To submit or not to submit .... advice ???

03/20/2005 05:27:33 AM · #1

I have an image I really like that I'm thinking of submitting to the stock challenge, but I'm not really sure if it's stockish enough!!? I've looked at the thread that someone started a while back about the definition of stock, and gone through the last challenge (If you didn't know better you'd have thought it was a free study).
For all my efforts I can't really seem to find any rhyme or reason to 'stock photography.' I tried looking at istock, shutterstock, and even getty, but there is photography of every kind on all of those sites.

At this point I think I'll just throw leave it in and see, but what I'm asking is does anyone have any special criteria for a stock image, or is this basically an anything goes, I'll just vote for the images I like best kind of thing ?

e301

03/20/2005 05:37:37 AM · #2

Sellable, would be my only criterion. That means sellable in my opinion, and not sellable to me. That obviously covers a wide range of photography - portraits, objects, locations, some abstract work, and doubtless a bunch of stuff I haven't thought of.

I've given up trying to second guess the voters - they'll always surprise you. Go with something that you like, and that fits in your eyes.

If I'd tried to second guess people, some of my more succcessful images here would never have been submitted.

E

samtrundle

Canon EOS-50D

03/20/2005 05:46:07 AM · #3

Originally posted by e301:

If I'd tried to second guess people, some of my more succcessful images here would never have been submitted.

Probably a very good point there. In my (limited) time here, some of the shots I thought would appeal to the masses have been met with a distinctly indifferent response, while other images I hadn't expected as much from have been fairly well received. I think I'll just bite the bullet.

Cheers

gaurawa

03/20/2005 09:42:23 AM · #4

I am also confused as to what's stock. Finally I ended up choosing a very simple subject and tried to give it a better look. you never know what people like :>

03/20/2005 10:02:32 AM · #5

It's a good question.

I'd add that it might or should be something representative of a subject, concept or maybe a feeling that a company might buy to help sell.

Computer Learning. Lemon Lime Freshness. Tropical Bliss. Perfect Apples. Beautiful Skiing Vacation. Buttery Lobster. New Romance. Advanced, Cutting Edge Technology. Tuscany. Smokey Wine with a light currant finish ("...bold yet not pretentious").

It's pretty wide open but most stock buyers, I believe, are using the photo's to help sell all of the above and the like. From what I understand many stock shops look for very specific subjects that sell and are always in demand. Therein's the answer. That's probably how I will vote most entries.

awpollard

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

03/20/2005 10:17:37 AM · #6

I side with e301 on this one...Sellable is the key. I think many around here many are going to confuse "Stock" with "Studio" (and/or staged).

Look at it from the "Marketing" buyers eyes...

There is no "I don't care, I like the picture" in stock photography because emotional ties and stock photos do not mix. Buyers' don't care if you like your photo or not. Buyers' are on one mission only. Look around on any of the RF stock sites with no real criteria and you will see a pletera of what must be "At least I like the shot" type images.

I'm going visualize the entries in my head as they would look in a Magazine, Newspaper, Brochure and even websites.

Good stock photos will stop a person dead in their tracks will flipping through a magazine or Newspaper or get you to stick around a website long enough to see what they are selling anyways. That's the first thing we see, that stock photo that they got from somewhere. "Woah, I have to read this advertisement" cause the picture stirred some emotion like Happy, Sad, Cute, Glamorous or Funny.

Also for me Title is not going to be important in my ratings of the Challenge...You are selling Emotion or Product (ultimately Product, Place or Thing). Long drawn out titles that have to explain the shot will not do well with me in this one.

This really is another open challenge as Stock Photos can be of anything from Animals, Babies, food, Landscapes and on...It's all about composition. Don't take pictures in your living room, or kitchen, unless you get really close to the subject so we don't have to see the braided rug from the 1970's, If it's a pet take it outside in an environment it enjoys.

Of course this is all my opinion...

03/20/2005 11:20:11 AM · #7

Originally posted by awpollard:

I side with e301 on this one...Sellable is the key.

Look at it from the "Marketing" buyers eyes...

Sellable, as in to a marketing/advertising rep, not as in framable hang it on the wall. I'm thinking this would be similar (similar - not the same) to the billboard challenge in the way that the image should be direct and simple.

Also, I don't think the image in itself needs to tell a story because a stock image is one that is going to supplement a story that the marketing/advertising dept is going to tell. The image is background. So, a successful stock photo should be generic enough to be desirable to a large purchasing audience (people that are going to pay to use it - more than one company or product).

03/20/2005 11:43:29 AM · #8

Originally posted by awpollard:

Also for me Title is not going to be important in my ratings of the Challenge...You are selling Emotion or Product (ultimately Product, Place or Thing). Long drawn out titles that have to explain the shot will not do well with me in this one.

I agree with that 100%. The photo should stand alone and say it all. I could be wrong but I look at a stock photograph as being a definitive image. I'm sure there are exceptions but I will be looking for photo's that define at least something, perfectly, clearly on their own.

Otherwise....see ya later.

ace flyman

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

03/20/2005 11:49:40 AM · #9

Having a tough time on set shots for this challenge. Your opinion if I'm on the right track ? Going out side for a while......Thanks..ace

Removed.......

Message edited by author 2005-03-20 12:54:30.

awpollard

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

03/20/2005 11:57:20 AM · #10

Originally posted by ace flyman:

Having a tough time on set shots for this challenge. Your opinion if I'm on the right track ? Going out side for a while......Thanks..ace

I'm thinking the background is a little harsh for a subject such as Kleenix. Background should not distract...Go natural soft color not white but way softer than black.

03/20/2005 11:57:57 AM · #11

Originally posted by ace flyman:

Having a tough time on set shots for this challenge. Your opinion if I'm on the right track ? Going out side for a while......Thanks..ace

I think tissues need to be on a white, soft, cloudy or a more feminine background. Think Pink! Not a bad shot but it would lose points from me for that reason.

I think the winners in this Challenge will satisfy all the angles. Scrutinize like an advertiser and you'll be in-line.

ace flyman

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

03/20/2005 12:20:06 PM · #12

Originally posted by ace flyman:

Having a tough time on set shots for this challenge. Your opinion if I'm on the right track ? Going out side for a while......Thanks..ace

Ya, a soft pink sheet would do it. Found some interesting idea's outside. Good Luck to ALL....Thanks.........ace

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4.0G IF-ED

03/20/2005 12:38:35 PM · #13

Originally posted by ace flyman:

[quote=ace flyman]
Ya, a soft pink sheet would do it. Found some interesting idea's outside. Good Luck to ALL....Thanks.........ace

Let me go one step further. I think these tissues need to be photographed in a nice delicate(again, feminine), sunlit bedroom. Think, pillows and lace. Bokeh clouds....

Not like a Rolex or an ipod.

Message edited by author 2005-03-20 12:39:02.

jbsmithana

Nikon D300

03/20/2005 12:40:54 PM · #14

I'm thinking that since this is an active challenge you should not be posting a potential entry.

ace flyman

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

03/20/2005 12:52:49 PM · #15

Originally posted by jbsmithana:

I'm thinking that since this is an active challenge you should not be posting a potential entry.

Actually I was looking for comments on the concept, it was pretty clear the background wasn't part of the consideration. ......ace

Beetle

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

03/20/2005 12:56:14 PM · #16

Don't forget that stock photos are not always used to sell something, but also to illustrate a story/report etc.
So we shouldn't see any comments like: "Who'd ever buy that?"

secondglantz

Nikon D800

03/20/2005 06:52:45 PM · #17

I have worked as a photo-researcher for both a stock photography agency and a large publisher. Stock photographs range from photojournalism shots to pictures of hot air balloons. Clients include advertisers, news magazines, textbook companies, computer software publishers and every imaginable professional journal. Regardless of the genre of photograph, photo editors are looking for one thing, quality images.

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

03/20/2005 08:41:09 PM · #18

Originally posted by secondglantz:

Brian, It sounds like you're well equipped for this challenge! ;^) I hope you enter - look forward to seeing your work on this one.

Artyste

Sony Ericsson W810i

03/20/2005 08:47:51 PM · #19

I'm thinking that a lot of people are taking the description: "Make your image sellable" to mean that they have to make what they are photographing sellable.

This is *not* the case. Stock photography is *NOT* just a great product shot. Your purpose is not to make the subject of the photograph sellable (or saleable), but to make the image itself sellable (or saleable). You want to sell your photograph.. your prints.. so what is in them is important, as a wide range of buyers need to be interested, but the subject of your photo itself need not be something that people might want to buy.

03/20/2005 09:23:52 PM · #20

Very good points.

Iraqi's voting, Tsunami victims, famine victims, hurricane devastation, cheering Michael Jackson supporters(yikes!)and so on, are all common stock type subjects.

Artifacts

03/20/2005 09:29:01 PM · #21

Stock basically is any image that has wide appeal and that may be used in a variety of different ways to sell something, anything.

If an image is very artsy, poor technical quality or controversial it will not make a good stock photography image.

A good stock photography image should be like... well... my entry.
(All 10s welcome!)

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

03/20/2005 09:39:23 PM · #22

Originally posted by Artyste:

Glen - I agree with your description of what stock photography is, but have to disagree with your opening paragraph in that I don't see where a lot of people are getting the description wrong - sounds like most are in agreement with your definition.

Artyste

Sony Ericsson W810i

03/20/2005 09:42:00 PM · #23

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by Artyste:
I'm thinking that a lot of people are taking the description: "Make your image sellable" to mean that they have to make what they are photographing sellable.

This is *not* the case. Stock photography is *NOT* just a great product shot. Your purpose is not to make the subject of the photograph sellable (or saleable), but to make the image itself sellable (or saleable). You want to sell your photograph.. your prints.. so what is in them is important, as a wide range of buyers need to be interested, but the subject of your photo itself need not be something that people might want to buy.

Glen - I agree with your description of what stock photography is, but have to disagree with your opening paragraph in that I don't see where a lot of people are getting the description wrong - sounds like most are in agreement with your definition.

Well, I wrote that without really reading this thread through fully, and yes, the general consensus in *here* is agreeing with what I've said. However, from chatting with people, from reading other threads, and from a general feeling since the challenge was introduced, I had a feeling that the way people were taking it was how I said. Perhaps we've made the difference now though. lol

srdanz

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

03/20/2005 09:43:57 PM · #24

How much do you think a title would matter in this case? I have an image that may be enhanced by a good title, and also degraded by a bad one.

Should I invest in coming up with a good title (or withdraw my submission)?