Author Topic: 2nd Rejection from Istock... (Read 4504 times)

Stingey · « **on:** October 25, 2012, 14:44 »

Hi guys, I'm new to this magical world of stock photography. I've started very gung ho, done loads of research, read books etc etc

I'm now on my second rejection from Istock and I know this is very common. I just wanted to share with you my latest images I uploaded; in my eyes, diverse subject matter and all checked thoroughly by myself for anything that could get them rejected, but as I'm new to this lark I feel I must have missed some things. Any tips / advice on these?

Also, I'm doing this as a hobby but would love to make at least a bit of money whilst doing this - how many images do you guys have up roughly and are you all earning decent money or pocket money? I hear mixed things and I know it all depends on quality of images but also quantity? Just interested in others' experiences.

Thanks in advance

- Man Holding Blank Picture Frame

- Preparing Pasta

- Half Dome, Yosemite National Park

Poncke · « **Reply #1 on:** October 25, 2012, 14:49 »

3rd image is a snapshot. Forget about iStock, join Shutterstock if you want to have some fun making money.

velocicarpo · « **Reply #2 on:** October 25, 2012, 15:07 »

First one:
Bad framing (too much white space over his head and arms cut off). Composition could be better (e.g. Body and picture frame are too much in a line, move it a bit and you give more live and motion to the composition)

Second: Bad light. The entire scene is sunk into a shadow, no highlights, no bright, vibrant colors.

Third: Yea, too snappy. Mountain front in the back is in shadow and no depth/perspective.

Nevertheless good shots :-)

click_click · « **Reply #3 on:** October 25, 2012, 16:28 »

You can get in if you keep improving and keep posting your results here for critique - that's the fastest way to get in!

I do like the concept of the first one but as mentioned before too much white space on top and cut off arms. Otherwise a very useful image. Lighting, focus, exposure and white balance look good to me (bearing in mind that the image is downsized...).

Second one is too dull. Get more creative with the lighting.

Forget shots like #3. Submit something else but nature shots unless it's blows our socks off!

Obviously IS wants to see what you can do that many others can't!

In regards to money it mostly depends on your skills and amount of time you can spend doing this.

To get off the ground to get a steady payment every month it might take you 6-12 months (always depending on your amount of submissions/acceptance and quality of work of course - which should be considered "good" or better in order to get some money out of it).

Never give up, spend a lot of time shooting, evaluating, internalizing critique, improving, re-shooting, proper post processing etc. It's a learning curve and a steep one as well but if you love photography it shouldn't hold you back.

Best of luck!

rimglow · « **Reply #4 on:** October 25, 2012, 16:31 »

The second one has a nice composition. Need to brighten it up. Also, the white background needs to be 100% white with no color cast.

markrhiggins · « **Reply #5 on:** October 25, 2012, 16:51 »

Agree with whats been said, Also - face in shadow and yellow cast on first . Insufficient dof on shots. Make sure your monitor is calibrated for wb.

gostwyck · « **Reply #6 on:** October 25, 2012, 17:49 »

Just keep it as a hobby would be my advice. That way you don't need to beat yourself up about rejections. Much more fun __ and photography should be fun. Don't ruin it by doing microstock.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #7 on:** October 25, 2012, 18:34 »

Quote from: rimglow on October 25, 2012, 16:31

The second one has a nice composition. Need to brighten it up. Also, the white background needs to be 100% white with no color cast.

There's no "focal point" to it, though. Two random pastas, a bit of a clock, a spoon. Why would I want this image?

gostwyck · « **Reply #8 on:** October 25, 2012, 18:45 »

Quote from: sjlocke on October 25, 2012, 18:34

Quote from: rimglow on October 25, 2012, 16:31
The second one has a nice composition. Need to brighten it up. Also, the white background needs to be 100% white with no color cast.

There's no "focal point" to it, though. Two random pastas, a bit of a clock, a spoon. Why would I want this image?

Shoosh! If he wants to take out-of-focus pictures of random pasta together with unrelated objects then that's fine with me. Neigh __ we should encourage this sort of stuff.

Monty-m-gue · « **Reply #9 on:** October 25, 2012, 19:05 »

Quote from: sjlocke on October 25, 2012, 18:34

Quote from: rimglow on October 25, 2012, 16:31
The second one has a nice composition. Need to brighten it up. Also, the white background needs to be 100% white with no color cast.

There's no "focal point" to it, though. Two random pastas, a bit of a clock, a spoon. Why would I want this image?

I think "the clock" might actually be weighing scales. I take your general point though...

Stingey · « **Reply #10 on:** October 26, 2012, 04:02 »

Cheers guys, I'll take on board the advice. It's still my first month submitting so I expect to learn a lot more and learn continually. And yeah, they are weighing scales.

I'm enjoying the sting of rejection and the fact that it will be difficult to get where I want to be. Nothing in life worth having is easy to obtain. Onwards and upwards. Expect more out of focus, badly composed shots coming your way soon

Tryingmybest · « **Reply #11 on:** October 28, 2012, 13:05 »

Quote from: Stingey on October 26, 2012, 04:02

Cheers guys, I'll take on board the advice. It's still my first month submitting so I expect to learn a lot more and learn continually. And yeah, they are weighing scales.

I'm enjoying the sting of rejection and the fact that it will be difficult to get where I want to be. Nothing in life worth having is easy to obtain. Onwards and upwards. Expect more out of focus, badly composed shots coming your way soon

Making iStock your first stock site can be demoralizing. Start with Dreamstime, Canstock and Shutterstock. Then keep trying with iStock. They are a pain and becoming less relevant anyway.

click_click · « **Reply #12 on:** October 28, 2012, 13:31 »

Quote from: sjlocke on October 25, 2012, 18:34

Quote from: rimglow on October 25, 2012, 16:31
The second one has a nice composition. Need to brighten it up. Also, the white background needs to be 100% white with no color cast.

There's no "focal point" to it, though. Two random pastas, a bit of a clock, a spoon. Why would I want this image?

It's perfectly normal for Sean to have ounces and grams printed on his clocks...

I wonder what time it is over there right now? 5 ounces after 3 pounds?

While the composition may not be stellar it sure isn't terrible. Is it going to be an Ansel Adams? Probably not. Will it earn thousands and thousands of dollars? That's written on another page.

Cut the guy some slack. We've seen a lot worse from people who've actually gotten into IS - so what's the threat here?

This is posted in the proper sub forum. No idea why someone who asks for critique receives such a lot of useless "tips".

digitalexpressionimages · « **Reply #13 on:** October 28, 2012, 15:08 »

Quote from: sjlocke on October 25, 2012, 18:34

Quote from: rimglow on October 25, 2012, 16:31
The second one has a nice composition. Need to brighten it up. Also, the white background needs to be 100% white with no color cast.

There's no "focal point" to it, though. Two random pastas, a bit of a clock, a spoon. Why would I want this image?

You wouldn't. But a graphic designer? Sure they might want it. F#@king photographers always think their photos should be the center of attention. If I'm doing a bit on healthy eating I want the M E S S A G E to be the focal point, not the photo that I use to dress it up.

Stingey · « **Reply #14 on:** October 28, 2012, 18:09 »

Quote from: TheBlackRhino on October 28, 2012, 13:05

Quote from: Stingey on October 26, 2012, 04:02
Cheers guys, I'll take on board the advice. It's still my first month submitting so I expect to learn a lot more and learn continually. And yeah, they are weighing scales.

I'm enjoying the sting of rejection and the fact that it will be difficult to get where I want to be. Nothing in life worth having is easy to obtain. Onwards and upwards. Expect more out of focus, badly composed shots coming your way soon

Making iStock your first stock site can be demoralizing. Start with Dreamstime, Canstock and Shutterstock. Then keep trying with iStock. They are a pain and becoming less relevant anyway.

Cheers. I've been submitting to Dreamstime, Fotolia, 123RF and Bigstock so far. Currently I've got 30 accepted on 123RF (although I'm not placing much weight on this 'success'), 10 accepted to Fotolia, 12 on Dreamstime (with some pending) and 7 on Bigstock (with some pending). It's very early days for me and most of the photos accepted were ones shot before I decided I wanted to shoot for stock, I just thought some fitted the bill ok. I really want to get accepted to SS and IS but I'm gonna wait, read up and get some really good shots before submitting. I'll make sure I post them on here before as I'd prefer a heads up so I don't waste my time on some that won't cut the mustard. I've not delved into Canstock - is this site worthwhile?

Thanks guys

Stingey · « **Reply #15 on:** October 28, 2012, 18:10 »

Oh and the pasta one and the frame holding one has been accepted on fotolia and a couple of others, so that's good news.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #16 on:** October 28, 2012, 20:31 »

Quote from: digitalexpressionimages on October 28, 2012, 15:08

Quote from: sjlocke on October 25, 2012, 18:34
Quote from: rimglow on October 25, 2012, 16:31
The second one has a nice composition. Need to brighten it up. Also, the white background needs to be 100% white with no color cast.

There's no "focal point" to it, though. Two random pastas, a bit of a clock, a spoon. Why would I want this image?

You wouldn't. But a graphic designer? Sure they might want it. F#@king photographers always think their photos should be the center of attention. If I'm doing a bit on healthy eating I want the M E S S A G E to be the focal point, not the photo that I use to dress it up.

No, no - even when you're creating content to be backdrop, it should have more of a point. Why are there two different pastas? Why not a larger variety if that is the point. Why a spoon? There's no pot. Etc.

Stingey · « **Reply #17 on:** October 29, 2012, 09:06 »

Pasta themed night. I have them all the time. Get a load of friends round, make as many different pasta dishes as you can against the scales; I mean clock.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: 2nd Rejection from Istock... (Read 4504 times)

Stingey

Poncke

velocicarpo

click_click

rimglow

markrhiggins

gostwyck

Sean Locke Photography

gostwyck

Monty-m-gue

Stingey

Tryingmybest

click_click

digitalexpressionimages

Stingey

Stingey

Sean Locke Photography

Stingey

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors