, 2013, 19:26 »
I am collecting research on the availability of photos I can't seem to find very many of at most stock sites: candid shots of everyday people - minorities, homeless, low-income, developmentally challenged, etc. And if I do find some photos of minorities they're immaculate shiny happy people wearing white and perfectly composed. There aren't that many realistic photos out there - everything I find is posed, smiling and conceptually unbelievable.
I would like to know if you, as microstock photographers, ever take photos of these forgotten that you just haven't submitted to the current providers? Do you have a large catalog of these photos you want to submit but the current websites reject them?
Do you know there is a demand for this kind of diversity?
Would you shoot more of these kinds of models?
What are the issues you've encountered if you've tried it before?
Thanks!
Rana
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
