Tempted by stock photography

Joshwain

Joshwain

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,379
Edit My Images
Yes
Okay so for most of this evening I've strangely found myself looking at stock photos on sites such as istockphoto and fotofolia and have almost convinced myself to give it a go. I know there's no money in it and what not but I'm thinking of looking at it as a challenge. Would I actually be able to pass the application process and would my sample photos be satisfactory?

I've never really even thought about stock photography never mind taken a photo with it in mind so it could be a nice little project for me. I reckon it could potentially make me think more technically and maybe even improve my photography as a whole.

If I do go ahead with it, what kind of things are they looking for in sample photos ans what subjects are a no-go? (besides isolated apples and oranges)
 
Sorry Josh but it sounds to me like you need a 52 challenge or a course rather than "giving it a go"
As you say you've never really even thought about it. Maybe try taking photo's you feel will be good for stock and get critique on here.

I would suggest you have at least 100 decent shots before you even attempt stock photography.
 
I started out with only a handful, didn't expect much, sold a few, that inspired me to take a few more.

Maybe now got cple hundred on line and I'd expect around 300-500 this year. Not loads but enough to put towards a nice lens :)

Nothing wrong in submitting a few photos and seeing how you get on, Esp if you doing for a bit of fun :)
 
Last edited:
Merc said:
I would suggest you have at least 100 decent shots before you even attempt stock photography.
Click to expand...

I'm not thinking of it as a serious thing at the minute, just as a challenge to see if I could meet the standards required. Then who knows, maybe I'll get in to it and make a few quid (and not much more)

TheDrift- said:
I started out with only a handful, didn't expect much, sold a few, that inspired me to take a few more.

Nothing wrong in submitting a few photos and seeing how you get on, Esp if you doing for a bit of fun :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. Maybe I'll really enjoy it and want to take it seriously. Submitting samples would just be a bit of fun to see if I could meet the requirements :)
 
Repeating myself :lol:

It's been a long day, starting with an A-level exam :p
 
I love stock photography for the reasons you've stated, as it makes you REALLY think and be critical of your own work. Before I started stock I was pretty damn "slap dash" when it came to preparing for a shot as it was all improvised. Now it doesn't matter what sort of shot I'm doing, I'm thinking about every single possible way to get the best out of my camera to minimise PP and get the shot to be technically perfect.

Istock and fotolia aren't that challenging as they accept a lot of "creative" shots, but shutterstock is more of a challenge imo. If your photo is wrong in any way, they'll reject it from submission. I'm slowly building up my shutterstock profile and I'm getting regular sales now which is nice to see.

If you are serious about getting into stock photography, get a book on flash photography (or even stock photography if you can find one!) and learn it from cover to cover, as you need to get your lighting dead on the money to stand a chance of having a high acceptance rate with the most successful agencies. I never use to take my flash out with me in broad daylight as I never saw a point to it and now I'm using it as a fill light for anything I deem "stock worthy"!
 
I think I'm going to produce some samples, see how it goes and then decide whether I'm serious about it :)

I'm a little like you were at the minute though, most of my shots are just improvised and that's probably why I rarely get an end product that I like
 
I've got a few hundred on various sites, Alamy and fotolia being the most lucrative. I've got a few on Getty too, but only 1 or 2 sales so far.

Alamy is a good one to really get your standards up, as they are very harsh in their acceptance levels to start with. As you get more and more images up they seem to chill out a bit, but the first submissions really let you know where you need to improve.

I didn't really expect to make any money, but I've made enough to pay for some nice things.
 
I've just had my first go at isolating with Photoshop, it went badly :lol:

I need to find a better background to use than an old throw and to find some pennies to buy a decent flash


Coffee Anyone? by Joshwain, on Flickr

Certainly not one to upload as a sample
 
You don't have to do hi key shots for product shots mate. Don't even have to do low key ones either :P Having a product shot where its in its natural setting is as highly sought after as isolated shots are, if not more.

stock-photo-latte-116404402.jpg


This is one of mine that sells often. The "background" is a solid granite chopping board, which gives a pleasant texture and a little bit "extra" to what would otherwise be a rather boring shot.
 
That's pretty cool, I think I fell in to the trap of trying to make what people see as typical stock, woops :bonk:

I did take a shot I quite liked myself but there isn't enough focus on the froth or whatever you want to call it so I didn't see it as one worth giving a go.

fondzp.jpg


You know, I'm not getting perfect shots but I'm enjoying it and learning plenty at the same time. It's a productive day! :lol:
 
Its close but still not there mate sadly :(

Two big issues with your latest image:

Aperture = You need DOF to have EVERYTHING in focus so the blur is unacceptable and you'd be rejected due to it.

Background - You need to clone out the creases and folds in the material as I can see dark areas at the top (centre) and far left that break the isolation on the white.

As for the coffee shot, the uneven lighting is an issue (the reflection from the window behind your shot on the table being the issue) as well as the small DOF. Remember, your focal point has to be ENTIRELY in focus.

Sorry for the harsh critique, but its best you learn early and the hard way so you get use to the requirements of stock photography.
 
James J said:
Its close but still not there mate sadly :(

Two big issues with your latest image:

Aperture = You need DOF to have EVERYTHING in focus so the blur is unacceptable and you'd be rejected due to it.

Background - You need to clone out the creases and folds in the material as I can see dark areas at the top (centre) and far left that break the isolation on the white.

As for the coffee shot, the uneven lighting is an issue (the reflection from the window behind your shot on the table being the issue) as well as the small DOF. Remember, your focal point has to be ENTIRELY in focus.

Sorry for the harsh critique, but its best you learn early and the hard way so you get use to the requirements of stock photography.
Click to expand...

I know the coffee shot was out of the question, I just liked it myself :lol:

Harsh critique is good, it's what they're going to be like! I did take a shot with a smaller aperture so I'll have a play with that now. Cheers :thumbs:
 
General rule of thumb is your lens will be living at F8+ when you are doing stock shots. Shallow DOF has its uses, but only in a few specific styles of shot. If your DOF crossed over something that SHOULD be in focus, you need to reshoot.
 
You've sorted the DOF nicely, but you need to clone out the background to keep it clean so the isolation works.
 
Also, it might need a slight exposure increase, so play with it and see what happens. Very close to having a pretty decent shot mate.
 
It looks like hard graft for little gains. You need 100's or 1000's of images just to make a few hundred quid, i'm too lazy:)
 
Last edited:
rjbell said:
It looks like hard graft for little gains. You need 100's or 100's of images just to make a few hundred quid, i'm too lazy:)
Click to expand...

I'm not looking to make money, just to see if I can get accepted :)
 
rjbell said:
It looks like hard graft for little gains. You need 100's or 100's of images just to make a few hundred quid, i'm too lazy:)
Click to expand...

It is :P

Joshwain said:
Right, I think I have it :lol:

The background is so hard to spot!


Mixed Spices by Joshwain, on Flickr
Click to expand...

I can see where you've cloned it mate so you need to do it again :D This is the issue with a pure white background. It HAS to be pure white, 100% all the same intensity all over the frame.
 
James J said:
I can see where you've cloned it mate so you need to do it again :D This is the issue with a pure white background. It HAS to be pure white, 100% all the same intensity all over the frame.
Click to expand...

Is there an easier way of doing it? My screen isn't the best and nor are my eyes so it's a little hard to spot :lol:
 
my best coffee seller on getty.. (ignore the ugly watermark.. was getting blogged to death from flickr!)


♥ coffee by michy66, on Flickr

what do you use for editing?

I do my main edits on paintshop pro4.. if my white background is dodgy i'll make a layer brighten that then erase to bring back the detail of what you want to show.. if that makes sense?

have a great little action too that works well too.. http://www.thecoffeeshopblog.com/2011/01/coffeeshop-backdrop-fix-action-and.html you could probably do it yourself but i'm not very technical :)
 
Joshwain said:
Right, I think I have it :lol:

The background is so hard to spot!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/joshwain/8404737067/
Mixed Spices by Joshwain, on Flickr
Click to expand...

That made me wee a little! That's the most hilariously bad background job I've ever seen! I think you need to adjust your screen, cos if you can't see how bad that looks, then there is something wrong. It looks like you've scribbled all over the photo with a grey pen!!
Please don't take it the wrong way, but if you could see what I can see, you'd agree!!

The easiest way to get it all white is with the correct lighting in the first place. You will never get it to look 100% doing it this way
 
Woops! :bonk:

My screen is just a TV screen so that's probably why I can't see it. I'm following a decent guide now though which ended up in the mess being highlighted, woops again :lol:
 
This could be comical again but I THINK I have it now? Gosh, I'm making myself out to be a right idiot :lol: I promise I don't have any sort of mental disorder :runaway:


Mixed Spices by Joshwain, on Flickr
 
Just thought to have a look with the "Info" window on Photoshop, looks like I've managed it... FINALLY! :lol:
 
rjbell said:
If you have photoshop use levels.
Click to expand...

Yeah thats a good way of seeing it. I process on a macbook air so I can simply tilt the screen back to see most of the artefacts lol. You'd probably be fine with that submission, but ensuring the background is sorted takes ages and is very frustrating.
 
James J said:
Yeah thats a good way of seeing it. I process on a macbook air so I can simply tilt the screen back to see most of the artefacts lol. You'd probably be fine with that submission, but ensuring the background is sorted takes ages and is very frustrating.
Click to expand...

I got there in the end :lol: Thanks for your help!
 
London Headshots said:
You are absolutely nowhere near the level for stock submission.
Click to expand...

Why dont you let the stock agencies decide that? ;)

Im no fantastic photographer, but Ive done ok through them.
 
London Headshots said:
You are absolutely nowhere near the level for stock submission.
Click to expand...

Hes not far off for micro stock, as long as he sticks to the rules. Why don't you actually give feedback that he can build on and utilise, instead of just talking rubbish...
 
London Headshots said:
You are absolutely nowhere near the level for stock submission.
Click to expand...

I keep using the word challenge. Now I'm sure you know what that word means, but just to remind you it's "a test of one's abilities or resources in a demanding but stimulating undertaking".

That's exactly what I'm doing, testing my abilities in the demanding task of getting accepted as a stock photography contributor. I'm not suggesting I'm able to get accepted to go and make a heap of money, I'm challenging myself in order to improve my photography.

I've fed up of a small bunch of people that post cynical comments on here. It may be you personal opinion but what do you expect to gain from that comment? If I had said it's my dream to do stock photography and I'd be disappointed if I didn't meet the standard then I'd find your comment perfectly acceptable, but I haven't. I don't expect to be accepted, I know I'm not the best of photographers and I'm just looking to improve my work. It's people like you that discourage people from taking up this hobby.

Go post pointless comments in another thread.
 
James J said:
Hes not far off for micro stock, as long as he sticks to the rules. Why don't you actually give feedback that he can build on and utilise, instead of just talking rubbish...
Click to expand...

Cheers, comments like that irritate me as you can see in my above post :lol:
 
Interesting response.

On an emotional, personal level I see where you're coming from.

But, I suspect the world of stock photography has has nothing to do with emotion or personality; it's about producing images that sell.

Why not take that comment as a challenge? Why not ask him what he would suggest you need to do to reach that level?
 
simon ess said:
Why not take that comment as a challenge? Why not ask him what he would suggest you need to do to reach that level?
Click to expand...

Hopefully he will give some sort of suggestion :)

My guess is that will either be the end of it or his best suggestion will be to give up trying...

Not gonna happen :)
 
No way ever, not in a million years, should you ever listen to anyone suggesting you give up.

And, judging from other posts, I don't think L.H. would suggest that.

But, I'm finding the best way to get good advice on here is to ask the right questions and ride the blows.

;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top