PHOTO: Application Rejected...Again.

Resultados de 1 a 11 de 11 encontrados.
sid6062
Postado Sat Apr 28, 2012 2:25PM

Photo 1


I took my RAW file and copied it to Lightroom WITHOUT converting it to DNG on accident. So without the XMP file data, is this what is causing the artifacting? I didn't realize it had artifacting until it was rejected because on my computer, the file looked PERFECT after post-editing.
Whiteway
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusivoOperador de vídeo exclusivo da iStockphoto
Postado Sat Apr 28, 2012 2:58PM
You haven't given the exact wording of the rejection - that would help.

To my eye it looks a bit over-bright and contrasty. What sort of post-processing have you done to it?

And when you say your image looked perfect, was that at 100% view?
sid6062
Postado Sat Apr 28, 2012 3:46PM

/
/"At this time we regret to inform you that we did not feel the overall composition of your photography or subject matter is at the minimum level of standard for iStockphoto. Please take some time to review training materials, resources and articles provided through iStockphoto. The photographs provided in your application should be diverse in subject matter, technical ability and should be your best work. Think conceptual, creative and most important think Stock photography. Try to avoid the average eye level push the button perspective of a common subject. Try and impress us, we want to see how you stand out from the crowd.

We welcome you to return after the number of days specified and upload 3 fresh samples of your work and we will re-process your application.  Please note that you will not be able to upload new samples until this waiting period has passed."


 


I always view my photos at 200% to make sure they have no noise, good focus, or anything abnormal. I'm almost positive the artifacting (in the green peppers for example) is because the XMP file was missing when I converted it to JPEG. I just want someone to confirm if this is the case or not. By the way..here are the other 2 photos I uploaded with this one....


 


Photo 2

Photo 3


Looking back at Photo 3, I wished I would have cropped it...just looks like crap


Maybe this would have been better?


Possibility?

(Edited on 2012-04-28 15:53:51 by sid6062)
kbwills
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusivoOperador de vídeo exclusivo da iStockphoto
Postado Sat Apr 28, 2012 4:35PM

If you uploaded three still lifes as your application, then that doesnt really show enough diversity in your work.


The rejection wording spells it out ...


" The photographs provided in your application should be diverse in subject matter, technical ability and should be your best work. Think conceptual, creative and most important think Stock photography." (my highlights in text).


REGARDS


 
esp_imaging
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusivo
Postado Sat Apr 28, 2012 4:55PM
Posted By kbwills:

If you uploaded three still lifes as your application, then that doesnt really show enough diversity in your work.

Agreed. Unless they are really awesome still life / product shots.

Peppers have awkward mix of colour temperatures with the lighting. Composition is weak ("half empty baskets of peppers") . They look too dark too.

I don't like the light (mix of daylight and tungsten?) in the tomatoes. Plus they just  don't look attractive, they are very orange, not red, under-ripe and not appealing. Focus closer to camera would have been better.

Handcuffs seem to be almost-but-not-quite in focus.
Whiteway
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusivoOperador de vídeo exclusivo da iStockphoto
Postado Sun Apr 29, 2012 1:16AM
It looks as if your question about not converting the file from RAW to DNG is a bit of a red herring. No one else seems to have mentioned artifacting in that photo, including the inspector who rejected your application. By the way, while it may feel like insurance to examine your photos at 200%, we are assured that inspectors view at 100%.

You need to find three photos of quite different subjects, nicely focussed and with minimal sharpening or other post-processing. It's your photographic 'eye' that is being tested here.
sid6062
Postado Sun Apr 29, 2012 3:45AM
Ok thanks to all that replied. I thought the message I got was a generic message, reason being, my first application, I submitted photos of the washington monument with a flag flying in the foreground, a portrait of my 4 year old on the beach playing in the water, and a photo of a chameleon. They gave me the EXACT same reason for denial. So I guess I'm a little confused as to what they want "diverse" to be...
Mijau
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Postado Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:15AM
Posted By sid6062:
Ok thanks to all that replied. I thought the message I got was a generic message, reason being, my first application, I submitted photos of the washington monument with a flag flying in the foreground, a portrait of my 4 year old on the beach playing in the water, and a photo of a chameleon. They gave me the EXACT same reason for denial. So I guess I'm a little confused as to what they want "diverse" to be...


This is standard notification for rejection of application. You have to provide 3 diverse photographs. Diverse as in subject matter as in technique used. It is usually recomended to uppload portrait, still life and landscape as it covers well diversity for subject matter. You can do studio portrait, macro, panning shots different depth of field or whatever you can imagine to differ technique used. And shots have to be made well technically and composed (pre-uppload opinions about it you can have in this forum).


Good luck.
Whiteway
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusivoOperador de vídeo exclusivo da iStockphoto
Postado Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:04AM
^Yes, it's about considerably more than diversity, though diversity is important. It's about composition and technical quality, too, and the ability to take an unusual view of something.
Difydave
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusivo
Postado Sun Apr 29, 2012 7:09AM

I'd agree with what's been said above.


Also don't strip out the exif data, either for posting here or for submission. It allows people to see what you are doing technically and possibly give you further help.
erniedecker
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusivo
Postado Sun Apr 29, 2012 12:45PM
As for not converting it to DNG, I never use DNG and it doesn't matter on the shots I get accepted. As for getting accepted, don't get discouraged. It took me several tries too. IMO, what may make a perfectely good file in normal circumstances is not always what IStock is wanting. Again, IMO, they seem to want a more even or uniform light throughout the image, Not much in the way of shadows, etc. Just my 2 cents and I must admit, they have accepted SOME that do have deeper shadows too. But not too much. Good luck.
Este encadeamento foi bloqueado.
Resultados de 1 a 11 de 11 encontrados.
Você não é associado?Cadastrar-se
Carrinho (0)