off to a rough start: istockphoto

I've finally decided to give a try @ stock.

They've rejected these 3 files, I mean I know they aren't exactly the normal things they see but they are totally of base about being "over filtered"

Clearly I am dealing with hack "editors"



Rejection Reason

We found this file over filtered from its original appearance/quality.

BS! it's not even filtered @ all!!



Rejection Reason

We found this file over filtered from its original appearance/quality.

again, no "filtering" let alone being overly



Rejection Reason

We could not find a clear center focal point for this file.

Are you kidding me??? 1/2 of the heads are in focus, 1/2 are not...on purpose!! It's call DOF, maybe they have never heard of it.

/rant




does anyone else here submit stock photos?

 

Maybe they are just using the same excuse for all rejections

But who cares, there are other companies that you can sell right?

 

yeah, like most customer services...stock answers

yep, many other sites I can and should utilize.

that being said, I guess the more generic and safe the better for stock pics. My super macros are probably too "out there" for for the typical stock editors.

 

What are the items in the first two pictures?

 

toothpicks

really really close up

 

nice, why would the send them back with a watermark on them?

 

b/c I can still access them in my control panel in the rejected pile.

here's a prime example of how much I think they are talking out of their a**e*

another "too over filtered"

orig ->straight from the camera







maybe I'm too close!! maybe I just need to shoot a generic shot from 15feet away like this one that someone did:





where's my decaf ;-)

 

Them stock editors probably do not even know what macros is..

They just didn't quite know how to react.. LOL

Don't take it to hard timsdd, I think your close up shots are bad ass, They are intense, vivid and captivating.

Boulder

 

i see, iv just started photography myself so im pretty interested

What does it mean by over filtered? As in you have post processed them to much?

 

yes exactly - but I haven't, they're just F to the ing stupid!!

I'm trying to submit stuff they don't have!! they tell you not to shoot the same old stuff they have thousands of!

case in point, MADNESS

another " no clear point of focus"...the whole damn thing is in focus!!



need to start sending them pics of NIN's colon!

 

lol, i really don't think they like you.

Your images are perfectly fine from what i can see and would make pretty decent stock photos.

Maybe try some other website? Or offer them for free at deviantart.

 

thanks, I think you are right!

either my work is so cutting edge - or they wouldn't know their a** from a hole in the ground. I think it's a combination of the two TBH.

my buds @ wtf came up with some good rejection reasons:

Rejected: Please tell the Bird to move a little to the left
Rejected: Toothpicks are not supposed to be colored...they must be normal wood color
Rejected: We aren't sure why, we just hadn't click this button today
Rejected: I have no taste, and can't tell a squirrel from a baboon at 5 ft.
Rejected: Your work is better than mine so it ain't getting in.
Rejected: Your name is Tim. A bully called Tim used to beat me up.
Rejected: I have a hangover and your pics have no point of focus.

 

haha brilliant!

what equipment do you use may i ask?

 

I use a Scooby-Doo disposable

j/k My list is on my LT, I'll have to update it and get back to you on that

 

lol

i have a canon 400d with a 18 - 55m lense

and a sigma 10 - 20mm

got these for christmas, enjoying it a lot

 

Perhaps by "no clear point of focus" they aren't talking about lens focus but more a central focal point, as in the main point of the picture that draws the eye?

 

sweet! I just shipped mine to Argentina the 400d

that sigma must be lots of fun!!

The XTi (400D) is a nice camera though for sure.

my 40D arrives tomorrow!!!

my stash,
Body: Canon 40D
My pride and joy: Canon 24-105/4L IS
Lenses: Canon 50/1.4, and Canon 70-200/4, Sigma, 105macro/2.8 & 12-24/4.5-5.6;
Flashes: EF-500 DG Super Flash, Sigma EM-140 DG RING ETTL FLASH
Tri-pod: Bogen / Manfrotto 3001N Tripod Legs (Chrome); Tri-Pod HEAD: Bogen - Manfrotto 3265 Grip Action Ball Head with Quick Release
CFC: Sandisk 4GB EXTREME DUCATI Edition

that's exactly what they are talking about. hey, who's side are you on that actually makes sense but I figured it would be different enough to merit consideration. who's to say there isn't a market for it? so long as it's technically strong I don't see why they are so picky.

I'll concede that one but the "over filtered" stuff is total BS IMO

 

Are they candies of some sort? It find them pretty nice. I would use them as paranormas for my abstract game.

 

timsdd, well they are nice images whether istock likes them or not. I guess they are aiming their stuff mostly at web designers and they aren't sure what a web designer would use your pictures for. I mean even if they did accept them you still might not make any money if no one ever wants to use them for anything, which mean istock wouldn't make any money either.

I bet there's somewhere you could use them though. For istock you could try going out and about and taking pictures of objects. I took some pictures of these PA/loud speaker things at a train station and some random buttons on the wall near the train track. You could look out for quirky stuff like that, buttons, engine parts, electrical equipment et cetera, if you want to do close-up shots, but make whole pictures instead of macros. I think that will be better for istock which is all about selling stuff, mostly for websites it seems.

You could try a couple others like http://www.shutterstock.com or http://www.fotosearch.com and see what they think, or have a go at competitions in digital photography magazines.

 

yep, you mean in post #7, those are candy sprinkles that you'd put on ice cream or a cake or whatever

yep, very good advice on all accounts. I've calmed down a little bit

yep, I think with stock - much like with website finding a niche is paramount.
"Household objects" for instance has been done ad nauseum and therefore would not make good stock subjects 9/10