Please criticize my work. Trying to start on stock photography coming from art

[domingos]

Hey guys,

First of all, let me introduce myself and give you a very brief overview of my experience as a photographer. I'm pretty new to stock photography in general but I've been in photography as a hobby for many years now (since 1994). However, I'm very rusty and not very familiar with the digital photo world. I used to shoot my old pentax K1000 (always B&W art), develop and print my work at home, where I used to keep a darkroom. But I stayed away from shooting for years and got back 3 years ago, first very lightly and more seriously since the end of last year. My equipment is a Nikon D5000 with Nikkor lens 18-55 and 55-300. For post development I've been using Adobe Lightroom 4.


I've submitted 3 photos with my application to iStockPhoto and got a rejection. I can see flaws in all of them (almost no picture is perfect, right?), but as I'm not familiar with iStockphoto standards (I still have questions even after reading their material on it), it's not very clear to me why they got rejected. Maybe something on my poor Lightroom skills? Could you please give me your opinion? I'm very open to it and would really appreciate any comments. I've included four more photos here, if you don't mind. I'm sorry to bother you but I really would like to see your opinion on these ones too.


Rejected ones:


https://www.dropbox.com/s/oa0udpycew7jono/sauipe_cerca_pb_MD.jpg

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zkgkrv110c6oujw/cobra_Verde_1_MD.jpg

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5bore8eaps7p2tm/veropeso_perfumes_MD.jpg



Extras:


https://www.dropbox.com/s/1e4eysadf0srrfw/cascavel_MD.jpg

https://www.dropbox.com/s/nmdescum95sfnpl/cobra_Verde_2_MD.jpg

https://www.dropbox.com/s/jv15xtuntjcvn2i/borboleta_grande_MD.jpg

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ozh0r9wj6rbbe2l/esquilo_MD.jpg




Thank you so much for your help,


Domingos.

 

[ralphh]

iStock are very fussy about what they take - overly so in some ways IMO - even elements that improve a picture astetically will be rejected if they break their rules...

Add grain to a B&W for astetic reasons and it'll be shot down as 'noisy'... you get the idea.


Anyways... if I had to guess with yours;
1) Looks like a large area of the sky is burn out white.
2) Not really sure. Showllow DoF ticked a box for 'blury' for the moron with a check-list looking it your entries?
3) Suspect same as #2, tho perhaps more justified; the bottles are getting quite blury towards the edges. Also, not sure what's in the background, but it is somewhat odd looking - pure white would be better I'd have thought. Great idea though.

Overall I like the shots, but I can see why they turned them down, except for 2, not sure specifficaly what's wrong with that one in their eyes - maybe they just couldn't see it selling.

 

[curtyoungblood]

#2 You missed the focus on this one. The photo is really focused on what would be the snake's ear, instead of its eye. That would be my guess.

 

[imagemaker46]

The problem with any online stock photo site. There are thousands of them, most giving the photos away for free or very little, there are hundreds of thousands of photos of sunsets, bugs, flowers, trees and animals available online. Offering a stock agency photos that are different, or better than what they are usually seeing, is the only door in. You have to remember there are also tens of thousand amateur and professional photographers sending these people images everyday.

There is nothing wrong with your images at all, personally I like them, but from a stock aspect, they look like the rest. Do an image search on snakes and you'll see what I mean.

 

[gsgary]

Ive heard that snakes on sticks sell well

 

[shinycard255]

I can't see your photos right now due to work blocking the links you posted (Tapatalk on the phone won't load them either), but I will comment tonight on them.

Over the past few years of me submitting images to different stock sites, I've noticed all of them have different guidelines that they all follow. My biggest rejection problem was always clipping paths. A lot of my stock work is shot on white and dropped off to white without paths now. iStock is very picky about clipping paths. Another rejection they throw out a lot is 'too much noise'. I'd recommend shooting at your lowest ISO (100 or 50) to get around this rejection notice. Not sure what other rejections they throw out, but I hardly get images rejected anymore since I've found out what they 'like'.

Another thing to keep in mind when posting images to stock sites is how saturated some areas can be. Here's an example, do a search for 'christmas' on any stock site. You will see TONS of christmas images pop up. I stay away from those because I know I won't make any money off of it since no one will really be able to find my images. Find something out there that isn't over saturated already. I go around to all the different stock sites I upload to and type in what I want to shoot first before even trying my hand at it to see if there's a market out there for it.


Here's an example:
I wanted to shoot car keys, but wasn't sure how saturated it was, so I took a peek. I usually start on Shutterstock so I typed in 'car keys isolated' and saw (at the time) to be quite a few images. Now, here was the biggest seller at the time for 'car keys isolated':

I think it looks OK, but it can be improved on. So I took out my car keys and set up the shot because I knew I could improve on what was already out there. So after playing around with lighting the keys and the composition, here is what I got:

I thought I had a killer shot and posted it right away just to see what happens. Now if you were to search 'car keys isolated' on Shutterstock, my image is the first image that pops up (it's only been on there for 3 months too!).


In all reality, there is a shot out there for everything in the stock world. You just need to find a way to make your images 'pop' compared to all the rest of them out there. Another thing to keep in mind to help your images sell would be using proper keywords. No one is going to find your images if you don't use the right keywords.

If I can think of anything else, I will add to this post. And as stated previously, I will come back and comment on your images tonight once I'm at home and can view them

Edit: Also, take out any logos on anything and everything that you can, otherwise you will get rejected.

Hope this helps!

 

[Tuffythepug]

At one time I considered the I-stock route. But after reading the guidelines and looking over their "Test" I decided it was not worth my time to pursue it. They are in fact VERY critical of any noise and they seem to insist that any photos must have been shot in RAW originally. That's not a big deal but it is an indication that they are very picky. Nothing wrong with your shots; they just aren't what I-stock is looking for at the moment.

 

[ralphh]

I also considered micro stock as a way to make a little extra cash, but very quickly realized it wasn't just a case of going back through my old photos and uploading the best -- i'd have to shoot specifically with stock in mind, which would just suck all the fun out of it and seem more like work than hobby.

 

[shinycard255]

I also considered micro stock as a way to make a little extra cash, but very quickly realized it wasn't just a case of going back through my old photos and uploading the best -- i'd have to shoot specifically with stock in mind, which would just suck all the fun out of it and seem more like work than hobby.

Yeah, that's the downfall of stock. You need to have that "stock eye" when shooting, otherwise it won't sell. The extra money that I make from stock sites helps me buy new lenses every few months. My next purchase is going to be a 100mm macro and then a new camera body

 

[ralphh]

I also considered micro stock as a way to make a little extra cash, but very quickly realized it wasn't just a case of going back through my old photos and uploading the best -- i'd have to shoot specifically with stock in mind, which would just suck all the fun out of it and seem more like work than hobby.

Yeah, that's the downfall of stock. You need to have that "stock eye" when shooting, otherwise it won't sell. The extra money that I make from stock sites helps me buy new lenses every few months. My next purchase is going to be a 100mm macro and then a new camera body

well that's just re-piqued my interest.. We talking L glass or nifty 50's?

I think i read somewhere that $1 per photo per month was a reasonable average guideline.. That really was the final nail for me...

 

[shinycard255]

I also considered micro stock as a way to make a little extra cash, but very quickly realized it wasn't just a case of going back through my old photos and uploading the best -- i'd have to shoot specifically with stock in mind, which would just suck all the fun out of it and seem more like work than hobby.

Yeah, that's the downfall of stock. You need to have that "stock eye" when shooting, otherwise it won't sell. The extra money that I make from stock sites helps me buy new lenses every few months. My next purchase is going to be a 100mm macro and then a new camera body

well that's just re-piqued my interest.. We talking L glass or nifty 50's?

I think i read somewhere that $1 per photo per month was a reasonable average guideline.. That really was the final nail for me...

L series for me. I wouldn't want anything less. I just picked up a Canon 17-40mm f/4 from 3 months of stock.

I set goals for myself with my stock work. My first goal was to sell 1 image per day. Took me a while to hit that, but then my next goal was $1 per day off Shutterstock. I hit that eventually, then I bumped it up to $2. Then to $3. The last mark I hit was $5 per day off of Shutterstock. The goal I'm trying to achieve now is $10 per day off Shutterstock (which I'm close to, I think I'm floating around $7-8 per day). I don't have goals set on the other sites because Shutterstock is my main money maker (~$100 per month if not more at times (and that's just off Shutterstock, imagine all the other sites I'm on too)).

The main key to this is to keep uploading though. Without increasing your stock portfolio, you won't be able to make money. The more images you have out there, the better. I'm at 142 images on Shutterstock, 141 images on iStock, and 155 images on Dreamstime. Not all of my images got accepted across all of these sites either.

 

[ralphh]

Wow, that's quite a lot of images, considering what it takes to get an image they'll accept...

How long did it take you to get to those kind of numbers if you don't mind me asking? Or more importantly, how much effort over how much time? Didn't seem to me like the kinda thing you could really start to get a return on without consistent serious commitment to it, not just the odd hour or two here and there...


Sorry for the thread hijack OP, hopefully this is interesting to you too....

 

[shinycard255]

With how nit-picky the sites are, it can be time consuming at times. Back to the car key shot I showed you, with doing the photography and retouching on it, I think I spent maybe 2 hours total on the image (but it almost gets downloaded daily for me).

I've been doing stock for almost 3 years now, so it took some time to get where I'm at now. Also, all the same images are on the different sites that I'm on to spread my portfolio out. So in total number of images, I'm around 170 for all 3 sites (since they all didn't accept the same images). Honestly, I spend maybe a few hours on images if it's needed. Other times, I will throw a shot up on set, play around for 30 minutes and throw it into PS to spice it up a bit and I post it.

It is a commitment thing in order to get a return out of it. I go through spurts too. One week I can spend some time doing 10 images to post, then the next like month I won't do anything just to get my mind off of it. I have to be in the mind-set at times to do it. But also in that month of me not posting anything, I'm still making money because of the number of images I have out there. Maybe even one day I can quit my daytime job and just sit around and do nothing while I make money (I have high hopes).

If people are really wanting to get into stock, look into Shutterstock. They seem to have less strict guidelines and since they seem to be the 'newcomer' in the stock world, a lot of people are using them for their stock needs due to low prices on images. I also feel like you get more for bang from them as well.

 

[ralphh]

Maybe even one day I can quit my daytime job and just sit around and do nothing while I make money (I have high hopes).

Wouldn't that be nice!!

Thanks for all the info :thumbup:

 

[shinycard255]

Thanks for all the info :thumbup:

Anytime! I'm glad people found this thread interesting and informative.

The main key is to do your research first before posting anything out there to make sure it will sell