Shutterstock Photographer Forum :: View topic

iknowme · Joined: 18 Sep 2006 Posts: 59 Location: Bournemouth

well i dont know where i should start in this threed.......but i must say its truly an amazing topic......as for myself personaly.....i have been at ss for 18mths..and yes i have only 105 photos in my portfolio and of those 105 i have probably submited double the amount and been rejected...but those rejections never frustrate me ....yes just gives me a challenge to do better even tho i say myself I may not be capapable, but what a buzz trying to succeed. I think the reviews are fair not always agreeable but fair and when they do accept my photos and then I get downloads I know i have satisfied my target and the reviewers and the buyers...I am what the common forum junkie classes as a lurker I read and learn and then try to improve (not always improve tho lol )...but i must say....this is the buzz of ss and lets not degrade the reviews or photographers..i would not review because i feel i do not have the knowledge or guts to receive maybe slander for a job that does not get praise in any aspect....but i'm with them...and i'm with the submitters also......its all about give and take.....if u cant take dont give...so hats off to everyone..and keep the site buzzing with threeds like this......10 outta 10.......

oh and i'll never be a tycoon as a photographer....but i have invested from a d50 to a d80 maybe not the best in a lot of eyes...but its all a new challenge for me.......and the bonus is waking next morning to be able to use the camera, and with my meagre portfolio i know its keeping me happy and intersted...and even the reviewers

ALL THE PROS THE AMATEURS, MANAGEMENT AND REVIEWERS MAKE THIS SITE WHAT IT IS

excellent

solaria · Joined: 19 Aug 2007 Posts: 45

I worked for a stock photography agency, about a year ago.
It was the "middle" organization between photographers (and their slides, some from 1980), and the big stock houses.

As a start-up photographer, there was nothing greater to me than the opportunity to work within the business and work with the work of photographers who were just phenomenal, in that I was fortunate.

My role in this company was to scan/digitize transparent slides using the big Hassey scanners that cost as much as my vehicle. Once those slides had been digitized, we were required to "clean" the dust off of the images that the scanner picked up, and remove any scratches or "clean up" the images (yes at 100%, and with 100MB files, sometimes one image would take a half an hour), without doing any pixel damage. There was also color calibration done in the office, professional keywording (by a girl with an English degree), etc.

In the professional environment I was in, we were never allowed to sit at the computer for more than a 3 hour stretch. After three hours, images DO start blurring together (especially at 100%), and you can no longer be expected to realistically see the images. Get up, get a cup of coffee, go from "cleaning" to "color correcting", move from digital scans, to images taken with a digital camera (slightly different workflow) and everything was rotated so that it wouldn't become torture.

Once it becomes torture (as was sometimes inevitable), you really do start hating certain subject matters. The lions in Africa eating their prey was particularly nasty, and the birds with ticks series was another that put my stomach on edge. However, I never once complained to my employer, my co-workers (unless jokingly) nor especially the photographer. It's just not professional. I did my job, I loved my job, and yes, if I had to do it again, I probably would.

10 hours at the computer straight is impossible. 7 hours is unreasonable. 3 hours at a stretch was barely tolerable. It's damaging to your eyes, to your circulatory system, and yes, your psyche.

I don't know who this person works for, but I hope, for everyone's sake, they are able to establish better standards for their employees soon, rather than what it sounds like, "working for a quota" (or so I'm guessing).

Now I see why some of my images are tagged with "blurry, out of focus". When I submit (and it hasn't been much), I submit maybe two, or three images at a time, culled from entire memory cards, when I actually have time to get out and shoot.

A lot of newbie photographers (myself included) shoot what they know. Sometimes it's their computer, money, cords, cars, feet and camera gear. I think everyone who wants to be successful (with anything) has to go through a process of pushing themselves outside of their comfort zones or what they're typically used to seeing and shooting.

It's a shame that reviewers have become bitter in the push to push microstock. I hope not everyone works, or feels the same way.

Thanks for the insight.

bluerabbit · Joined: 29 May 2005 Posts: 813 Location: Colorado

I think I have read this before, and it is very funny. I think the reviewer should do more writing, not because she is a bad reviewer, but because she is a wonderful writer.

That said, the reason that people take those shots is that they sell (if they are done well). Certainly all of the agencies have plenty of these subjects, but many of them were taken before the wonderful cameras we have now were invented, so some supplements are needed. Some new pictures of home technology and flowers are still accepted, and do well.

I think the important part about what she says is the quality--noise, lighting, imaginative presentation, neatness. It isn't the subject, really. Designers need pictures of some pretty strange things. Most of our shots aren't going to be put on a wall in the dining room. They are going to become an element in someone else's design--and who knows what they are looking for. I shoot landscapes, myself, but I'm sure someone wants a well-done funny picture of a guy's hairy big toe (winks).

tandaleah6 · Joined: 16 Jun 2007 Posts: 152

I only do vectors. I wonder what the people who review vectors think?

rpleis · Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Posts: 563 Location: oakville MO. USA

So, what??? you think maybe I should scap my up coming series featuring my scewdiver set with the ubs plugs eating strawberries?. All done in poor lighting conditions ( you know for effect!!!). Just kidding. However I'm guilty of sending in a picture of a dead squirrel.It even sold serval times( I,d like to see what those were used for).Tough job to be objective looking though that sea of hopeful submitions. All I can say is their doing a great job ( the reviewers). I appreciate the oportunity to be represented by this site.

rinder99 · Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 11:53 am

rpleis · Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Posts: 563 Location: oakville MO. USA

rinder99 · Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 12:10 pm

rpleis · Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Posts: 563 Location: oakville MO. USA

I did not realize how old this tread was. I just found some old post I made here before. I don't know what I was thinking then? (note to self, get a clue ya big dummy)

rinder99 · Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 12:48 pm

stevieray · Joined: 04 Jul 2005 Posts: 268 Location: UK

iknowme · Joined: 18 Sep 2006 Posts: 59 Location: Bournemouth

rinder99 · Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 1:39 pm

14ktgold · Joined: 26 Jan 2007 Posts: 409 Location: Holland, MI

I normally do not do "long reads" but this one grabbed my attention immediately. I always wondered what the reviewers experienced and thought. Now I know... And I, too, am guilty on the strawberry subject, but I don't end up eating them. It is the desserts that go to waist... mine!