istockphoto - I got rejected three times!

With stock photography, it's 100% necessary to get model releases. That's because the pictures can end up anywhere... literally!

Your picture of grandpa with a big smile on his face could end up on a Viagra billboard in Times square! No joke!
 
LeicaFoReVer said:
Do you know if I submit some examples of kid photos for approval if they are going to ask for permission papers at the first hand? Or those examples I submit to apply are just for application purpose if I dont sell them...
Click to expand...

Most stock agencies require you to submit the release(s) for review at the same time as you submit the images. Its also a good idea to use one of the released from one of the larger sites like Shutterstock just remove the any wording related to that site and you should have a good generic release.
 
Found this: http://www.istockphoto.com/license.php

Many stock photo sites let you choose what use/industry/nature your photo can be used (e.g. No porn, no illegal drug ad) but you'll just never know. I assume that's a big part of the reasons why you can't find many kids/family type of photos.

Ask your designer/marketing friends what type of photo they have hard time finding.
 
coelacanth said:
Found this: http://www.istockphoto.com/license.php

Many stock photo sites let you choose what use/industry/nature your photo can be used (e.g. No porn, no illegal drug ad) but you'll just never know. I assume that's a big part of the reasons why you can't find many kids/family type of photos.

Ask your designer/marketing friends what type of photo they have hard time finding.
Click to expand...

Yes it is hard to have a control on that...you never know where it will end...😱
 
coelacanth said:
Probably it's safer to get a release signed if kids are involved even the shots were taken in public place.
Click to expand...

It really depends on the usage of the image(s) For images that will be used for commercial purposes a model release is required for each recongizable person in a picture. One the other hand images can be used for editorial purpose without having a release, but the market is tilted to 99% commercial 1% editorial.
 
I'm speaking from customer's point of view.

Photos I need (hard to find)

• Natural kids/family shots (reasons listed above)
• Shots with white/black background (quicker to use in presentations)
• Animals
• In-motion shots without photoshop job (real motion blur, etc)
• Anything that I have better control in short time
- No cropped elements
- Background easier to manipulate
- Good exposure with no clipping, etc​


Photos I don't need (too many out there)

• Hard to manipulate shots (see above)
• Composed photo like dollar sign, 1&0 all over
• Meeting shots, anything office related, two people handshaking
• Blondie with inter-com and smile.
• Fake motion blur or pretty much any photoshop effects you can think of
 
Last edited:
coelacanth said:
I'm speaking from customer's point of view.

Photos I need (hard to find)

• Natural kids/family shots (reasons listed above)
• Shots with white/black background (quicker to use in presentations)
• Animals
• In-motion shots without photoshop job (real motion blur, etc)
• Anything that I have better control in short time
- No cropped elements
- Background easier to manipulate
- Good exposure with no clipping, etc​
Photos I don't need (too many out there)

• Hard to manipulate shots (see above)
• Composed photo like dollar sign, 1&0 all over
• Meeting shots, anything office related, two people handshaking
• Blondie with inter-com and smile.
• Fake motion blur or pretty much any photoshop effects you can think of
Click to expand...

Thanks for referencing me 🙂

"Hard to manipulate shots (see above)". If I am a photoshop geek, I would be easily manipulate above photos. Actually I did some for the jellyfish photo. I erased some reflections on the glass. It was pretty easy even if I am not familiar with photoshop...


Though they say they dont need animal photos anymore and they need more corporate photos.

Just have a look at people's photos and tell me what percentage of them fit the above description. That is the ideal case you are giving.
 
Last edited:
"they need more corporate photos."

LOL.

I specialize in fixing super cheesy marketing materials, presentations, UI, web presence, etc and I have more than enough clients to help out. That means the market is filled with people looking for more typical corporate shots and handshaking interracial man and woman in bright futuristic office. 😉

I certainly don't need smiling customer service rep shots any more than we have right now.
 
Images that iStock does need:
5.1.jpg
Corporate shots
Everyone looks a little more handsome when a suit's involved.
5.2.jpg
Groups & Teams
One person is great, two, three, four… just gets better and better.
5.3.jpg
Concept Stock
Leave it to others to shoot the obvious.
5.4.jpg
Sports
Cycling, ping pong, soccer, skateboarding, kung-fu, bocci ball, the list goes on.
5.5.jpg
Rare Artifacts
The more rare, the better.
5.6.jpg
Illustrations
Vector and not rasterized.
5.7.jpg
Holiday & Seasonal Themes
Christmas, Valentines, Easter: don’t wait until the last minute.

Fashion
Leave the jeans behind, unless they're couture...

Analogue and Grunge
Intriguing textures, effects, & treatments – not for the amateur of style.

Food and Beverages
Preferably with someone holding the edible item.

Images that iStock does not need:

Your dog or cat
He's adorable. Send a picture to your mom.

Flowers
iStock now possesses the definitive online collection of files called ‘flower’.

Flags
We can now proudly say we have every country covered.

Photos of your feet, socks, etc.
Try looking up with your camera instead.
5.15.jpg
Your immediate environment
Get up, move around a little. Keyboards, mice, cables, compact discs, floppy discs and monitors are covered.

Light Blurs
Great for fun and experimenting...

Brick walls
The Wall came down in 1989. Get over it.

Close-ups of fire
It's for your own safety.

Close-ups of eyes
They scare small children.

Symbols (!$%@)
You see it in every e-mail.

Sunsets & clouds
Very pretty, but...

Forest Snap Shots
We love nature, but...

Airplane Wings (& out the window shots)
In the end, they seem to all look the same.

Your Shadow
Try another route of dodging the model release.

Overly simple 3-D & Bryce renderings & Photoshop backgrounds
Challenge yourself a little.

Photoshop Backgrounds
Fun to experiment, but they're not quite stock.

Overly simple text
Let people pick out their own fonts.
 
probably no 🙂

It is too much restricted...I should be able to put descent shots and sell to someone likes...few or many, does not matter..So that is why I better continue my zenfolio...
 
photogdave said:
From what I've been told by friends who do sell to stock agencies, it's no longer worth the time. By the time you've edited your images and tagged all the info you're actually working for pennies an hour.
Click to expand...


One does not "sell" to stock agencies. If you do, you've picked the wrong one. Stock agencies basically license imagery for a certain usage for a particular amount of time. That is how they get paid. Of which you earn and get paid a percentage, a royalty, of that sale.
 
They are a slick photo agency. It helps to get a feel for their needs. As a former picture editor, I can tell you that there are only a few standard rejection comments to make.

They are probably overwhelmed with submissions and have a push-button batching process for rejections. I would. After a while particular photographers would be rejected without even looking at the work.
 
LeicaFoReVer said:
probably no 🙂

It is too much restricted...I should be able to put descent shots and sell to someone likes...few or many, does not matter..So that is why I better continue my zenfolio...
Click to expand...

Aykut (btw, your name is very intriguing, I'd love to know its origin and meaning),

Truthfully, your images are too artistic and personal to be a stock-image.
Just in case it's not clear, I *like* your photographs 🙂

I played that game of pleasing-the-reviewers a few years back, and I got accepted (istockphoto, and another one whose name escapes me now), but I hated the whole experience.

I don't want to spend a lot of time getting an image just so I can measure up (or down) to the reviewer's "standard." I stopped the whole thing and never looked back.

Keep shooting the way you enjoy, make an honest effort to create a good photobook (now, that's an exercise of editing that will make your head hurts).

And don't expect miracles 😉
 
more or less sounds like "I could" without the L pronounced 🙂

June-eight is not a bad method. only thing is "u" must be turkish "u" with dots, which is pronounced like in "jude"

🙂
 
my spin on stock

my spin on stock

I recently started putting my work on istockphoto. I have found it to be very discouraging and they are very picky in their selection of photos. That being said, I have a friend who is making $2000/month on istock. I was shocked when he told me that because my success has been minimal. His suggestions are that your images HAVE to be simple, not over processed, not too much clutter... just simple. Conceptual images are the only ones that sell on there.
The image is only half the battle, if people cant find your image, then they wont buy your image. You have to be proficient at key wording. Here are the tips he gave me.
1. The first 10 keywords should be conceptual, if possible (eg. teamwork, stewardship, compassion etc) then use words to describe your image (eg. man, sky, hand, dog, etc). The search engine searches from the beginning of your keywords first and most people are looking for those conceptual images.
2. You dont need 50 keywords because the search engine searches from the front of your list to the back, the last 30 words will never even make it to the search engine. So keep your keywording simple but very accurate.
3. Dont use multiple versions or words (eg. hand and hands), the search engine will automate these variations for you.

I have seen many people who only have 800 or 1000 images be more successful than those with thousands of images, simply because they know how to keyword to get their images to the front of the results page.

When it comes to actually shooting the images, again keep it simple. Ive read a couple people on this post say that stock sites like free space, which I absolutely agree with. So give them free space. My friend sets a goal for himself to shoot and upload 5 great images per week that are keyworded well. It does seem like a lot of work but I have found that with keywording, the more you do it, the easier it becomes. When you search the istock site, look at the first few images that come up and see how they keyword, thats a good indication of how you should do it too.

If you want to make $10,000/month doing stock, then it will be a full time job, but with a little practice and patients you can generate a handsome supplemental income for yourself in no time.

When I go out to shoot for personal assignments, I try to capture at least 1 or 2 images just for stock. I try to browse the istock website every now and then just to see what people are buying and selling. Conceptual images really do sell on these sites. My advice is to stick with it and try it for a year, if your not happy with the results then you can walk away from it.

It is difficult to get the hang of the process (I am still just a beginner) but once you understand what they want and how to effectively get the image to the front of the search pages, I think you will be happy with your results.

Dont let anyone tell you that your not a "real" photographer if you shoot stock, and dont fall under the impression that if you shoot stock you can't shoot anything that you want. What is great about stock, especially if it is not your only income, is that it is supplemental, which makes it a hobby. Plus it is a great feeling to be flipping through a magazine or walking down the street and unexpectedly see your image.

Keep it up and I would love to talk with people about stock so send me a message or something

Photocodo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mos6502
A good short video about Tseng Kwong Chi.
Replies
1
Views
252
Zuiko-logist
Z
murrayatuptown
Giving away three Retina parts-unit cameras - do I NEED to place a Classified post?
Replies
8
Views
650
robertofollia
robertofollia
D
How has your photography changed over the years?
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
6K
DownUnder
D
farlymac
Leica LTM Leica IIIf Post DAG Overhaul Test
Replies
18
Views
1K
Godfrey
Godfrey
Jbennett68
This is a weird one.
Replies
0
Views
353
Jbennett68
Jbennett68
Back
Top Bottom