Stock Photography Critique

[christopher_d_rice]

Hey!

I'm new to stock photography and have not joined any stock photo sites yet. I know that sites do require you to submit samples of your work to be approved to have your application accepted. I was wondering if these photos are anywhere near acceptable. Any help is greatly appreciated! :mrgreen:

Dog>>>http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8477/8172731414_c96fe16deb_h.jpg

Kitten>>>http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8488/8172703823_3b339f3a98_h.jpg

Kids Feeding Cow>>>http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8349/8172739612_42e160f499_h.jpg

Rock Climbers>>>http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8204/8172748306_5c9b04a0b2_h.jpg

Old Birdhouse>>>http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8485/8172721383_6581f4fec5_h.jpg

Winding Road>>>http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8346/8172744440_eb8b77e3e9_h.jpg

Dead Tree>>>http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8202/8172744665_e5c79bd252_h.jpg

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Images that iStock does need:
•Corporate shots: Illustrate the many sides of modern business.
•Concepts and Visual Metaphors: Go beyond the literal, and help a designer explain something in a new way.
•Food and Beverages: Cuisines from around the globe.
•Groups & Teams: People working together.
•Holiday & Seasonal Themes: Show all the ways we celebrate. Include more than religious celebrations; let’s see local festivals and customs as well.
•Non-Business Jobs: The word is filled with mechanics, garbage men, baristas, and more.
•People Interacting: Human interaction is a constant in this world.
•Religion and Spirituality: The rich tapestry of the world’s beliefs.
•Science and Technology: Accurate and true depictions of the cutting edge of human knowledge.
•Social Issues: Poignant looks into the issues that impact us.
•Sports: For fun, for fitness, for glory. We’d love to see more team sports.

Images that iStock does not need:
•3D – Simple Renders: Go beyond the easy and obvious presets.
•3D – Extruded Text: Simple 3D text is not enough.
•3D – Simplistic Modeling: Spend more time with your polygons.
•Airplane Wings (& out the window shots): Wait until you land to shoot the vacation shots.
•Flags: 3D or real, give us something more than the basic flags.
•Light Blurs: Fun for photo clubs, but rarely is it good stock.
•Nature Snap Shots: Sweeping vistas and insect macros are great – yet another forest floor is not.
•Photoshop Backgrounds, Fractals: We’ve all had fun with filters. Designers are looking for images that they can’t quickly make themselves with a few button pushes.
•People Doing Nothing: Get your models doing something!
•Shadows of People, Headless People: Photograph people or do not. There is no try.
•Single Apples (or Green Peppers or Oranges) Isolated on White: The day of the single fruit isolated on white has passed.
•Sunsets, Cloudscapes, Skies: Be sure the sky really is stunning before uploading.
•Symbols: !$%@ – Whether rendered or photographed, typographic symbols are less interesting than you think.
•Your Immediate Environment: There’s life beyond your front door!

 

[tirediron]

You'll get MUCH better critique if you embed 1-4 images (vice links) within the post. Moving to the General Gallery.

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

The only one I see having any potential is the rock climbers one. The eye explores the frame nicely and the climbers being OOF creates good anonymity. Good line, well composed, a good stock shot.

All the others, you need to isolate subjects better and compose more thoughtfully. A lot of these compositions feel very "normal" and snap-shottish, the level of planning and execution you'd want to see in a good stock photography shot is just not there.

 

[tirediron]

There's more images here than I normally respond to however, I'll do a quick drive-by.
1. Unlikely to be accepted by ANY stock site. Poorly exposed, uninteresting subject, poor crop, and uniteresting setting.

2. As above. Pay particular attention to composition and avoid cropping errors such as the tail.

3. If this were leveled, better post-processed, and if the cow's face were not partly obstructed by the fence the child's more visible, this one might be a contender.

4. This is NOT a picture of rock-climbers, it's a picture of a carabiner.

5. Of no use to a stock site. Poorly cropped, busy, distracting background.
6. Turn down the GREEN channel... holy mother of gawd! There's potential here, and if you'd not blown out the sky, it too might have been a contender.

7. Good sky, tilted horizon, harsh exposure. This one would be worth going back to shoot when the sun is low in the sky. As-is, too contrasty and too many harsh shadows.

Shooting good stock images is hard. Too many people think that it's just a matter of taking a few photos and letting the money roll in. Maybe one in a million photographers can make a living off of stock these days. Most make a few dollars a month, a rare few make a few hundred. Not to say that you can't do it, but I will guarentee that none of these are even remotely close to being accepted by a major stock agency. WOrk on the basics, composition, exposure... and whenever you're shooting for stock, think, "What would someone use this image for?"

 

[KmH]

Don't forget to leave plenty of space for advertising copy.

Most people see something like 1000 advertising image a day. Look at them closely, and notice how advertising agencies use images.

 

[deeky]

So what is the stock market even like right now? I overheard a conversation about it elsewhere recently and was curious about how things are going now that everyone and their brother has a decent camera.

 

[panblue]

Nice pictures...and I've no idea.

 

[KmH]

From a photographers perspective, he stock image market is over saturated, gets more saturated daily, and requires more work than the pay is worth.
There are 2 kinds of stock sites. The microstock agencies that are mainly about Royalty-Free (RF) use licensing, and the 2 big boys - Getty and Corbis - who offer both RF and Rights-managed (RM) licensing.

About 85% of all the stock images that get licensed, both RF and RM have people in them.

For some insights and other info about the microstock part of the business visit - Yuri Arcurs | Home of the world's top selling microstock photographer

And this - The Time Magazine Cover Photo “Ripoff” « Mark Stout Photography – Photoshoot News & Models

And this - http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/general-shop-talk/256614-f-ck-you-pay-me.html

 

[greybeard41 14]

There's more images here than I normally respond to however, I'll do a quick drive-by.
1. Unlikely to be accepted by ANY stock site. Poorly exposed, uninteresting subject, poor crop, and uniteresting setting.

2. As above. Pay particular attention to composition and avoid cropping errors such as the tail.

3. If this were leveled, better post-processed, and if the cow's face were not partly obstructed by the fence the child's more visible, this one might be a contender.

4. This is NOT a picture of rock-climbers, it's a picture of a carabiner.

5. Of no use to a stock site. Poorly cropped, busy, distracting background.
6. Turn down the GREEN channel... holy mother of gawd! There's potential here, and if you'd not blown out the sky, it too might have been a contender.

7. Good sky, tilted horizon, harsh exposure. This one would be worth going back to shoot when the sun is low in the sky. As-is, too contrasty and too many harsh shadows.

"

This looks like the letter I got from iStock the time I sent them some images......LOL

 

[matthewo]

You will make more free money easy with youtube doing reviews and monitorizing them. I make about $120 every 2 months off my vídeos with only a few vídeos bringing in the bulk