Stock Photo Ideas - Didn't Enter

Mattel Barbie Photo Designer Digital Camera

03/26/2005 06:09:17 PM · #1

Any of these strike you as being "stock"?

nsbca7

03/26/2005 06:10:14 PM · #2

Originally posted by BikeRacer:

Any of these strike you as being "stock"?

They're all stock.

Mattel Barbie Photo Designer Digital Camera

03/26/2005 07:26:23 PM · #3

Originally posted by nsbca7:

Originally posted by BikeRacer:
Any of these strike you as being "stock"?

They're all stock.

LOL, thanks. Do you think they're any good/would have done well?

nsbca7

03/26/2005 07:49:30 PM · #4

Originally posted by BikeRacer:

Originally posted by nsbca7:

Originally posted by BikeRacer:
Any of these strike you as being "stock"?

They're all stock.

LOL, thanks. Do you think they're any good/would have done well?

Damn, I could never hope to guess what might do well in any of these challenges. But the images look crisp and clear and the color is good.

rblanton

Canon EOS-10D

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

03/27/2005 12:51:12 AM · #5

#2 is sharp and would have done well I feel.

bucket

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

03/27/2005 12:58:48 AM · #6

I like both #2 and #3, they are both interesting and creative shots...so who cares how they would have done.

DrewLong

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Tamron AF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 LD for Canon

03/27/2005 02:29:10 AM · #7

I like'em. one and two the best for me. I think they would have done well, an honest 6 and/or 7 from me.

03/27/2005 02:25:17 PM · #8

Originally posted by canoe3k:

#2 is sharp and would have done well I feel.

Thanks, I was hoping to get more shots with cool water splashlets, but this was the best one.

03/27/2005 02:29:56 PM · #9

Originally posted by bucket:

I like both #2 and #3, they are both interesting and creative shots...so who cares how they would have done.

Thanks, I guess it was more a "do these fit the general idea of stock" question. I guess I don't really care if a shot does well or not, but I'd like to try to learn why a shot does well.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/27/2005 02:30:31 PM · #10

Originally posted by DrewLong:

I like'em. one and two the best for me. I think they would have done well, an honest 6 and/or 7 from me.

Thanks. #1 is my fav too.

Artifacts

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

03/27/2005 04:03:51 PM · #11

Originally posted by BikeRacer:

Any of these strike you as being "stock"?

As for being "stock" these images are all "wet".

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/27/2005 07:00:30 PM · #12

Originally posted by stdavidson:

Originally posted by BikeRacer:

Any of these strike you as being "stock"?

As for being "stock" these images are all "wet".

Is that "good" or "bad"?

Artifacts

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

03/27/2005 07:21:43 PM · #13

Originally posted by BikeRacer:

Originally posted by stdavidson:

Originally posted by BikeRacer:

Any of these strike you as being "stock"?

As for being "stock" these images are all "wet".

Is that "good" or "bad"?

Actually, it is supposed to be funny. But if I have to explain it then it wasn't. :)

Almost anything can be a stock photo, but generic images containing people and/or generic product items seem to be the hotest sellers.

Look on stock sites and the type of images you see most often are the ones to emulate.

Yours, I think, would be for a niche market so might not increase your "liquid" assets to any great degree and the small profits you get would "evaporate" quickly. Then again, anything I say might just be "water under the bridge". OK, I'll just "drop" this subject for now. :)

Message edited by author 2005-03-27 19:24:03.