Stock photography question - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

10/25/2005 07:07:23 PM · #1

Ok, so I have been bored today and reading through all the threads in regards to stock photography...micro vs. macro sites etc. I have never posted to any stock websites, yet....
Right now Alamy looks the best to me from what I have read, but I have a cheap Fujifilm Finepix camera with only 4MP (it was free so I shouldn't complain too much!) Obviously need to make some money on a site somewhere to save up for a much better camera. Is there a way to use some of these "upsizing" websites I have been reading about to be able to use shots from a 4MP camera to send to Alamy? I am a real novice still on digital cameras and not sure that I understand all of what I am reading. Any links or suggestions would be quite helpful!

bfox2

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

10/25/2005 07:24:41 PM · #2

From what I've read, Genuine Fractals (PS Plugin) is one of the best pieces of software around for upsizing. I haven't tried it yet though, so I couldn't give you a first hand account becasue I think it takes a good bit of RAM to run properly, which my computer is sorely lacking.

WGF Images

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

10/26/2005 01:23:11 AM · #3

I have used and still do..GF. You will need to have uncropped and unsharpened images to be able to submit 4MP images to Alamy, but even then it's "still pushing the envelope" as Alamy only accepts 6MP+ digital shots....if you pass QC, or don't for that matter...don't blame me.

faidoi

Pentax K10D

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

10/26/2005 01:32:05 AM · #4

Also you have to have a cd-r or dvd-r burner

briphoto

Nikon D700

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G

10/26/2005 01:57:48 AM · #5

Alamy "suggests" that your un-interpolated image in the TIFF stage be at least 17Mb (that would be from a 6MP camera). They really have no requirements. If you don't tell anybody else I will say I have submitted photos from my 4.1 MP Sony point-and-shoot. They were accepted. I did use extra care in editing them.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

10/26/2005 02:10:39 AM · #6

Fred Miranda's SI Pro and Resize Pro both do as good or better a job as Genuine Fractals at a small fraction of the cost...

Robt.

ArpeggioAngel

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

10/26/2005 03:07:15 PM · #7

Thanks for the responses...will see what I can do from here. Wish me luck!

leaf

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

10/26/2005 03:16:02 PM · #8

yeah, I think the 4 MP sounds a little small.. either way i think your would be better off to start sending to shutterstock to save the $$ for a better camera.

Alamy can be good (i think.. i have only 1 download there so far) if you have between 1000-10,000 images.. starting out that will take a few years to get there ... earning VERY LITTLE.. and take a LONG time to save anything significant.. if you send 100 good images to shutterstock and the likes you could have $500 in your first year.. which could get you a used 10D and perhaps a lens to go with it.

right now i submit to both. RF images go to micro stocks.. and images i want licensed go to alamy.
so far however micro stocks have earned me much more $$ than alamy. I haven't given up hope though.. i have a few hundred images in the line up to send to alamy. I think both have their place.

Message edited by author 2005-10-26 15:16:24.

10/26/2005 03:26:18 PM · #9

well, I can't speak for Alamy or other stock sites but as a customer of stock photo sites and as a vendor to stock sites all I can say is..what someone (be it a stock site or a stock photo user) will accept as a file size depends on output.

If we run an 1/8th page ad in Sports Illustrated then a 4mp clean file will suffice IF...we don't have to crop much.

However, if we run a full page ad in the same Sports Illustrated we need about a 24 meg file (about an 8 megapixel camera image)

If we run a double truck or need a display image then 36 meg files (a 12 megapixel camera) is the minimum.

We also have digital backs for 6x7 that are over 30 and 48 megapixels respectively.

We do not use upsize programs for display design. They are not considered useful for print display although they do an adequate job for large sign display, exhibits to be viewed at distance like outdoor.

If you are really interested in stock photography, invest in a nice 8 megapixel camera like a Canon 20d. For about $1,300 you cannot go wrong if you want to build around a Canon system. 4 or 5 photo sales will pay for it.

I bought my Nikon D2x gear 3 weeks ago for a job and it is paid for after one photo job. And I am not even a professional full time photographer :-D

Message edited by author 2005-10-26 15:28:13.

leaf

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

10/26/2005 03:51:09 PM · #10

if only all of us had the contacts, business line to land the thousand dollar photography contracts....
i am trying, but it is tough slugging finding contracts.

If you have sudjestions I am all ears.

10/26/2005 04:12:20 PM · #11

No doubt that you have to be in the loop to get photowork.

I won't bore you with how I (at 42) traveled to get where I am but I never intended to shoot for money..it just seems to end up with me shooting a lot of stuff the pros won't shoot cause I get paid to get the job done..the client doesn't care how. If that means I get money for photos in addition to selling and designing the job..so be it..more for me.

Shooting lots of photos and entering contests and sending stuff to stock sites won't make you a living in this business. It WILL get you experience if you can learn and get better.

What will get you business is building a portfolio of photojournal/events shots, product shots, portrait shots, fashion shots, architectural shots that do not suck, joining the local chamber of commerce and smoozing with the local businesses, doing free stuff for hi-profile, non-profits and getting credit. Be creative with your marketing proposals, work with ad agencies, marketing departments and SELL YOURSELF!

The number one pitfall (besides not having any talent at all) is not being able to market yourself which roughly translates into not getting out and selling in the market.

Our in-house photographer told me after his last, boring industrial catalogue shoot that he didn't like this kind of work and it showed in his photos. I said fine, I'll shoot the next set (which I had already sold the client on) bought my camera gear with a credit card and proceeded to knock out 128 product shots at $50 a pop clipped and ready for a catalogue. 4 days work and over $6,000 later I have a nice camera and my photographer has nada.

This is usually all it takes to make it...a failure is not an option attitude and the b*lls to get it done.

ArpeggioAngel

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

10/26/2005 04:38:47 PM · #12

Hokie that is some great advice. I am still fairly new to the world of digital photography (after lugging around 2 Minolta 35mm for years), and a bit shy when it comes to marketing myself. I am also not big on architecture/sports/fashion...the normal photo shoot type of stuff. I prefer and do much better photographing scenery and wildlife. I know that probably won't translate into any big contracts for me, but I love just being able to share my work with others. If I can even make a few extra bucks somewhere like shutterstock then maybe that is the road to take for now.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

10/26/2005 04:54:00 PM · #13

ArpeggioAngel, I agree with your attitude 100%.

A measure of a photographer is not how much he/she has sold or what they do commercially. I am living proof of that.

Many, many people would lose their enjoyment of photography if they had to do what I and others like me do. I basically didn't have time to shoot photos for just myself over the last 2-3 years simply because, in the advertising world..I got SICK of handling photos.

But, and this is going to sound strange but its good words of encouragement to others here, DP Challenge helped me to simply have a place to vent and share about photo stuff. Most of the guys I hang around with everyday at work are so sick of photography (like my previuous example above) nobody talks about photos anymore. They would rather talk about racing cars or anything else.

Now, after 3 intense years maybe I can help others here with words from the other side ..I don't know. :-)

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

10/26/2005 05:08:05 PM · #14

Originally posted by hokie:

Now, after 3 intense years maybe I can help others here with words from the other side ..I don't know. :-)

You could look at people's stock (and print?) portfolios and offer some general advice/criticism from the perspective of the prospective customer ... although that involves evaluating a lot of photos ... : (

10/26/2005 05:17:42 PM · #15

Originally posted by GeneralE:

I would be more than happy to look at peoples portfolio's as time permits.

As we speak I am going through about 50 hi-rez industrial photos (about 80-130 meg files..eating up all my puter power) and nothing could suck as much as these. Here we have a pro photographer that couldn't keep a lens out of the metallic shots and a photoshop specialist who cant seem to understand how to clean something up without smoothing the metallic surface to a non-descript state.

I swear, all it takes to make a living in this business is 1) give a rip about your reputation 2) have the skills you claim on your resume.

>:<

Message edited by author 2005-10-26 17:18:08.

leaf

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

10/27/2005 01:41:04 PM · #16

thanks for the thoughts hokie... they were helpful. I will have to put the thinking cap back on.

Brent_Ward

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L USM

10/27/2005 01:52:58 PM · #17

Originally posted by hokie:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

You could look at people's stock (and print?) portfolios and offer some general advice/criticism from the perspective of the prospective customer ... although that involves evaluating a lot of photos ... : (

I would be more than happy to look at peoples portfolio's as time permits.

As we speak I am going through about 50 hi-rez industrial photos (about 80-130 meg files..eating up all my puter power) and nothing could suck as much as these. Here we have a pro photographer that couldn't keep a lens out of the metallic shots and a photoshop specialist who cant seem to understand how to clean something up without smoothing the metallic surface to a non-descript state.

I swear, all it takes to make a living in this business is 1) give a rip about your reputation 2) have the skills you claim on your resume.

>:<

I feel your pain. I used to shoot all the coleman company's products. Curved stainless grills and patio lights!! Not to mention lanterns. Oh that Stainless Steel Cooler is also a bitch to shoot.

Kavey