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

[shinycard255]

OP... this one's for you! I'm curious as to what they said about your photos as well... as in which photos got which rejections

Main photos:
sauipe_cerca_pb_MD.jpg
This is a good shot, but a few things. The sky is blown out and that's probably why the bounced it back. If you can fix the sky by bringing some detail back into it, this should get the approval next time around. Maybe add a bit more contrast too. Also, the horizon line isn't straight either

cobra_Verde_1_MD.jpg
I feel as if the focus is off just ever so slightly off of the snake's eye. I'm assuming that's what the rejection was for. Composition is OK, I wish you would have gotten more of the snake's body wrapped around the stick (not sure if it's even possible). Too much dead space on the bottom left

veropeso_perfumes_MD.jpg
What's weird to me is that the center of the image is sharp, but as you go towards the edges, it gets a lot softer. And there's also noticeable grain. Stock sites don't like grain too often. Also keep in mind that you are selling the whole shot, so if something is soft when it shouldn't be, they will probably bounce it back.


Extras:
cascavel_MD.jpg
They will probably bounce back because of the grain. Shot is good, but grain is bad.

cobra_Verde_2_MD.jpg
This shot is better than the first one (at least I think it is). Brighten it up a bit and see if they will accept it

borboleta_grande_MD.jpg
Composition is good but focus is off just ever so slightly. Do you have another shot that has the eye in focus? If so, try uploading that one instead

esquilo_MD.jpg
Focus is off just by a bit on this one as well. He's too close to the right edge of the shot. Find a different shot with better composition.



I don't mean to sound harsh (if I do), but you're real close on a few of these. Fix some of these issues and I don't think you'll have an issue with them accepting your images. Be more critical on yourself than you think you should be. I like to walk away for 15-30 minutes when working at times to clear my mind and see what I notice when I come back

 

[domingos]

Thanks for the reply Ralphh,

I have a lot to learn but it's clear to me that I have to focus on learning how to avoid artifacts and how to identify them. You got right to the point: what is ok in fine art is not ok in stock photography. I've changed my camera settings and I'm working on improving my Lightroom skills. Also, I've to give them the kind of subject they want, what they need. Working on that too.

I'm glad you like my shots.

Thanks again,

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.

 

[domingos]

Thank for the reply Curtyoungblood,

You are quite right. The focus is not perfect. That's definitely true and it's something to take into consideration but I think they didn't reject my shot because of this. I've got many replies to this message and now I realize they have plenty of the kind of subject I sent them and there are too many artifacts in my photos. I've to learn how to identify and to avoid them and to give them what they want. Working hard on that...

Thanks again,

 

[domingos]

Imagemaker46,

You're absolutely right. I didn't give them what they want, but what they already have a lot of. Now I realize that. Now it's clear to me that I've to shoot with another eye if I want to get accepted by them. I'm gonna try and do that.

I'm glad you liked my photos. Thanks a lot

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.

 

[domingos]

Shinnycard255,

Man you just gave me an EXCELLENT explanation. That's exactly what I needed. Of course that helped a lot. Did you manage to open my photos? I'm curious to hear your opinion. As soon as I read your post I started searching on iStock and took notes of some ideas I had. I'll let you know if I manage to get some photo accepted.

Also, as I mentioned before, I've to keep an eye on artifacts. Now I realize that my photos have plenty of them. That's understandable as I came from B&W film and I'm pretty new to digital photography.

Congrats for your shot. It's awesome. Great light.

Thanks a lot again,

 

[domingos]

Tuffythepug,

You are right. That's not what they want. I think that was my main mistake (there're others of course). I really want to get some photos accepted there, not at all because of the money but because I think it's gonna be fun. It's a challenge, right? I've been too long away from serious photography and I think that's a very good opportunity to update myself. I don't want to stop shooting art photography at all (no way). I like photography as whole but except Mapplethorpe (that's disgusting) so why not give it a shot?

Thanks again for the reply,

 

[domingos]

Thanks again for your comments. It helped a lot, again. And no, you didn't mean harsh. That's exactly what I was looking for and why I started this thread in the first place.

Now, about your comments:

sauipe_cerca_pb_MD.jpg: The whole composition was a bit overexposed. I will try to work on it again, but I'm not sure if I can fix it. But I've others shots I took at that same day, with different exposition levels. I'll review them. You are quite right about the horizon line. Unfortunately, nothing I can do about it.

cobra_Verde_1_MD.jpg: There were more details on the botton left, not much though, but I removed all of it to focus on the snake. Will work on it too.

veropeso_perfumes_MD: I think I spoil it all on Lightroom. I'll check the raw image and start working on it again.

cascavel_MD: The same as the last one. I think I can fix or at least improve it.

cobra_Verde_2_MD: IMHO the first green snake is better than this one, but I think that's because of my background. Old times. Diagonals and rule of thirds were almost everything. Today, they are important, of couse, but there are more things to take into consideration. I've to change my eye and, as you mentioned, be more critical. Another think is that the focus it too shallow on both images.

borboleta_grande_MD: Yeap. I've some other shots. But, unfortunately the focus is almost the same. The light was very hard to work at that day. :-(

esquilo_MD: Unfortunately, that's the best shot I've. The squirrel stayed there for only a fraction of a sec.

Again, thanks a lot for your comments. That's exactly what I was looking for.

OP... this one's for you! I'm curious as to what they said about your photos as well... as in which photos got which rejections

Main photos:
sauipe_cerca_pb_MD.jpg
This is a good shot, but a few things. The sky is blown out and that's probably why the bounced it back. If you can fix the sky by bringing some detail back into it, this should get the approval next time around. Maybe add a bit more contrast too. Also, the horizon line isn't straight either

cobra_Verde_1_MD.jpg
I feel as if the focus is off just ever so slightly off of the snake's eye. I'm assuming that's what the rejection was for. Composition is OK, I wish you would have gotten more of the snake's body wrapped around the stick (not sure if it's even possible). Too much dead space on the bottom left

veropeso_perfumes_MD.jpg
What's weird to me is that the center of the image is sharp, but as you go towards the edges, it gets a lot softer. And there's also noticeable grain. Stock sites don't like grain too often. Also keep in mind that you are selling the whole shot, so if something is soft when it shouldn't be, they will probably bounce it back.


Extras:
cascavel_MD.jpg
They will probably bounce back because of the grain. Shot is good, but grain is bad.

cobra_Verde_2_MD.jpg
This shot is better than the first one (at least I think it is). Brighten it up a bit and see if they will accept it

borboleta_grande_MD.jpg
Composition is good but focus is off just ever so slightly. Do you have another shot that has the eye in focus? If so, try uploading that one instead

esquilo_MD.jpg
Focus is off just by a bit on this one as well. He's too close to the right edge of the shot. Find a different shot with better composition.



I don't mean to sound harsh (if I do), but you're real close on a few of these. Fix some of these issues and I don't think you'll have an issue with them accepting your images. Be more critical on yourself than you think you should be. I like to walk away for 15-30 minutes when working at times to clear my mind and see what I notice when I come back