KZander Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 I'm new to stock photography and looking for advice on how to improve my pictures so I can pass QC! These two were rejected for being soft or lacking definition: https://drive.google.com/file/d/12TXXRVwnB4G0ufKGWS3jBhZNFrnMRm6C/view?usp=drive_link and https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kaDnGNpFPnUO9p5sryPzcjJGUtC3dxL0/view?usp=drive_link Taken with a Canon EOS Rebel T7 - how can I make my images sharper? Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander Hogg Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 It's asking for requesting access on Goggle Drive so cannot see the pictures 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve F Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 Hi Zander, If you go back to Google Drive, you can create a link with public access to all and reshare. Welcome to Alamy. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KZander Posted July 19 Author Share Posted July 19 Omg I always forget Google Drive needs you to make them public. Should be viewable now! Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiskerke Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 Make sure that for the first images you submit, all of your subject is sharp. So you must also think of what your subject is. Is it the whole plant or just a spine. Quality Control has stated often enough that in general a client should get what he/she expects to get looking at the thumbnail. So in this case in the thumbnail your plant looks overall reasonably and equally sharp, but on closer inspection it's done with a wide aperture giving shallow focus. Pleasing to some. but make sure there's a clear subject that's in focus. And make sure it looks that way in a thumbnail. wim 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Standfast Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 I recommend having a look through the curated images here. https://www.alamy.com/category/ It gives an idea of the standard and quality of the competition. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve F Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 What Wim said. Alamy is looking for your first 3 test images to show that you can take an image that meets their technical requirements, including focusing. And your cactus photo at the distance you've photographed it is not really an image that you would ever normally be doing shallow depth of field for. Looks like you've picked some random point on it to be in focus. Pick 3 simple images for your test submission. You can submit shallow depth of field images afterwards - but use shallow dof where it's appropriate. Good luck! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betty LaRue Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 (edited) I’ve found, when using shallow depth of field, the nearest part to the camera needs to be the sharpest part. It just doesn’t seem to work otherwise. People see an ugly blob in front of the sharp part that puts them off. This seems to hold true for small objects including plants. There are exceptions for broad scenes, something like a person walking down the street, where something innocuous like the corner of a building nearer the camera is soft making the clarity of the person stand out because the person is the subject of the photo. That soft part, well off to the side, needs to be innocuous, so when first looking at the image what you notice is the person. As usual, there are always exceptions, but until one has a few years under his/her belt, play it safe. Here is an example. I focused on the tallest coneflower with shallow depth of field. If I had focused on the purple flowers behind the coneflowers, the coneflowers would have been blurry blobs & rendered the image as unworkable. Edited July 20 by Betty LaRue 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KZander Posted July 20 Author Share Posted July 20 Ah, I hear what y'all mean about selecting a subject and ensuring it's sharp. I've been thinking from a standpoint of 'do I find this an attractive image?", but for stock photos it needs to be more universally appealing using clean techniques. I think I've always just considered a shallow depth of field in a pictures to be a mark of quality since it's only really achievable with a higher quality camera, but that doesn't mean it produces a useful and quality photo. I need to think about what exactly am I actually taking a picture of. Thank you so much all for your feedback! I really appreciate it. I'm not sure if trying to sell stock photos is really a valuable use of my time, but I hope at the least it improves my photo taking skills. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDM Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 (edited) 30 minutes ago, KZander said: I'm not sure if trying to sell stock photos is really a valuable use of my time, but I hope at the least it improves my photo taking skills. Valuable use of time? That's the $2 if you're lucky question. My last three sales were for less than $2 each before commission and they were images that I worked hard to obtain. Stock photography can be very disheartening these days. Working towards passing Alamy QC on a regular basis will help you ensure that the main subjects of your images are in focus and sharp when viewed at 100% in Photoshop or equivalent editing app but there are far better ways to improve your general photography skills. Edited July 20 by MDM 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebecca Ore Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 The Guardian zoomed two photos of stink bugs. Mine was in an ugly location; the one chosen was on a flower. So aesthetic qualities can be useful, but not at the expense of a clear subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KZander Posted July 20 Author Share Posted July 20 3 hours ago, MDM said: Valuable use of time? That's the $2 if you're lucky question. My last three sales were for less than $2 each before commission and they were images that I worked hard to obtain. Stock photography can be very disheartening these days. Working towards passing Alamy QC on a regular basis will help you ensure that the main subjects of your images are in focus and sharp when viewed at 100% in Photoshop or equivalent editing app but there are far better ways to improve your general photography skills. haha I think any money is useful for what is primarily a hobby that just costs me money! I have started doing some photography as part of my digital marketing gig primarily just for social media, but that's got me trying to develop it as a professional skill. I'd love to hear any ways you recommend to improve photography skills or any online resources you can share. Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KZander Posted July 20 Author Share Posted July 20 3 hours ago, Betty LaRue said: I’ve found, when using shallow depth of field, the nearest part to the camera needs to be the sharpest part. It just doesn’t seem to work otherwise. People see an ugly blob in front of the sharp part that puts them off. This seems to hold true for small objects including plants. There are exceptions for broad scenes, something like a person walking down the street, where something innocuous like the corner of a building nearer the camera is soft making the clarity of the person stand out because the person is the subject of the photo. That soft part, well off to the side, needs to be innocuous, so when first looking at the image what you notice is the person. As usual, there are always exceptions, but until one has a few years under his/her belt, play it safe. Here is an example. I focused on the tallest coneflower with shallow depth of field. If I had focused on the purple flowers behind the coneflowers, the coneflowers would have been blurry blobs & rendered the image as unworkable. Thank you for this example, that's extremely helpful! And gorgeous coneflowers, love em Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDM Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 2 hours ago, KZander said: haha I think any money is useful for what is primarily a hobby that just costs me money! I have started doing some photography as part of my digital marketing gig primarily just for social media, but that's got me trying to develop it as a professional skill. I'd love to hear any ways you recommend to improve photography skills or any online resources you can share. Thank you! I come orignally from the ancient world of film and chemical and I learnt from books, magazines and lots of mistakes and lots of practice. I just adapted what I had learnt about photography to the new world of digital, happily I must say - no nostalgic longing for smelly toxic chemicals here. Nowadays there is a vast amount of info out there and I have no idea what to recommend. Much depends on whether you learnt best from books, YouTube videos, face to face or a combo thereof. It obviously depends on what you already know about basic photography as well as post processing. I would suggest structured learning from competent educators in whatever form that comes. It can be worth paying for good quality learning when weighing up the time wasted learning in a piecemeal manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betty LaRue Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 (edited) Photography isn’t rocket science. I would suggest the first thing you should study is composition. Even the most simple image is improved by good composition. Study about the rule of thirds. For stock, it’s nice to leave some space for the buyer to add text when you can. Room for text at the top here… and here… Some images are not suitable for leaving room, like this one. You need to understand between the two. Edited July 20 by Betty LaRue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve F Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 (edited) 9 hours ago, KZander said: haha I think any money is useful for what is primarily a hobby that just costs me money! I have started doing some photography as part of my digital marketing gig primarily just for social media, but that's got me trying to develop it as a professional skill. I'd love to hear any ways you recommend to improve photography skills or any online resources you can share. Thank you! What Betty and MDM said. Stock is one of the worst ways of making money, but it's nice to make something out of your hobby. Agree that it depends which format helps you to learn best. Personally, I would get a variety of photography magazines over a number of months. And some books that include composition, techniques, subject matter, use of colour, lighting, black and white... Learning how to take picture of products may be useful, depending on what you're going to be marketing. Learn the rules of composition, and then how to break them. Steve p.s. if you go to Portolio Critique section on the Forum, there's a bunch of advice about selling with Alamy, as well as general photography techniques. Edited July 21 by Steve F Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander Hogg Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 2 hours ago, Steve F said: Stock is one of the worst ways of making money, but it's nice to make something out of your hobby. I totally agree If i new when I first started what I know now probably would never have started but the small amount of money earned does help sometimes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KitJames Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 My first test submissions were of my best and in focus after inspection at 100%. I look for any blur when its not intended, and dust or anything that can affect images. And it did pass. I use software for processing and I use DxO Photolab Elite edition. I also toyed and learned the weaknesses and strengths of my lenses and got better results out of them that's shown little differences to the higher end ones. It's worth finding out what depth of field is worth having on certain subjects, some need more and some need less. Toy with your lens and see what's best, and then use that to your advantage. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Normspics Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 On 20/07/2024 at 17:09, Betty LaRue said: Photography isn’t rocket science. I would suggest the first thing you should study is composition. Even the most simple image is improved by good composition. Study about the rule of thirds. For stock, it’s nice to leave some space for the buyer to add text when you can. Room for text at the top here… This is a lovely photo, there is a theory in composition of items like this that odd numbers are more aesthetic, 3, 5 etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betty LaRue Posted July 23 Share Posted July 23 I agree, Norm. Even when one tries to think of everything before pressing the shutter, something slips through the folds of the brain. May be more rocket science than I thought! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IKuzmin Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 On 22/07/2024 at 12:05, Normspics said: there is a theory in composition of items like this that odd numbers are more aesthetic, 3, 5 etc. E.g. https://the-photo-ebook.com/cheat-sheets-composition/?sc_ref=jFFwcMsKYvNaQd8w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now