MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Shutterstock.com => Topic started by: Magnum on May 06, 2008, 02:20
-
I just HAVE to complain a little!
Thereīs a snowboard picture among the top photos at SS. No offense to the photographer, but If I had taken that picture It would probably have ended up in the trash. Itīs sharp and has a nice clear sky, but thats it.
- only back of the person showing
- not the most stylish jump, grandma:)
-bad colors clothing.
-snow is overxposed
I canīt belive it sells!!!!!!! congratulations!
Iīve actually start to dig in the trashcan for goofy looking stuff after I saw this one :Q
No link. check most popular images.
-
so it's not only me that feels this way lately. ;)
-
The customer is always right.
Repeat after me:
The customer is always right.
The customer is always right.
The customer is always right....
-
The customer is always right The customer is always right The customer is always right The customer is always right The customer is always right The customer is always right The customer is always right The customer is sometimes drunk
-
The customer is always right.
The customer is always right.
The customer is always right....
-
The customer is always right.
The customer is always right.
The customer is always right....
-
yessir,
The customer is always right.
The customer is always right.
The customer is always right.
-
Oh ! there he is !
I was looking on the left ;D
Thank you !
-
If it's the one I'm looking at I think it's a great shot. Let me interpret your "negatives" a different way.
- only back of the person showing
Means the person could be anyone more versitility. The photo could be used to reach any demographic group.
- not the most stylish jump, grandma:)
Perhaps relevant if it was for an ad targeting a very narrow market but for the broader base it works just fine. An average winter display ad doesn't demand super stunts which will detract from the real message.
-bad colors clothing.
The clothes are a solid neutral color. If the designer wants to change that it's easy enough.
-snow is overxposed
Maybe true (since I'm not looking at the full size and it's a close call when talking snow) but does it really matter? It will blend nicely on white paper. What's more irritating is the tree shadow that needs to be cloned out.
This is a very classic stock shot. It has great motion to direct the viewer to the real message. Stock photos aren't about the photography, they're about the final design.
-
Youre right obvious! It sell shitloads:)
-
The customer is always right.
The customer is always right.
The customer is always right....
-
The customer is always right...
I uploaded some trash photos for fun a while back, just experimenting with new equipment. They were accepted, and they're in my top 10. I feel dirty (no pun intended!) but hey, if the customers like it and find a use, who am I to complain?
-
I out right REFUSE to upload anything I don't believe to 100% on.
I know I keep score in this game by counting the amount DL's as points. However, uploading an image
that does not sit right with me just for the sake of DL's is totally against the grain for me.
Cranky MIZ
-
Look around . . . there is bad photography being used everywhere. And it's not just on billboards and web sites, I've even seen pixelated pictures published in magazines. To steal a line from a TV commercial I saw last night, "People wouldn't know a good photograph if it sat on their lap and called them mama!" (I think the TV commercial said people wouldn't know HDTV.) I don't know if art buyers are ignorant or if they just don't care. But these art buyers hold influence people's opinions and they are using this influence to lower the general public's perception of what makes a good photograph. John Q. Public thinks it must be good, it's been published. By using sub-par pictures these art buyers are having a negative effect on all photography.
Having said that I am not sure that all the fault lies with the art buyers, after all they only buy what they see. And I think a lot of people who have gotten into microstock don't know any more about what makes a good photograph than the art buyers do. And it is hard to blame these new microstockers because all the pictures that influenced them were published by the art buyers. Garbage in garbage out.
That brings us to the microstock web sites and their reviewers. I have no idea what kind of photographic qualifications are required for a microstock reviewer, but it can't be much. I have had images turned down for reasons so ridiculous that it was apparent the reviewer no idea what he or she was seeing. (Alpenglow on a mountain is not caused by the white balance being off, it is caused by the low angle of the sun.) I think that the microstock web sites are very narrow minded in what they do and don't accept. They think some subjects are "not commercial" and won't sell. What I always wonder is how do the reviewers know that todays "non-commercial subject" is not going to be popular in 6 months or next year. Last year everyone wanted to drive a big SUV now everyone wants to drive a hybrid, did they see $130 a barrel oil coming?
Now, I have images that I don't think are so good, but they sell every week. So some customers think they are good. 1. Are these customers being negatively influenced by the art buyers? 2. Did a under qualified reviewer let these images slip by because he or she was tired of seeing work by new microstockers? 3. Should I take these images down because I don't think they are good enough? The answers are #1 I don't know, #2 I don't know and #3 Not as long as I am making money with them.
What's wrong with buyers? The way I see it there's no easy answer because there is plenty of blame to go around!
redhat
-
I don't see anything wrong with people using images we might consider poor. Perhaps they feel the more arty photos are less realistic and they just want to use a snapshot. If I was only going to upload the images I was really proud of, my portfolio would have 3 photos in it :)
-
Also remember that stock photography isn't about the photography. It's about the photograph's potential.
What difference does the overexposed snow make when the jumper is against a nice solid blue sky so they can be isolated easily and be jumping off the product or promotion du jour?
I never said that as a photograph it was a work of art, just that there are valid reasons why it would sell as stock.
-
If I was only going to upload the images I was really proud of, my portfolio would have 3 photos in it :)
I agree with that statement completely.
-
Look around . . . there is bad photography being used everywhere. And it's not just on billboards and web sites, I've even seen pixelated pictures published in magazines. To steal a line from a TV commercial I saw last night, "People wouldn't know a good photograph if it sat on their lap and called them mama!" (I think the TV commercial said people wouldn't know HDTV.) I don't know if art buyers are ignorant or if they just don't care.
redhat
I teach photography to high school students. Many students are perfectly happy handing in images where the focal point is blurry, the background is the school parking lot (ughhhhh), or the exposure/contrast is blah. They know they are going to get a poor grade but the low quality is not a big deal to them. These are our future consumers :). They know the qualities of a good photo, but they are content with substandard photographs. I feel that low res internet images make them all to comfortable in accepting poor shots.
-
kathrynshort
At least you can do something about your students. I say give them an F and make them go to summer school!
redhat
-
This is missing the point the buyer is not buying an image for it's quality but for its content and message, an article in a free paper can often be more interesting than in a paper you paid for so it's the content that matters most.
When a buyer looks for an Image they are looking to find an image to tell a story, grap the viewers interest and they have to do this in a split second, so if we take the example of any sport or urban activities, which will catch the eye of a person interested in that activity, a slightly out of focus real action image, or some fake isolated over white, cheesy smile image?
As for the students not looking for pin sharp quality then there could be a simple answer, they see that the image gets across by content the message they want it to.
When one of my daughters sends a "blurry" text message in text speak like "r u k txt bk", it is not a quality message, but it gets across what they want it to "are you ok text back"
It could well be that the Quality Control on the stock sites are doing the buyer a miss service by rejecting some images for quality that could get across a message better than anything they already have.
So for the "Buyers of Tomorrow" will we still be uploading pin sharp isolated fakes, or real images with real backgrounds that have the message they want to get a cross to thier peers, or do we already have that on the macro sites?
B.T.W. most people cannot do the most stylish jump or wear the most stylish ski suits, that might be why they find this image a good option as it will appeal to the average Joe, rather than the elite!
-
I canīt belive it sells!!!!!!! congratulations!
You never know what is going to sell well. When I first started on SS, I put my best work up and was accepted 9/10. However, for the most part, those aren't the pictures that are selling well for me. Yesterday I got an EL on a picture of a red barn in a green field!
At the end of the day, I don't care which pictures make the most money as long as I'm making money!
-
I have an image which has all sorts of lighting issues which I nearly didn't upload 2 years ago but decided to just let the reviewers decide. It has sold over 500 times at IS, nearly 900 at SS and various amounts over the other sites. It still sells well but now that I have got better there is no way I would have uploaded that image now and it definitely wouldn't get accepted. It surprises me everytime it sells as I now have similar and much better images in my portfolio but you can never tell what the buyers are looking for.
-
I have an image which has all sorts of lighting issues which I nearly didn't upload 2 years ago but decided to just let the reviewers decide. It has sold over 500 times at IS, nearly 900 at SS and various amounts over the other sites. It still sells well but now that I have got better there is no way I would have uploaded that image now and it definitely wouldn't get accepted. It surprises me everytime it sells as I now have similar and much better images in my portfolio but you can never tell what the buyers are looking for.
Your image has that nice undefinable X factor which appeals to buyers. Sometimes even if things are technically wrong, aesthetically it is appealling. Congrats on your odd success :)
-
If I was only going to upload the images I was really proud of, my portfolio would have 3 photos in it :)
Me too. Or more like my portfolio will have 3 submitted to it, and 2 rejected because it's more artistic than stock. =)
-
Remember this is SS we're talking about, a lot of them downloads will never be used. The individual download is in effect free for the buyer.
Loads of stuff sells on SS that would never get a second look on site where the marginal cost for an image isn't zero.
Think about the folios of submitters who say that SS is their no. one seller.
They tend to be either poor compared to others or good (sometimes very good) but not commercially very useful (arty etc.)
Yeah that's right I went there! ;)
-
I'm sorry but Magnum's post smacks of jealousy. Calling out somebody else's work is low and very unprofessional. Truth is, it's a great shot and if you spend time looking at the rest of her portfolio, her work is solid across the board. If I were a buyer, I'd grab her stuff like a kid grabs candy.
Sure, there are times when I wonder why an image is so popular but, as stated, the customer is always right. There are times I think that the image is badly done or could use improvement. But I would never, ever say anything (unless I'm their teacher). This type of behavior reminds me of how teenage girls are in high school. When they see a pretty girl, they start talking trash about her behind her back. They end up looking like idiots for doing so.
Sorry Magnum but I think you crossed the line. You need to focus on your own work and stop calling other people out on what's "wrong" with their work. If the creator of that image showed up here, I'm sure she would be hurt that you essentially trashed an image she may be incredibly proud of (and should be!).
Marj out!
-
I have to admit that on more than one occasion, I have been mystified about the front page pics - the specific thing that repeatedly jumps out at me would be "white balance". Countless times, I have felt that if I'd submitted such a shot (I am NOT referring to any specific photo), it would have never been accepted.
I questioned it publicly once and got the following answer:
"Ya gotta know the rules before you can break the rules".
I thought that was pretty good advice, and since then - when I have seen photos that I personally think would not make the grade had they been my own - I try to study them to see why they DO work and why they ARE featured.
I haven't figured out a whole lot by doing that, but I don't get aggravated any more. I just figure that my limited experience/vision/ability makes it so that whatever image it is - that the skill/ability/vision of the photographer is just over my head!
Does that make sense?
-
the customer is always right...
he / she is the one with money to waste...
noise BAD, good composition , bit of noise BAD
lousy boring image NOISE FREE
buy buy buy... don't look at the image, look at the graph...
no noise BUY BUY BUY
get the picture ? (bad pun)
stop making noise (bad pun again) :-*
-
I just HAVE to complain a little!
Thereīs a snowboard picture among the top photos at SS. No offense to the photographer, but If I had taken that picture It would probably have ended up in the trash. Itīs sharp and has a nice clear sky, but thats it.
- only back of the person showing
- not the most stylish jump, grandma:)
-bad colors clothing.
-snow is overxposed
I canīt belive it sells!!!!!!! congratulations!
Iīve actually start to dig in the trashcan for goofy looking stuff after I saw this one :Q
No link. check most popular images.
it's not the image.
find out who is the reviewer and send a lovely photo of yourself...
with "hey sexy! wanna be friends?" ;D ;D ;D
-
I'm sorry but Magnum's post smacks of jealousy. Calling out somebody else's work is low and very unprofessional. Truth is, it's a great shot and if you spend time looking at the rest of her portfolio, her work is solid across the board. If I were a buyer, I'd grab her stuff like a kid grabs candy.
Sure, there are times when I wonder why an image is so popular but, as stated, the customer is always right. There are times I think that the image is badly done or could use improvement. But I would never, ever say anything (unless I'm their teacher). This type of behavior reminds me of how teenage girls are in high school. When they see a pretty girl, they start talking trash about her behind her back. They end up looking like idiots for doing so.
Sorry Magnum but I think you crossed the line. You need to focus on your own work and stop calling other people out on what's "wrong" with their work. If the creator of that image showed up here, I'm sure she would be hurt that you essentially trashed an image she may be incredibly proud of (and should be!).
Marj out!
-
I'm sorry but Magnum's post smacks of jealousy. Calling out somebody else's work is low and very unprofessional. Truth is, it's a great shot and if you spend time looking at the rest of her portfolio, her work is solid across the board. If I were a buyer, I'd grab her stuff like a kid grabs candy.
Sure, there are times when I wonder why an image is so popular but, as stated, the customer is always right. There are times I think that the image is badly done or could use improvement. But I would never, ever say anything (unless I'm their teacher). This type of behavior reminds me of how teenage girls are in high school. When they see a pretty girl, they start talking trash about her behind her back. They end up looking like idiots for doing so.
Sorry Magnum but I think you crossed the line. You need to focus on your own work and stop calling other people out on what's "wrong" with their work. If the creator of that image showed up here, I'm sure she would be hurt that you essentially trashed an image she may be incredibly proud of (and should be!).
Marj out!
My intention was not to cross the line here, but I guess I did in your point of view. Itīs hard to get the right feeling to Text.
Iīve been a snowboarder for a big part of my life, and that do a little to it, I think. Shooting snowboarders, and living with snowboarders, watching movies of snowboarders. Iīll have to say again, that Iīd have thrown that in the garbage if I didnīt know about stock buyers.
And as I said before. No offense to the Photographer!
/M
-
I think everyone has a point here.
but we , as photographers / illustrators, have to keep in mind who the buyer is too, for which in most cases, we don't.
it's like the movies and music. which movie or music is the bigger draw?
one with a good story, great lighting, good actors, incredible production,etc.. or something that is marginal?
in most cases, the latter is the money maker.
it's the sad reality. but as some of you point out, we know it's a problem, but perharps, we also have to try to be honest with ourselves.
money is great, but i don't think any of us want to be associated with an image that many of our peers would call "crap".
then again, we need to sell our images, or else no one is going to look at your portfolio.
it's a double-edged sword, isn't it?
-
The last time I went to the museum, (which was the last time I'll ever want to :o), there were more ppl standing around an exhibit with a toilet seat, and a wall spray painted with 2 blocked colours.
no one was standing around admiring a rembrandt or even a van gogh.
these are the same ppl who will grow up to teach our children what art is.
is it not surprising that mediocrity sells?
paul simon used to sing about this (mediocrity) in the 60's.
so why are we still surprised?
-
Magnum, the answer to your question can be summed up in two words:
"WOOLY BOOLY" 8)
-
Translation plz for a viking:) Some words canīt be found in the dictionary....
-
Translation plz for a viking:) Some words canīt be found in the dictionary....
oh, if you're asking me what WOOLY BOOLY is ?
it was a song in the 60's. the most stupid song you can ever play. based on 3 chords that even a baby can play on the guitar, the beat too... horrible.
but it sold a million and perharps even more.
no honest living musician would touch this tune, and the writer and group was the worst band in the world.