MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Will I ever get in?  (Read 16502 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: September 12, 2008, 05:46 »
0
I have great sales (for a beginner of 3 months now with only ~70 photos online) on SS, and lousy on every other site (IS being second worst by a dollar), so comparisons aren't always viable. In my case, what I consider a great shot and it sells on FT,DT and StockXpert, it doesn't have a single dl on IS. it will take me 5 more months to reach payout on other sites, and I'm only on SS for a month and a week and will get a payout at the end of this September. So it is definitely worth it, but it requires you to upload constantly through out the week. On the day my batch get accepted (unless it is weekend) I get 15 dls, next day 5, next day 3, and so on until I get another batch approved. On other sites it's loong days without dls.
I got in on the first try, but it was 10 photos of beautiful girls isolated on white in the studio. I recommend hiring a model or two and getting them to go through some concept shots and submit that to SS. You should pass with flying colors. Afterwards, fill your portfolio with your usual stuff.


« Reply #26 on: September 13, 2008, 07:04 »
0
Am I the only one that thinks it's not hard to take ten pictures that will pass inspection with flying colours?  I could do that in twenty mins sitting at my kitchen table.

If you get turned down to sell your stock, perhaps you should go away for a few months and learn how to use your camera properly?

« Reply #27 on: September 13, 2008, 08:04 »
0
Am I the only one that thinks it's not hard to take ten pictures that will pass inspection with flying colours?  I could do that in twenty mins sitting at my kitchen table.

If you get turned down to sell your stock, perhaps you should go away for a few months and learn how to use your camera properly?


Take your very same 10 photos and submit them around else where and see if very same photos ALL get accepted. You know as well as I do this   industry is quite a racket that has photographer's jumping though hoops and playing guessing games all the time. None of them seem to know what they want, what's selling and what's hot or not. I'm not afraid to say that since I left a very established B&W film history to persue this crazy commercial stock world as a new challenge that I have had blanket rejects and with that said have taken the very same photos and not only had them accepted at more than one place but have derived sales from said photos.

Take your photos honey and go RM and submit to say, Alamy and you'll be at your kitchen table with your camera and coffee alright pouting over your rash of rejections. Your statement and theory leads no credibility to your said statement and is self-appointed elitism and pompous without purpose.

Dirk

P.S. You know upon further thought several months ago when I first started and I got blanket rejections from SS I was spurred but then submitted again to have it happen again until they became a part of my workflow process and after they in fact rejected them they in turn would be most likely be accpeted elsewhere. Another man's junk is another man's treasure. SS-0 Me-$$$ This is another valid point of what was mentioned above, also on the subject of credibility, it applies greatly upon the industry as well as a whole. This is the "Hollywood" of the photography world; you wanna friend, go buy a puppy, think you actually made a friend, think again, think your acceptance at some stock place makes you special or accepeted overall, again, think again, what's hot today isn't in 24 hours or less later, sitting in forums grandstanding our own ego's, yep, slamming others, yep, all in a NYC second.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2008, 08:34 by Dirk Diggler »

« Reply #28 on: September 13, 2008, 10:31 »
0
It took me 4 attempts to get accepted by Shutterstock:
http://pixelsaway.com/C911796005/E20080308090659/index.html

2:8
5:5
5:5
8:2

and it was worth it.

« Reply #29 on: September 19, 2008, 01:24 »
0

Take your photos honey and go RM and submit to say, Alamy and you'll be at your kitchen table with your camera and coffee alright pouting over your rash of rejections. Your statement and theory leads no credibility to your said statement and is self-appointed elitism and pompous without purpose.

Honey, I already DO submit to Alamy.  I'm in the process of removing all my micro photos because they don't make me nearly as much as alamy and other specialist agencies for my sports and military work.

And I'll say this.  It was easier to get accepted at Alamy than iStock.  I've not had a rejection on Alamy yet.

« Reply #30 on: September 19, 2008, 15:22 »
0
Am I the only one that thinks it's not hard to take ten pictures that will pass inspection with flying colours?  I could do that in twenty mins sitting at my kitchen table.

If you get turned down to sell your stock, perhaps you should go away for a few months and learn how to use your camera properly?


You may not be the only one to think so, but you are the only one who is arrogant enough to tell it.

Your post only demonstrates that it is not necessary to be a nice human being in order to be a good photographer  ::)

You are not Laurin Rinder: you are not old, wise and experimented enough.

And BTW, your web site is bad: I can do a better one in 10 minutes while drinking my coffee.

 :-\


« Last Edit: September 19, 2008, 15:31 by araminta »

« Reply #31 on: September 19, 2008, 15:37 »
0
In fact, after browsing your collection, I must confess I was wrong: you are not even a good photographer. Not bad, just OK.

Sorry to be so rude, but you deserve it IMHO  ;D

« Reply #32 on: September 19, 2008, 16:35 »
0

Take your photos honey and go RM and submit to say, Alamy and you'll be at your kitchen table with your camera and coffee alright pouting over your rash of rejections. Your statement and theory leads no credibility to your said statement and is self-appointed elitism and pompous without purpose.

Honey, I already DO submit to Alamy.  I'm in the process of removing all my micro photos because they don't make me nearly as much as alamy and other specialist agencies for my sports and military work.

And I'll say this.  It was easier to get accepted at Alamy than iStock.  I've not had a rejection on Alamy yet.

Seren,

Why don't you take some of that phat money you make and go by an ounce of class.

CofkoCof

« Reply #33 on: September 19, 2008, 19:18 »
0

Take your photos honey and go RM and submit to say, Alamy and you'll be at your kitchen table with your camera and coffee alright pouting over your rash of rejections. Your statement and theory leads no credibility to your said statement and is self-appointed elitism and pompous without purpose.

Honey, I already DO submit to Alamy.  I'm in the process of removing all my micro photos because they don't make me nearly as much as alamy and other specialist agencies for my sports and military work.

And I'll say this.  It was easier to get accepted at Alamy than iStock.  I've not had a rejection on Alamy yet.

Seren,

Why don't you take some of that phat money you make and go by an ounce of class.
Why? Cos she doesn't make phat money lol

« Reply #34 on: September 19, 2008, 20:44 »
0
Take your photos honey and go RM and submit to say, Alamy and you'll be at your kitchen table with your camera and coffee alright pouting over your rash of rejections. Your statement and theory leads no credibility to your said statement and is self-appointed elitism and pompous without purpose.
quote Seren:
Honey, I already DO submit to Alamy.  I'm in the process of removing all my micro photos because they don't make me nearly as much as alamy and other specialist agencies for my sports and military work.

And I'll say this.  It was easier to get accepted at Alamy than iStock.  I've not had a rejection on Alamy yet.


geez... seren...    you're really knowing how to win friends and influence people. On the other hand,  it is obvious that you don't care to anyway.

To KANE and the original question... YES,  keep trying. I too went 2, 3 rounds with SS before getting in  and....  in the end, it really had nothing to do with taking  10  good shots, as someone once said.
  I'm not 23. I'm 60 and I've been shooting 35mm since I was 13. I think I take a 'pretty good' photo and evidently so do many others that give me good money(4 digits for a dozen shots) for my stuff.  Wow, some are with Alamy, gee golly.  SO? I also am at Alamy and I also sell with Jupiter now too....  and I wouldn't even dream of pulling my SS account!!  Dude, free money and lots of it!!!  Anyone not making money with SS must have one of two things, mediocre photos or an miniscule folio.
 I also make a great deal more money free lancing and contract sales direct to publishing companies...   SO WHAT?  Who doesn't on this forum, a minority I believe and most likely because they are new to the biz and if they stick with it they will too. .
Most of the folks here on MSG all make big bucks outside of microstock. Many here are with the big macro agencies ( Jupiter, Getty, Corbis...). Most here are professional photogs in that it is their only source of income, their career.  Yet here we are pushing material into microstock. Why? It's easy money with little effort.
  And many here have been photogs for decades!!  Not a few years. You may do as you please. As for me, when I got into the micro biz specific, I learned most of what I needed to know right here on MSG. There  is plenty of wise counsel and long term experience to draw on.  Listen to it.

AND back to the original point... SS  is worth it. Once you are in and build up your folio, you too will be cashing checks on a regular basis. ....for no work beyond the intial upload. Keep trying, you'll get in!!

P.S.  to Seren...   it's a shame. Just before I came on this thread,  I actually complimented you in another.  There,  you were telling folks how foolish they were to pull their photos from nonproductive sites in the short term.  They should stay and have patience, you implied.   Yet in this thread... you tell us you are now removing your photos from microstock....
       Humm..I don't understand... Guess I took too many drugs at Woodstock... and I'm now just a confused old man......                yeah, right. 

Perhaps  YOU should go away for a few months and learn how to be a better person. 8)=tom
« Last Edit: September 19, 2008, 21:28 by a.k.a.-tom »

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #35 on: September 19, 2008, 21:06 »
0
 ::)


« Reply #36 on: September 19, 2008, 21:35 »
0
Good one, PW!!  LOL...  Just thinking...   how many photogs on MSG are also reviewers  for many agencies[hopefully none that are reviewers at agencies where she might want to post]???   I'm sure Seren never thought about ticking any of them off when she made her comments. LOL
  Then again, she seems much too confident and full of her 23 year old self to care.  8)=tom
« Last Edit: September 19, 2008, 22:09 by a.k.a.-tom »

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #37 on: September 19, 2008, 21:43 »
0
I'm sure there are reviewer members here Tom. Even if not, they absolutely are lurking.

Never crap where you eat.  ;)

« Reply #38 on: September 20, 2008, 01:15 »
0

P.S.  to Seren...   it's a shame. Just before I came on this thread,  I actually complimented you in another.  There,  you were telling folks how foolish they were to pull their photos from nonproductive sites in the short term.  They should stay and have patience, you implied.   Yet in this thread... you tell us you are now removing your photos from microstock....
       Humm..I don't understand... Guess I took too many drugs at Woodstock... and I'm now just a confused old man......                yeah, right. 


The reason I'm pulling from microstock, is that in nine months I'm going to be hitting the road with my partner (military man) and I don't want the stress of having to keep up with what 6 sites are up to with my images.  I don't want to have to keep checking them to see if I have made a payout, or if they're playing silly buggers with my money.  I want ONE primary site, and then work with specialists to promote my images.  I have four main collections to my work - millitary (which I'm deciding who to put with), a kayaking collection (which I'm having a portfolio review with next week), an archive collection (around 5000 slides and trannies which were my grandfathers who was a photographer for about 50 years) and a local collection (which wouldn't sell on microstock).  So basically almost every photograph I take won't sell on microstock because they won't have it.  So what do I do?  Put one or two pictures a week on microstock?  No, it's not worth it when I can put them with the rest of my collection.  That way I don't have to keep visiting sites all the time.  Plus I'm hoping to go away somewhere deserty and violet on a regular basis (in negotiations at the moment) so it's not really practical to have to check your earnings and keep up with sites while you're there.

P.S.  Alamy reviewers aren't photographers - I applied for a job there as QC, it's just down the road from me.  And the other agencies I'm interviewing don't have reviewers.  They have editors who search the collections for clients.   :-\
« Last Edit: September 20, 2008, 01:17 by Seren »

« Reply #39 on: September 20, 2008, 01:31 »
0
Just a further thought too.  Because it seems the attitude around here is "Keep trying till you get in".

If I stacked the shelves in a supermarket and kept putting damaged products on the shelves, that's not acceptable.  If I turned up for an interview, and I demonstrated how I was going to stack the shelves with these damaged products, they wouldn't let me come back for another interview.

Apply that to stock.  People here have claimed that they have interviewed for shutterstock nearly ten times.  Why does shutterstock keep letting people present their damaged photographs to sell?

Where is the honor anymore?  Surely before you offer a product to sell to the general publish you must be accomplished in your craft and produce a final end product.

Back to food again.  If I rocked up to a farmers market and started selling my jam that I had accidently spilt vinegar in, people are going to have something to say and I'm not going to be asked back to the farmers market again.  (MMmm, Jam).  It's the same thing.  Why do people keep being offered multiple chances to do something that should be done right first time?

I bet, that if you set your dSLR to program mode, ISO100, walked outside and took a picture of a well lit, well composed scene, (I don't know, a cat on a windowsill) then I bet it would be accepted to all the libraries (notwithstanding the "too many" rejection).  dSLR's will inherently take a technically good picture, that's what they're designed to do.  I don't know how people manage to stuff it up so much.  Like I've said before, I've had my MUMS holiday pictures accepted to microstock and Alamy taken with her compact on Auto.

« Reply #40 on: September 20, 2008, 07:03 »
0
For me it is not a matter of whether you are right or not, but it's just about good or bad behaviour.

In fact I never encourage myself people in such threads and I do not think you are completely wrong, but I consider myself not wise, skilled and experimented enough to tell people they should stop trying. So I just do not participate to such threads.

I think that Yuri Arcurs is a good example of what a successful microstocker should be: very confident because he knows he is one of the best, but still trying to participate and give good advices to others less successful people.

On the other hand, Laurin Rinder is a lot more rude and direct, but he is still trying to help peoples and give good advices.

You are neither as successful and definitively not as good as Yuri and not as experimented and wise as Laurin. You are just very confident and your portfolio is not good enough for me to justify this attitude.

RT


« Reply #41 on: September 20, 2008, 08:07 »
0
P.S.  Alamy reviewers aren't photographers - I applied for a job there as QC, it's just down the road from me. 


Yes they are and you need to have a recognised photography qualification, maybe that's why you didn't get in!

http://www.alamy.com/jobs/stock-photography-digital-images-quality-controller.asp

Check the first line of the 'Essential requirement'

« Last Edit: September 20, 2008, 08:15 by RT »


PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #42 on: September 20, 2008, 08:52 »
0
Thanks for your life story but I'm not clear on what this has to do with your attitude. Are you saying you feel you're justified at treating people like crap because they're struggling?

« Reply #43 on: September 20, 2008, 13:43 »
0
Paulie - fed up perhaps because everyone I talk to is a "photographer".  Fed up because I got stopped again last week while out shooting by a guy with a Casio compact saying he was trying to get accepted at iStock and just couldn't seem to manage it.  Fed up with the amateur photography magazines convincing everyone that they're a photographer.  Fed up with people with portfolios of 20 images who make two sales a month claiming to be "proffessssional".

Guess I'm turning into one of them nasty "pro's" that all the microstockers hate.

Fed up with people who think they're good enough to sell their pictures but can't take ten good pictures.  Read a book.  In fact, read the camera manual.  It's got everything you need to know!

Fed up with people who show me their crappy photographs taken on ISO 800 in bright sunshine, out of focus and suffering from serious CA and yet having to go "yes, it's lovely".

Fed up I suppose with pissing around with people who don't have a clue what a good technical photograph looks like.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2008, 13:45 by Seren »

« Reply #44 on: September 20, 2008, 13:46 »
0

Yes they are and you need to have a recognised photography qualification, maybe that's why you didn't get in!

Actually I phoned them and photography qualification isn't an essential requirement.  It's a nice thing to have.  There were other reasons I didn't get the job - mostly lack of experience in a picture editing role.

« Reply #45 on: September 20, 2008, 15:22 »
0
Seren, Im not sure where you are going with all of this, but you are not helping yourself. There are many people in this world with a real reason to be fed up you not wanting to help others is not in my opinion worthy of our consideration.

Shutterstocks acceptance policy is Im sure based on good business practice, your attitude to others isnt.


« Reply #46 on: September 20, 2008, 16:23 »
0
Hey Seren

you should try the wedding biz if you truly want to see incompetence in action. I quit wedding shooting a couple of years ago, but am making gobs of money doing retouch for all the new shooters blowing their shots. In one case, I charged a shooter more than she charged the unsuspecting customer for the wedding job. Yes, one of those who picked up the digi rebel at the discount house and decided to go into the wedding business.

There are some who have some natural talent when it comes to shooting. My brother is one of those. Me, I had to study harder to get where I am. And hard as is to say, there are some who just suck and will never get it even if hit on the head with a hammer.

I have a nice sharp knife - I think I'll become a surgeon...

With regards to the "be nice and help others", well there comes a point where you will just start banging your head against the wall, because even when advised, there will be the shooter who will continue to make the same gaffs out of habit and laziness - trying to shoot a model on white who is standing 12 inches in front of a dirty bed sheet, shooting flowers at high noon when the sun is blazing... And don't even get me startied on reading the manual cover to cover.

Someone suggested submiiting to 123, an "easier" agency - well yeah they will accept anything, but you'll never learn anything from the process. There is a reason for low sales here - your images are mired in trash. If agencies would all become a little more iStock-like, I'd be very happy. And no, not an exclusive there - I don't drink the kool aid. But their high standards are to be admired. It's better for the customer and better for those who study and work hard at their craft.

Micro is loaded with garbage - if anything they should up their standards in order to offer a premium product to the customer.

Advice to the OP - study sales stats from agencies like DT, StockXpert etc where you can seel sales stats. Search subjects you are familiar with, see if such subjects are selling. And also search, Business, Shopping, Lifestyle. Get some ideas and go out and shoot it better. Because when looking at your submission, the overall sales potential on your images will be a consideration. No business likes a dud that just lays on the shelf.

« Reply #47 on: September 20, 2008, 16:36 »
0
Has anyone here heard of crowdsourcing? When istock started the microstock industry it was based on the crowdsourcing model, and they still pride themselves in encouraging contributors to grow as photographers and develop their skills. I wonder if yuri had all his original submission to shutterstock accepted. I know a couple of excellent photographers who didn't.

From anecdotal evidence it appears to me that Shutterstock is only interested in people who are persistent. They probably don't want a lot of accounts of people who have uploaded a dozen images and then stopped. All of my 10 were rejected and every one of them had been accepted on istock, whose inspectors are not renowned for their leniency.

lisafx

« Reply #48 on: September 20, 2008, 18:03 »
0
Well, I guess I am stepping in it here, but I think Seren has a point.  Maybe not worded so tactfully because she is fed up and also facing stresses.  If the love of my life was headed to a "desert climate" with the military in a short time I would not be feeling very diplomatic either.

I think it is great that people want to learn to improve their skills and that is why a lot of us come here to this group.  Nothing wrong with that, and there are a lot of very helpful people in this community. 

But to be fair, if the rants of the reviewers in another thread are true, there are apparently a lot of folks who don't bother to learn the technical aspects of this craft before submitting images, and even after doing it for awhile, are not making any efforts to improve.  Maybe they are in the 70% that never make payout.

I don't pretend to know what's best for other people, but I know for myself, it never occurred to me to charge money for my pictures until I had spent several years reading books, magazines, photography forums, etc. and taking classes on photography, lighting, and photoshop techniques.  Applying those lessons with constant practice eventually yielded consistent results, and it was at that point I thought of turning "pro".  And of course I still have a lot to learn - when I see the work of some of the talented people doing this I realize how far I have yet to go.

I guess to me it is an issue of putting the cart before the horse.  Knowing the basics is essential to any undertaking, be it microstock or something else.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2008, 18:06 by lisafx »

« Reply #49 on: September 20, 2008, 18:43 »
0

Guess I'm turning into one of them nasty "pro's" that all the microstockers hate.


Seren... I guess this is the point of the whole discussion as of late.  You can be a 'pro'  and not be nasty.
   You had mentioned that your grandfather was a photographer. Was he pro? Was he nasty?
      You are an accomplished, published photographer. I would venture to guess that you learned something if not much from your grandfather, whether by direct guidance or by observation of his work [ I don't know your circumstances],  but at the very least, you were probably influenced by him to some degree.
   If it was direct, how did he handle you.  If you were not fortunate to spend time with him,  do you know how he handled others that wanted to learn the craft, be it pro or just hobby?

      That's one of the problems universally on this planet.  Some who become accomplished have a tendency to  'look down'  on those that are not so accomplished.  Some are gifted and talented... some are not.  Just because one has become successful in  their craft is no reason to  be demeaning to those that aren't.
    In this case...  we don't know Kane,  the person who made the original comment in the thread.  Maybe he is a person who just got into the biz because he read he could make a quick buck with a point&shoot. Maybe he has no talent, no experience at all..... He could very well be one of those that thinks because a dige-cam can do a lot of the tech of photography, that    everything he shoots is utterly fantastic.....
    And then again, maybe he's a guy thats been shooting pro photog for decades and now decided to try his hand at stock photography.
    The point of that?   There are plenty of pro photographers out there and some on this forum who have been pro for years and years...  ones who had to attack the learning curve between film and dige. Some who made a good living but then wanted to get into this stock thing on the side and had to learn the idiosyncracies of stock.
 The fact is, there are lifelong,  high paid, successful pros right here on this forum that......   had  a  problem  getting  into  SS.  Getting shot down by SS once, twice, five times   IS NOT  indicative of ones professional talents as a photographer.   Like many, I was accepted on the first try at  IS, Alamy, StockXpert, ... 14 agencies... Jupiter is selling my work.. I have had featured magazine articles developed around my photography... books, national advertisments, gov't agencies, lobbying groups in D.C. , heck, the list goes on and continues to expand...   SO WHAT?????    .... and it took me... I think, four times to get into SS.   This is not bragging,  I know there are many here that can say the very same and even more,even greater.

      SS reviewers are not the be all, end all  authority on how talented you are as  a photog.

     Seren,  Be all that you can be,  more power to you, may you have greater success than you even do now...    but please........   DON'T turn into one of those very things that we DO all hate around here.  A bitter, nasty 'pro'. Share your talent and knowledge and be encouraging to newbies....
     If they have no talent, sooner or later they will find that out on their own. On the other hand, you may by squelching someone that has talent and could possibly be the next ... Ansel Adams  or whoever...   
   If I came on too nasty myself in my comments to you... I apologize. Just trying to grab your attention on the matter... I wish you success in your new ventures.

 Peace.  8)=tom

 
« Last Edit: September 20, 2008, 18:45 by a.k.a.-tom »


 

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors