First Attempt at Stock Photography

Some of those are pretty good. I didn't look at all of them though (56k).

The ones with the grill/fence/netting in the shot are probably useless to most people, whereas the clear scenics are nice. Other shots I noticed weren't too good, with blurry images -- due to simply poor focus or slow shutter speed or if you're not holding the camera steady. And a couple of them were in bad light. Watch out for flash reflections too.

With a little touching up or strategic cropping, you could save some of the bad ones.

I really like the cats (first pic). Best of the ones I saw. Good angle, focus, light, and subject. The snowy view from beside lamp is a good one too, though it could do with adjusted levels.

And yes, some of them would make good stock photos. If you want to share them, I'd encourage you to submit to sxc.hu or deviantart.com's stock photo section.

Overall, it looks like a good session. As an amateur myself, I normally get about 5-10 decent shots out of maybe 30, with my point-and-shoot cam. Keep it up and keep at it.

Btw, what hardware do you use?

That was off my Uncle's camera. It was a Nikon something or other.

The netting was taken out of a window with a screen, and I left them just in case. The other ones were either taken out the door or behind a window with no screen. I couldn't manually change the speed, but I did find out that the "close up" setting had a quicker shutter speed. I have a very shaky hand, so that was a problem too. I wasn't too concerned with light. I tried to put it behind me when I thought of it, but I didn't always think of it.

I like to play with blur and the such, so I may be able to use some of the bad ones with "artistic editing."

The cat pic was my kittens when they were really little (sometime this summer). It's actually really old. I must have grabbed the camera and shot them when they were sleeping, because my uncle doesn't remember taking it. I really liked it, although I wasn't sure how good they'd work as stock photogrpahy. As far as the lamp, that was a fluke. I wasn't intending to get it in there, but then after I saw it, I liked it.

I was kind of hoping that I might be able to make some money off them, but maybe I'll submit to both istockphoto and the two you mentioned.

I might add that some of the shots were for specific purposes (such as the clock face) I've been playing around with the idea of "12 Noon Productions." I'm not exactly sure what I'll use it for (or if it's TM, I'll have to check that) but it sounds cool.

I don't know about internet bases stock photography, but when I was doing it (normal photography), you needed a release form from everyone in the photo (person signs a form saying you have permission and rights to it and any profit ...).
Blurry pictures can be used and often are (depending on the subject).
Photography can also be seasonal - winter stuff in summer ...
If you include people make sure you dont have light reflection in eyewear (glasses) and watch how the fingers/hands are placed.

I didn't look at all the pics as I am on dialup too, some of what I saw seem to general, while the landscape ones look good the close up tree ones are not.
If you plain to do this for a while, I'd suggest offer the good ones to the net based stock photo places and you will soon learn what they want and dont want, but also keep doing landscapes (what I did mostly), every season of the year, try and capture the season, dont make people guess and submit 14 pics to a printer/publisher (how ever its done over there) and try get a calendar deal (real good money)

Be warned, stock photo can be real disappointing, film based you usually get about a tenth of your work approved, anymore and you're either sleeping with the boss or you own the place lol. Again, not sure about internet based but film ones you have to submit about 10,000 at a time, and only a 1000 max would be selected. It's not usually determined on your skills, rather your topic as stock agents have huge libraries of pics.

If you have a shaky hand, use a tripod or minipod and worry about the light remember the flash is your friend and can/should be used during the day as well (depending on the subject)
good luck

Thanks for the tips! I'm not really getting into this, I just need a library and thought I might post some just to see what happens. It turns out I had the picture size settings too low, and I can't submit this batch to istockphoto as they're too small. My camera only has one setting which thankfully is big enough.

I still have to submit them to the free place and see how that turns out.

As far as submitting and getting approved, eh. Whatever happens happens.

I did get my dad's old tripod to adapt for my camera, so that should help alot.

Again Busy, thanks for the tips, and I'll post my next batch when I get some more pictures.

Depending on your topics a monopod might suit you better, is quicker and easier to move around but as the name suggets (mono) only has one leg so can be a pain in the butt if you are doing stills that need adjusting. (assistant helps to either hold it or adjust whatever)

Remember the accepted rate usually isn't high on stock photos so dont be upset if they dont pick any, doesnt mean they arent any good, just means they either have that topic already or dont have a market for that topic.
When learning photography I was taught if you get one good photo in a roll, you have done well, if you get two, you're doing better than most. With todays cameras (no I'm not that old lol) it's easier to boost those numbers up.
If you can browse through the library, pick a topic or two you'd like to do, say hands (human hands), look at what they have on stock, now look for what they don't have, say they have hands, fingers, rings, palms, knuckles ... whats missing? how bout thumbs, gloves, two hands (shaking hands, holding hands), kissing hand ... while it's pretty hard to find something that easily you have to look for what they dont have or try pick new trends and styles and try get in before everyone else. landscapes can be good but needs to be more like a single tree, single rock, a road, a sign, wheel marks ... Everyday things are good topics, things we all take for granted, a tap (faucet ?) or water coming out of it is a good example. Think outside the rectangle (the square was copyrighted lol)

I started out as a hobby, then turned it into a profession, can make good money from it but it takes a lot of photos and a lot of time.

Also read the fine print on any contracts you get, if the pics are approved usually you can not use them anywhere else, not even for your own stuff.

I took another quick set of thirty (tripod this time) and I think I got one good one out of it. And yes, I realize I need to clean the sink.

http://madclassifieds.000k.net/Stock/1-24-05%20Home/DSCF0017.JPG

liquid gold also try using a slower shutter speed (make the water 'fluffy')

this picture kind of reminds me of that teapot picture doing the rounds, an ebay pic, you can see the reflection of the guy in it and he is naked - ewww, so watch out for reflections lol

I do have some of the water a bit softer, but then so is the picture (even a tripod can't help me) I really wanted the water frozen. I thought it looks really cool! But then again, you may need soft water for some porpouses.

I was reading a book about photography yesterday and they advised a fast shutter speed, wide aperture and using the flash to bring out the highlights (even in sunny weather!).

Shutter speed is fixed on many mid- and low-end P&S digital cams. I have trouble with this always.

Flash can be tricky too at first. I've been playing with fill-in flashes in outdoor/sunlit situations recently -- trying to control flash intensity with a bit of masking tape. Got mixed results so far.

On my camera, I have both an auto and manual settings options. In the manual there is an "E/V" thing that compensates exposure, so I can play with the shutter speed there, which helps but not always fixes everything. I too have been told to use flash even in light, and I've had mixed results. I think part of my problem is that I'm not shooting in enough natural light, as I often don't have a chance to until night, and I'm still trying to find a good place to do objects.

Woot! I just got my first photo approved by sxc.hu (still waiting on istockphoto, but I doubt those are gonna be approved, as the ones I submitted weren't very good). It can be seen here:

http://sxc.hu/browse.phtml?f=view&id=246386

It was already downloaded 3 times (not alot, but I'm proud for my first)!

The other 4 I submitted were unfortunately rejected because they already had too many of that type.

Flash is your friend.
- If inside, bonce the flash off the roof or wall (if you cant point your flash up use white paper and rubber band around flash to point it up).
- You can't really over fill (over expose) with flash during the day (peoples biggest fears)
- Using the flash at night is different during the day as it no longer becomes a fill in.
- Depending what part of the world you live and time of year, the best times for photos is early morning and late afternoon, when the light is at it's mellowist (new word I believe)

To photograph objects (depending on the size), ideally you should use a light table (also depending on the desired effect you want). A very low budget tip is to get an old kids table, place some white cardboard or thick paper on it and peg it, or tape it so tape/pegs not seen, place this on table or floor if you like working low (is a portable work place). next you need light, ideally you want minimum of two lights, one at 10 oclock, the other at 2 oclock (and your flash on camera is at 6 oclock), to test you have it right, something like a small vase with flowers is ideal, place on card (if card isnt thick either place thick card under paper or be careful it doesnt tip over) and with the lights you will see the shadows, adjust lights to fill in shadows, use a temporay third light in place of camera for flash while setting up.
Another method get one of those fold away chairs and use the paper/card trick again but leave a curve in the join of the chair, lights at either side or top and side or top and beside you ... different angls = different results, this is how most object photography is done - with a seamless background.
I personally hate doing objects as it can take hours setting up and the rewards are minimal.

A few items you may want to 'play with' to find out about light and shadows etc
glass/s of water (different levels, behind, beside or on top of one another). paper, get white paper (printer paper), roll some up, screw some up, fold some and place them all together (be creative and make castles or something). Shiny objects, something like an old tea pot, toaster (chrome) or whatever, as long as it reflects light. These objects will teach you about light, shadows and reflections - also great for learning B&W photography too (when using filters). something else could be a keboard, focus on the number key pad while looking down the whole thing, use lights to adjust the shadows or fill them in completely.

Using lamps (household) and foursents (sp?) will give you false results, ideally you need flash units but on a budget what you can find is just as good, it gives you the idea and method/style you need. If you're just doing it as a hobby or for the fun of learning buying equiment like a studio set wouldn't be worth it, unless you plan to make some money out of it (will cost you heaps), if you want to make a living you have to really pick a field, inside/outside/items/things/people/cars/animals ... as all are photographed differently *I have a studio kit for sale if anyone wants one muahaha*
If you do want to do anything except landscapes, I'd suggest buying, or even making a reflector, great for helping out with fill in light, can also replace the flash if conditions are right. If you buy one, get a reversable silver/gold one, shape doesnt matter, size only matters for your subject, ie a 20inch reflector isn't going to be much good taking a pic of a 747 areoplane

Ideally, if you can go 100% manual you should bracket your shots, one under exposed, one exposed and one over exposed.

Not all the old photography books are correct, example some say it's best to have the sun behind the camera. This is wrong for several reasons, one, if you're taking a picture of a person, the person will have the sun in their eyes ... Sun to the side and use flash to compensate the shadows. Have also seen a book saying best time for photos is mid day, this is so wrong as this is when the sun it at its brightest and the shadows are so sharp, very hard to fill in sharp shadows with just a normal flash.
oops, babbled on again

I love the picture that was approved by sxc.hu Very tasty!

I've submitted a couple of pics to iStock over the past month or so. They've only accepted one... It's a picture I took of the toilet roll holder in my bathroom at home. Interestingly the light in the shot is completely natural.

What do you think?

http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=394610

One of my fave techniques at the moment is to I hold the shutter open for 10 seconds+ at night but in situations with lots of moving lights. It creates all sorts of cool effects, like these for example:

http://www.greendezire.com/images/uploads/screamifyouwannagofaster.jpg
http://www.greendezire.com/images/uploads/redambergreengo.jpg
http://www.greendezire.com/images/uploads/speedymotorway.jpg

Kewl huh?

Another effect, similar to long exposure at night is a zoom lens (dont think you can do this on digital cameras), focus on an object or part of an object and with the shutter open zoom out then release, can get different results going opposite way.

Dang, that's probably not possible with my camera. Do you get a motion blur on the edges?

yeah... it's really freaky. But cool too! Strangely enough I was reading about that very method in a mag I bought yesterday!

Andy: Thanks for the info, but fortunately, I've already seen those (I read your blog every once and a while).

Busy: Cool trick!

Everyone:

I've been contacted by istockphoto, and my pics were declined on account of noise. Here's the email:

Quote: Dear David

Thank you for taking the time to apply as a photographer with iStockphoto.com
The iStock administrators have asked that you re-upload your samples. Here's why:

Unfortunately your camera is producing a lot of noise in your files. If you can control the ISO speed, a slower ASA (like 100 ASA) may correct this problem. Or, try scanning at a higher resolution, this may also help to correct the problem. Please see http://www.istockphoto.com/tutorial_2.3_noise.php Please re-upload samples when this has been corrected.

Please Re-upload new samples based on this feedback and the iStockphoto administrators will re-process your application.

Best Regards,
iStockphoto.com

I checked that site, and in one of the reccomended threads, our very own zerocattle posted! I don't know anything about ISO other than a bit about the different ISO films. I'm not really sure how to control it on my camera. I'll look into it.

Most digital cameras have a manual override for ISO (ASA) which is film speed, ideally you should use around 150 if you can. 100 is good, 200 maybe better for a film camera, 400 iso is very noisey.

to try explain noise, think of pixels. A 400 iso film can only be enlarged to about A3 size (biggest of the A sizes) before it becomes very pixelated, a 100 iso film can be enlarged four times that before suffering the same problem, slide film on the other hand at around 100-200 can be enlarged to movie threate screen size before becoming pixelated.

*had a hard day if this makes no sense ;)* maybe this will make more sense:
100 iso = bmp
400 iso = gif

The old school teaches it like this, the lower the number the more light is needed, the lower the number the less light needed, so 400 + is ideal for night shoots, 200 - is ideal for sunny days.
With a digital you should be able to set the ISO to whatever you want, but in a film camera normally you can't, but if you have a good camera you can BUT, changing the film speed, or tricking it is a trick of the trade but you MUST get it developed at the film speed you changed to, not speed of the film or you will get bad results.

ISO and ASA are the same thing - film speed but named differnt depending on what part of the world you're from.

Another thing to watch out for is metering, most digital cameras (depending on brand) have about 3 types of metering, center, outside of center and spot (depending on brand can be 3,4,5,6,7,8 points) tlc, unless you want a blurred background use the largest focal meter point option you have.

I've started to make a 'my pics' page on my site (isnt anymore than a 'coming soon' at present) about my old work - photography as I no longer do it for a job and wont be renewing my stock library pics (not net based), I plan to do a lot of tips and tricks as well as display a heap of photos - when I get some free time, 95% will be film based tips but some should be able to be used with digital, I only got a digital camera at Xmas time, still havent read the 1000 page manual lol, just stuck it on manual and pressed some buttons, if I find anything interesting will include them as well.