New photos up at PhotoShelter

After a slow period I have managed to get some new photos uploaded at PhotoShelter. These are from a trip to the Woodland Park Zoo in Seattle, WA. Click on the pictures to be taken to their pages at PhotoShelter.

Here you can see two flamingos making the famous heart shape with their heads. As far as I could tell they were actually two males fighting as opposed to lovers.


Here I presume is a female flamingo tending to her nest. There were several nests in the enclosure.


This giraffe was not too camera shy and stared right back at the camera.


Here's a pretty nice statue of a lion. Unfortunately the live lions were a little bit more reclusive and just laid in the grass.

Jeez, luck is not on my side

A while ago I got a hankering for a wider angle lens than my sigma 28-70. I thought, what the heck, I mothballed my kit 18-55 that came with my Rebel XT, what the heck a soft wide shot is better than no shot at all, right? Well I pulled it out and threw it on the camera and what do you know? It fails to autofocus. I'm a few months out of warranty but seriously haven't used the lens in at least a half year. Oh well, crap lens, I can live without it.

Today my Sigma 28-70 is showing problems. The focus ring is stiff to turn and it''s interfering with the autofocus motors. I took a quick look for my lens box, receipt, warranty card, etc. Can't find em. I assume I registered the lens online. I just emailed Sigma about this lens. Lets cross our fingers that this puppy is still under warranty.

Made it this time

All nine pictures I submitted from our family's trip to the zoo were accepted at Alamy. So, am I better at self editing or did I get a lucky QC pass?

One thing I will say is I had a lot of soft shots when viewing them at 1:1 pixels. Most of these shots looked great zoomed out at 50% - 75% but once I got to 100% they looked really soft. I'm trying to figure out the culprit. I was using my telephoto that doesn't have image stabilization and I didn't have a mono or tripod. I was often at focus lengths over 200mm with shutter speeds around 1/120th and the lighting was crappy and overcast. So, it it camera shake or soft lighting or a cheap non-stabilized lens?

Wow... I've been busy, but not with pictures

I've been busy doing other things apparently. After my last round of rejections at Alamy its been almost a month since I submitted new pictures. I went to the zoo with my wife and son and got some more pictures there that I am submitting to Alamy and PhotoShelter today. I got my first lightbox add at PhotoShelter the other day but nothing has come of it so far. I really prefer Alamy's stats because you know which images are hitting on which keywords and which are actually being looked at.

One thing is for certain, it takes a lot of work, time and opportunity to get decent pictures. I wish I had more of all of the above as well as some nicer equipment. It's still a fun process and having an early success like I did last month gets me in an irrational mindset. I already sold one, so they should be flying off the shelves right? I realize though that this is an unreasonable expectation since overall my catalog is still really small.

Who wants to come model for me? Who wants to give me free equipment? I promise to right good reviews like "This new Canon 1ds is super!".

It finally happened, I'm a "pro"

Well, it happened, and rather quickly all things considered. I got my first sale! I sold a picture of Travis Pastrana that I took at the Oregon Trail Rally. Before you ask (or think), yes it was sold under editorial license so I didn't need a model release.

Here's the picture:



Here's the link to it at Alamy.

That's the nice thing about stock. I've been a little busy and a havevn't put up any new pictures in a week or two but the pictures are still out there. One even sold itself. June will only be my first full month on Alamy as well. Here's hoping I can keep the streak going and get some more quality up there!

Rejections Rejections

Well, I had a ton more pics rejected at PhotoShelter. This is the same series that got me rejections at Alamy. I'm wondering if my self editing skills are lacking.

Perhaps its my post-processing? There's a book on processing RAW files that I have on my Amazon wish list - Art of RAW Conversion: How to Produce Art-Quality Photos with Adobe Photoshop CS2 and Leading RAW Converters. I understand the very basics of the histogram and mainly I work on my processing to keep things from being to over or underexposed and have proper color correction. I'm probably missing a few tricks that could really help.

Its gotten a little frustrating but oh well.

Soft, and lacking definition...

Got another rejection at Alamy. Jeez, I think I got overconfident. I think I'm looking at two problems. First, the Rebel XT, while producing much better results than point and shoot cameras, really is at the bottom of the totem pole when it comes to DSLRs. Second, we have this really great light in the Seattle. "Seattle Gray" its when there is always a 100% uniform cloud cover that provides overly soft and drab light throughout the entire day. This really hurts because there are no shadows or highlights a lot of times. That means pictures end up looking soft, and lacking definition.

One picture in particular was a cruise ship... can you imagine the light I would need to make that look right? Yes, stack another 400 flashes over there please...

So I need to work more on composition and evaluating and dealing with the crappy light we have up here.

Research feedback from PhotoShelter

I like to peruse the forums at the different stock sites. You can see what sells if photographers feel like sharing. You can get suggestions. You can see whining. Sometimes you even get some great information.

The PhotoShelter forums yesterday had a blog entry about their research system and what is and isn't a good submission. They had examples that were actually submitted to the research request and provided individual feedback on what is and isn't good. While they don't have time to provide feedback on each individual submission, these general results are extremely helpful.

Alamy not Alamay

For some reason I always say Alamy in my head as Al-uh-may. To that end, I'm not even sure of the proper pronunciation, is it all-uh-me, al-uh-me, al-uh-my? Who knows? I like to think its all-uh-me as a play on "all of me". I'm just rambling now aren't I?

Rejection at Alamy

Garden 5-31-32
Originally uploaded by punkd0rk

Well, I failed my first quality control (QC) at Alamy. It was one of my artichoke pictures. I'm not sure which because I don't use a common naming scheme between Alamy and my Flickr account. I've got the image at home and I can figure it out there.

The rejection reasons were:
Interpolation artifacts
Soft or lacking definition

Well, perhaps they didn't like my depth of field regarding the Soft or Lacking Definition. I'll have to take a closer look regarding the interpolation artifacts too.

It looks like I should drag a strobe out to the garden for my next shots. There wasn't a ton of light for this artichoke and thats why I used a large aperture and hence the shallow depth of field. Again, when I get home I'll confirm exactly which artichoke picture was rejected and throw that one up here.

I was starting to think I was invincible on Alamy... no sales though. I am up to 15 views. The nice thing about the views from Alamy is they tell you what the key words were, this helps you to figure out what the customers are actually looking for and if you're missing the mark.

UPDATE: I had a second rejection on another artichoke shot so I pulled them and resubmitted. That submission was approved this morning. I guess I'll go back with more light or take another look at the shot to get some more dept of field in there.

A new opportunity at PhotoShelter

PhotoShelter has added a new opportunity. Research assignments. These are assignments where they have potential customers but their needs aren't met by what is currently in their collection. They post a research need and you can submit new pictures directly to that need.

I participated in my first one on Sunday night. There is a client looking for pictures of herbs and vegetables, etc. I uploaded a few shots from our garden. We'll see what happens.

I wonder how long before I get a sale somewhere. It'll happen, just gotta keep shooting...

PhotoShelter more picky?

Or am I just a poor self editor? 2 of 8 pictures accepted yesterday. Not a great run. Again, I don't take it personally. However, I don't like wasting their or my time. I really wish they had a subject/technical checkbox for rejections so I could figure out why things were rejected and better self edit for their collection.

That's where the issue is. They have something in mind for their collection, a certain feel. They want "pictures of real life". The quote is something like that. Anway, one of their editor's choice is a father sitting on the messy floor of an apartment changing a diaper. Its almost a snapshot (who am I kidding, I can't tell that piece of art from a snapshot). When we were out at the Tulip festival I took a picture of my wife holding my 6mo son while he grabbed a tulip. Cute picture, real life. To me it had more composure than a snapshot without being posed. It was rejected.

So did I miss the ball technically? Did they hate the composure? Or do I not get the "real life"?

Oh well, as I keep saying. Just gotta take more pictures.

Stock whiners

Something I've noticed in the forums on a lot of stock photo sites. Whiny photographers. There's a few typical complainers.

There's the guy with 4 pictures online for OVER A WEEK who hasn't had a single sale yet!!!!?!?! Don't mention that all four pictures are of the same subject, his cat.

Then there is the PROFESSIONAL Photographer. He's the one convinced that cheap DSLRs are going to put him out of business. Hey, if all you have is your equipment, you've been overcharging your clients. There should be some skill, technique and experience you have that Joe Schmoe with his Rebel XT can't match.

Last is the microstocker alarmist/gloater. Very closely related to the above. These are the people convinced that anyone with a high megapixel digicam is going to put them out of a job. They also gloat heavily when anything bad happens to a microstock agency (see Lucky Oliver).

Lastly are the ones who complain about editors. Listen, the deal is, if your image is declined, the particular editor feels it doesn't meet a technical or subject matter bar and its not marketable. If the image is so great, sell it yourself.

Granted, I'm doing this part time and my livelihood is not dependent on this. However, I've also yet to make a sale so I don't see how I'm digging into their profits.

Got my first hit at alamy, no sales yet...

Well, I was checking my "Alamy Measures" and I got my first views and zooms on Alamy yesterday. A "view" as termed by Alamy is when one of your thumbnails shows up in search results. A "zoom" is when one of your thumbnails is clicked on.

Not bad, as of yesterday I only had about 20 pictures online. I've got over 40 today so I'll keep my fingers crossed.

One quick note about Alamy. I HATE their image tagging setup, if you accidently click the wrong link you lose all your unsaved data. I really need to get ITPC (I think that's the acronym) worked into my workflow.

Alamy's rocking and rolling

Alamy is certainly different than PhotoShelter. For one, they are better known and currently have stronger sales stats. Secondly, they are not an edited collection. They have quality standards that must be met but they don't edit for content. After your initial submission is approved, consecutive submissions are only spot checked (if the spot check fails, the whole batch is rejected).

This has allowed me to toss a lot of images up rather quickly in comparison to the much slower review cycle at PhotoShelter. This is both a good and a bad thing. If I just toss up noise, I'm diluting the quality of Alamy's catalog and its value to its customers. On the other hand, if I think a particular image is marketable and PhotoShelter disagrees I have another avenue to sell on. Neither site requires exclusivity so the only real investment is time.

Time time time. I really need to crack down on this. I have all of my images up on a server. However I currently do a lot of editing via a laptop that is joined to my work domain. I have a domain at home but that is just becoming an administrative nightmare. I keep intending to install a Windows Home Server instead and use Lightroom to catalog ALL of my images from a share hosted on the server. If I put all the relative data into the tags on the images I could save a lot of time on processing accepted uploads. Man I hope I can see some success at stock photography. Just enough to let my wife stay at home and take care of our son. Two working adults is well and great before kids, but those boogers take a lot of time and money.

Alamy says yes

Well, Alamy accepted my submissions so now I get to upload to them as well. I'm feeling better about my self-editing capabilities now. I submitted 4 pictures to Alamy and all 4 were accepted.

When populated, my gallery will be available here. The 4 images I applied with should be available there within 24 hours.

Now I get to learn a new agency!

Breaking news..

My first Breaking News submission has been process at PhotoShelter and the following pictures were accepted from the 2008 Oregon Trail Rally.

Here a car is worked on at the service park held in Vernonia, OR.


A fan-favorite Jamie "SubieGal" Thomas navigates a water splash at a spectator stage.


The winner of the Oregon Trail Rally '08, Travis Pastrana, talks to the press on Saturday morning at the Parc Expose.


Later, Travis Pastrana can be seen blasting through a water splash to the delight of spectators.


The team Rockstar cars wait following service to continue the competition.


A vintage Saab navigates a corner and heads to the water splash.


The youngest driver at the event, Kyle Sarasin, is only 18.

Three more pictures accepted

Just a few pictures of some P.O. Boxes from the Issaquah post office. As usual, click on the pictures to see them at PhotoShelter.

The one that got away...

Normally its about fishing. This time its about photography. I was out at the Oregon Trail Rally this weekend (I'll post some pictures once I get some stuff over to PhotoShelter) and I saw a shot I desperately wanted.

I was in Vernonia, OR to take a look at the service. There's a Kwik-E-Mart in town that probably does more business on the Oregon Trail weekend than in any other month of the year, spectators and competitors stop in for cold drinks and fried food that has probably been sitting under a heat lamp for far too long. I ordered a bean and cheese burrito and ended up with a BBQ meat burrito (who thought that was a good idea). I sat down to eat it while my dad used the restroom.

As a budding photographer, I'm always looking around evaluating everything to see if it would make a good shot. Honestly, I'm probably missing the good ones and taking the cookie cutter shots. I digress. A large man, most likely a local sits down at a table across from me. He's heavyset, tall, and has a bushy salt and pepper beard. That's just the start, he's wearing overalls and aviator glasses, and a breathe right strip (I thought those were for sleeping, but for him, a fashion accessory). He also proudly wore a headband, brand name Everlast, and the logo was upside down. He then proceded to eat a corndog with great enthusiasm. It was beautiful.

I couldn't think of a way to pull out my camera and take the picture without drawing his attention to me. I was right in front of him. I also thought that basically, I found his appearence amusing, not really a good thing to say when directly asking him for permission either. I couldn't find a way to respectfully get the shot so, unfortunately, I had to let that one go.

Back that thing up!!!

I was thinking this morning about my backup solution and I figured it'd be a good thing to write about here. Using a second/external hard drive or DVDs is all well and good, but it doesn't really offer as much protection as one needs. In case of a fire, likely everything is gone. Thats where using an Internet backup solution is a big win. Its already located "off-site" so you don't have to worry about any problems you have locally

I use http://www.idrive.com. For $4.95/month they offer "unlimited" personal backup space. Fine print says 150GB = unlimited. Which is interesting because when I checked my account, I'm up to 190GB. Yes, it takes a while to upload that much, even over broadband but the piece of mind is worth it. Not to mention they offer a few things that most local backups don't.

1. They actually back up your data. Lets face it, most of us are lazy about backups. With this service, install the software, configure it and let it go.
2. Multiple versions. They perform differential and incremental backups. What does this mean to you? Say you're working on a letter or a book. Something you're working on for several days. You make a bunch of changes, save it and then realize, no, this is crap, I want to go to last week's version. Connect to the software and download last week's version. If I remember correctly they either keep 30 days or 30 versions, I forget which.
3. Off-site, which I already touched on.

There are many players in the online backup game, do some research, find the one you like and go with it. In the long run it is not that expensive and the cost is well worth the time you will save if you ever have to use the restore option.

Hidden bonuses of cheap flashes

So a quick update on the flashes I got. I couldn't salvage the 540EZ so I sold it on ebay. I got about $13. That put me at under $40 for my 430EZ. Not a bad deal.

The other night I wanted to take a couple quick shots with my camera and my house is lit like a cave so I grabbed my 430. I've got a Sunpak P40Z but that thing doesn't fire consistently. I need to send it in for warranty.

Back to the 430. Everyone says oh no, its not ETTL, won't work on digital, yada yada. This is partially true. For those not in the know, ETTL is an automated mode of flash to make sure you get the "right" exposure. Exactly what is "right" is up to the camera so results may vary and may not be what you want. Since my P40Z has been so unreliable I never use it in ETTL mode any more, based on that I went with the 430 since it fires every time (so far).

Well, I turned it on and my camera. Then I framed my shot (probably my son). I heard something, sure enough, the zoom motor in the flash was synched with my lens... cool! I pressed the autofocus and I noticed red dots on my son. The focus assist lights work too! So the only thing I'm missing is ETTL which I don't always want in the first place. All of the other advanced features on the flash worked fine. This wasn't something I'd heard much of when people used these old flashes on new cameras and of course I was using a Canon flash on a Canon body. YMMV with other brand bodies and flashes.

Eggs and baskets

As the saying goes, you shouldn't put all of your eggs in one basket. Well, that's what I'm doing right now with PhotoShelter. Not to mention its a growing basket and they're still working on getting the word out.

Now I know I don't have a ton of stock quality pictures available yet. Still, I believe I should investigate another avenue for sales. Following this line of thinking I have applied today at Alamy.

Alamy has some interesting requirements. The most interesting is that they want the images that you submit to be 48MB+ when uncompressed. Well my Rebel XT is a 10MP camera, you can see a disparity there. Here's where it gets strange, they have no problem with you resampling, all they care about is the quality in the end result.

So I picked four and upsized them and shot them up to Alamy. Now it's time to sit and wait through another approval process.

More images accepted

I just got an email from PhotoShelter, six more images accepted. Seven declined. That still should raise my acceptance rate. It also gets me over my next threshold. I hit 20 pictures! Still, that's not much in a field of thousands. What is it I always say? Oh yeah, gotta keep shooting.

So what made the cut? Click on the pictures to see them on PhotoShelter.

What didn't make the cut? Well, my little ducky friend below, some pictures I took of unlit fireworks (I think they didn't like the tablecloth I used as a backdrop, it had wrinkles). I'll try reshooting them on white and see what happens. A picture of my son grabbing a flower. Also declined were a variation or two of the shots above.

The kindness of strangers, the perils of shipping

Last week I was poking around Craigslist looking for some flashes to augment my current one flash. I stumbled across a pair of Nikon SB-28s for $35 each. I know I shoot Canon but since these would be off camera, the brand doesn't matter. If you follow Strobist at all and have been out to ebay, those things normally go for around $100. I emailed the person, they were in the Spokane area, to see if she'd be willing to ship. Unfortunately I was too late, they were snapped up by locals.

So I continued my search. A few days later I found a gentleman in Oregon selling an old film Canon with a 540EZ Speedlite. I shot him an email and no one was interested and they were still for sale. He was asking $50 for the set. I asked him if he'd take $50 shipped for just the flash and he accepted. We discussed what I was after as he had some other equipment. I sent him the money and began the wait.

Saturday was the glorious day. I opened the mailbox and saw the key to the parcel mailbox. Woo hoo! I grabbed the box. It was quite large for only having a single flash in it. I went inside and immeadiately tore it open. Then I was confused. I found the flash. I also found a book on lighting for products. There was another item too... it turned out to be a 430EZ Speedlite. I got two flashes and a book for $50. That's an amazing deal. The flashes showed some wear on their cases but otherwise looked great. LCDs intact, etc.

I grabbed some batteries and tossed them into the flashes to test them. The 430 fired off, no problem, the zoom motor worked, everything was great. I grabbed the 540, inserted the batteries. Nothing, no dice, the flash wouldn't even power up. This is the one that's supposed to be working according to the Craigslist add. Damn! I tried the batteries a few more times, no dice, I did research online. I just couldn't seem to get it to power up.

So now I have a 430EZ that works great and a failed 540EZ. I emailed the guy who sold them to me. Hopefully he insured the package or there is some trick to this older flash to get it going. However, I don't feel ripped off, why would this guy send me a second, working flash if he was trying to dump crap on me, and why include the book. A local used camera shop has 430EZs for ~$50 so if I can get the 540 working too I made out like a bandit. We'll see what happens.

Batting .500 for the day

Another day and more approvals at PhotoShelter. This time I had a 50/50 approval rating. I took a couple pictures of some lots prepped for new home construction. One of my rejected shots had a big puddle that was reflecting the sky. I wonder if they didn't like it or if they just didn't consider it as good as these and didn't want to saturate the search with all the same style image, just different views. Of particular interest to me is that I finally got some pictures accepted with non-blue skies. Post-processing on these was a pain, it was hard to determine exactly how to set things. Perhaps next time around I'll try doing some HDR images to keep detail on and above ground or maybe I'll finally pony up for a GND filter.

If you're interested on licensing these images, click on them to go to their pages on PhotoShelter.

So what was accepted yesterday

Three shots from Tulip Town when we visited the Skagit Valley Tulip Festival. Of note is the fact that I had uploaded more. Not a single picture that included other people or ANY horizon/sky was accepted.

Here are the shots. Clicking on them will take you to their pages on PhotoShelter.

The last picture was taken here in Issaquah. This is from a rails to trails conversion just down the street from my office.

Apparently, this is where my photography comes from

tulip_town-114
Originally uploaded by punkd0rk

Well, PhotoShelter just finished another batch review of my uploads. Results, 4 in, 16 rejected. Ouch. Granted, some, like the one on the right here are a little, well, bla. I thought it was an interesting little outhouse, didn't really have a better way to capture it. I need to start looking at things a little differently.

I really wish we could get something other than gray skies out here in Washington. I noticed all of my pictures rejected from the Tulip festival included some of the sky which was trademark Washington gray. I got an idea for a shot today at work. I'll try it out tonight and if I like the results I'll send it up the wire. Problem is, if I want to get anything sold, I'll do better with more shots. More shots are a bit of a problem with nothing but GRAY SKIES. Can I have some spring yet, please?

On a side note, my profile is now into the double-digits with a grand total of 12!

A shopping wish list

I think every photographer is always hungering for another piece of gear. I'd love a Canon 1Ds body. I won't be getting one of those any time soon unless all the sudden I have a massive amount of sales on PhotoShelter. However I also have a reasonable shortish term wish lish:

1. I want at least three flashes. I've got a Sunpak PZ40X. I have a used Canon 540EZ in the mail (picked it up for $50 shipped off Craigslist). I'd love another, perhaps with built in optical slave like the Nikon SB-28.
2. Enough wireless recievers to control all of my flashes. Since I'm on a budget I go with the Cactus V2 triggers commonly referred to as Poverty Wizards on the Strobist Flickr group. While not having the reliability or range (without hacking) of Pocket Wizards, they come in at about 1/10th the cost or about $30 a set or $20 for a single receiver. A popular strobist shop, Midwest Photo Exchange carries them. I've got my first set and they work great for me, but I don't push the range, yet.
3. I posted before discussing a Graduated Neutral Density filter. I'd love one of those for when the sky is just too bright. Yes, believe it or not, we do get bright skies in Seattle.
4. A Canon "nifty fifty" 50mm 1.8 prime lens. Apparently, these things rock, especially when coupled with the smaller sensor in the "cheap" digital cameras. The 1.6x conversion gives them an 80mm equivalency which is supposed to be great for portrature. Not to mention that maximum (or is it minimum?) aperture is insane at the price range and the lens is made by Canon and sells for under $100. I'd be interested to see what working with a prime lens does for my shooting too.
5. A mess of PVC and some fabric for my own backgrounds and light modifiers. For more info see the "Tinker Tubes" notebook and the original Strobist post that introduced me to this idea in the first place.

Not too bad of a wishlist I say. Probably less than $300 all said and done. For my pie in the sky wishlist... I don't even know enough about high end gear. I would like a nice image stabilization lens though. So if you have an extra you're gonna throw out, gimme a buzz.

Edit: I forgot, I also want a remote shutter release for my camera. Adorama has one for $19.95 shipped or I can snag one off ebay for a few bucks less.

It's a botanical weekend

mt_si_nursery-5
Originally uploaded by punkd0rk

So Saturday was the tulip festival. Sunday was the trip to the Nursery at Mt. Si. We picked up a bunch of flowers and veggies for our Pea Patch (which will become another one of my photo projects).

Everyone loves to take pictures of flowers. Stock sites have tons of them. The trick is apparently to make sure to know a little bit more about it than "pretty orange flower". For instance, this flower is an... awww crap I don't know. Not to mention, while nice to look at, the composition isn't great. One flower, dead center, lots of empty room on the sides. The lens I was using isn't great for macro so I couldn't get any closer. That means this pic stays in my personal collection and every once in a while I can go... "ooh pretty flower" and then I'm happy.

That's something I try to remember, while it's great if I can sell some pictures, its nice too for me to capture our experiences. Occasionally I have to put down the camera and participate too.

Oh yeah, light

tulip_town-41
Originally uploaded by punkd0rk

So yesterday my wife and I headed up to Skagit Valley for the annual tulip festival. First thing I have to say is I hate Everett. We got stuck in stop and go traffic no less than three times. This is about noon on a weekend day. This makes a 90 minute trip approach two hours. We then get stuck in traffic just getting off the freeway in Mount Vernon. Okay, so that is to be expected, small town, big event and all. We stop, grab lunch and then on to the tulips!!

We went to Tulip Town. There are several gardens in the area and most of them charge a small admission fee. Tulip Town was great, $5, cash only. Oh, no cash? One of you can go in and use our ATM, enjoy the $3.50 service charge!!

So we make it in and it is just crowded, as heck. It feels like high school again with large groups of people just standing in the middle of walkways talking to each other. We push through and make it out to the tulips. What then happened was a huge surprise. There were a ton of beautiful tulips, but the overall planted area seemed rather small. I would estimate an acre perhaps. And the people! My god, they were everywhere, standing in the tulips as the signs clearly said not to. Picking tulips as the signs clearly said not to. Getting in each others way and in general just milling about like a herd of cattle.

Thus began my problem. I was there to take pictures of flowers, not people. I spent the next hour or two carefully trying to compose my shots to keep people out of the majority, while not taking so long as to drive my wife nuts (she was carrying the baby afterall). What seemed like a small amount of flowers ended up taking quite a while to go through so in the end, it wasn't a bad place. Next year however, we'll go during a weekeday.

Now, back to light. I get home and download the ~150 pictures from my camera and start processing them (I shoot only in raw now for the added tweaking ability). I notice that I had some interesting light in a lot of the pictures. Not interesting good, or interesting bad, just a little different. Perhaps not the most flattering light. I realized I got so overwhelmed by the crowds and composition and keeping people out of my pictures that I totally ignored what the light was actually doing. It's rather easy to lose focus in this setting, the flowers are amazing and ever shot looks good, I mean, it's filled with flowers! To really take it above and beyond though I wish I would've paid a bit more attention to my lighting and shooting angles, I could've had a lot better results.

Playing with fire

glass_float_trial_and_error
Originally uploaded by punkd0rk

Here's a little shot I've been working on in practice and in my mind for a while. We picked up these glass fishing floats in Lincoln City, OR during a vacation one year. Looking at some of the other cool things people have done with lighting beer bottles, etc., I thought this would be a perfect subject.

After several different shoots I'm starting to get some very interesting results. Some neat colors and textures are really starting to show. I think the trick on this on though is to get rid of the super bright highlight caused by the flash firing directly back at the camera. I tried a little post processing but nothing would reasonably clean that up.

The trick I believe will be to light this thing from below so the flash highlight is straight out the top. I've seen it done with a lot of other objects and the effect is just awesome. If it could make a relatively homogeneous bottle of corona look amazing then it should make this float absolutely pop.

Check back soon and I'll probably have gotten this thing lit the way I really want to see it.

The approvals keep pouring in

License this picture at PhotoShelter.

I just got five more pictures up at PhotoShelter. It actually counts as a total of three since they count stacks as a single photo and this submission included two stacks. That brings my total up to 9 whopping pictures! I'll keep on submitting and maybe some day end up with a sale.

From all accounts there are three areas to focus on, quality, quantity and niche. No matter your quantity, you're not going to sell without quality as well. Niche is where things can really happen. If you can find a corner of the market that is underrepresented, you can make yourself and your clients very happy. Unfortunately, I doubt my 9 pictures are going to be diverse enough to help me find that niche, so, (you've heard it before) I'll keep submitting.

Now for a brief bit on stacks, I love 'em. In case you don't know what they're for, stacks are for when you have multiple, related angles of a similar subject. We all know utter junk and our bad photos when we see them, but maybe you have a shot narrowed down to 2-3 frames and you're not sure which is best. You might like shot 1 but shot 2 might give the designer who buys your picture more room to work. So you can take your best couple shots and drop them in a stack which indicates multiple related views. This keeps from browsing stock and seeing 50 related shots by one photographer with little variation while still allowing an interested designer access to angles that might work better for them. PhotoShelter allows these but appears to want them used within reason, i.e. not every photo you submit should be a stack. We'll see how things go.

Laying the foundation

construction-1
Originally uploaded by punkd0rk

So I continue to upload new pictures to PhotoShelter. One thing I realize is that is takes a fair amount of time to generate a lot of pictures. I spent maybe 20 minutes after work at a local construction site and I came away with basically 4 new shots, empty graded lot, lot with foundation, earth moving equipment and a shot of the sun behind a storm cloud (now that's original).

PhotoShelter has two main categories, creative and news. I submitted the construction shots as both since they could be used to depict home construction issues, etc.

We'll see how thins go. Meanwhile, I'll just keep shooting.

Strobist gets more attention

Here's a fun post. I'm going to post a link to a blog referencing an article. The blog entry and article are about David Hobby of Strobist fame. The sum of it is USA Today printed a profile of him today. I'm glad to hear he's getting all that publicity. His work is great and the fact that he shares so much is awesome. It mentions he might go back to work at the Baltimore Sun and that if he does he'd probably slow down on blog posting. Selfishly, I hope that doesn't happen. But everyone has to do what's right for them.

Keep up the good work David!

Here's the full article.

Rejections and approvals at PhotoShelter

Well, I got an update from PhotoShelter. A few more pictures were approved and a several more were declined. Now everyone says, don't take rejections personally. I completely understand and agree. As a an amateur I welcome any feedback I get.

Here's my gripe with PhotoShelter, for the most part you get no explanation. I don't expect them to make me the world's best photographer, I don't expect feedback of "overexposed 1/2 stop, should've moved subject to lower 1/3 of frame and set whitebalance to 4357K". What would be nice would be simple categories such as "technical issues, not marketable, or complete crap". That would be great in helping me target my materials for PhotoShelter. The more experience I get, the more I'll be able to guess at what is/isn't on target. When push comes to shove its always a subjective call too so again, I don't take it personally.

Oh, and in case you were wondering, the inset picture, declined.

Focus!!

So I have started taking my camera with me whenever I leave the house, in case I see anything interesting to photograph for myself or PhotoShelter.

Today I came across some rhododendrons (man that's a fun word to spell) in a local parking lot. What caught my eye first was a neat bush with red and green leaves. I took a bunch of pictures and came away with a few lessons learned.

1. I need a graduated neutral density filter man those skies were bright.


2. In hindsight, my Strobist side says I could've balanced the sky with a well placed flash or two.


3. Autofocus can't always be counted on.

First, I realized I could've used some light stands and strobes to bring the plants up to a level to match the sky or better work with it. But I didn't have my flash with me and I currently only have one. I do have my eye on a used SB-28 though. I can't wait to try some of those techniques. It would be nice to have more control over the exposure of the sky. A GND filter would be an alternate solution and in some cases, more flexible, however, I don't currently have one of those either.

As far as autofocus is concerned, about 10 pictures of the red and green bush and not a single one in focus. Sometimes I wish manual focus was a more reasonable solution for my Rebel XT.

Never count on the weather

So today we happened to be in downtown Seattle for Baby Loves Disco (don't ask). There were a couple of old buildings that looked interesting but I figured, we're in a rush, lets go ahead and get inside. Sure enough, when we come out, its raining (go figure, rain in Seattle). We'll I risked life and camera and snapped of a few frames. The camera is still in the car because we were out too late so I'll check the shots out tomorrow. I know the sky will be a lot more boring without the clouds that were there before we went in.

On a side note, I guess there is really no point to shopping in brick and mortar stores anymore. I went to a used camera store in search of a Nikon SB24 speedlight. Well, I found one, for only $199!! Thats ebay times about 2.5. So I'll just head over to KEH and pick one up. I've already tried several local pawn shops and I'm just getting too antsy to wait any longer.

Dear lord, the global warming is upon us...

snow0005
Originally uploaded by punkd0rk

April 18th and we're getting snow outside Seattle. This certainly has been an interesting year for weather. This shot shows another Strobist philosophy, don't let good light ruin a photo. If you actually read that post I just linked you'll realize the photo he's talking about might be a tad more important than a picture of a dog in the snow.

However, to our family, this is an important photo, our dogs love the snow. We like to see them in the snow. Plus, it's cold outside and I wasn't about to run outside and set up a light stand and strobe. I'd rather have a couple quick shots with hard light on the camera than no shots because there wasn't "good light". So I threw the flash on, cracked the back door and took a couple of quick snapshots.

To Micro or not to Micro

So I've done a little digging recently and I'm getting concerned about the microstock is destroying the photography world debate. There is a post from 2006 at Strobist that takes one look at it. I've seen other discussion in forums.

Three days into this blog and I'm already taking action. I'd rather have one or two sales through PhotoShelter and be taking photos that interest me than be wedged into an uninteresting corner by the confinement of microstock.

What about my pictures already out there? I guess I'll let the few that are there, sit. Meanwhile, I'll focus my new shooting on technique, styles and subjects that interest me. If I were already making thousands a month on microstock, it might be a hard call. But for now, I'd rather have fun and explore than bring in an extra $10/month.

So what are my feelings on the microstock industry overall? Well, its just likes what has happened in many other businesses. It's basically outsourcing/off-shoring of photographers. Not convenient for those who had been enjoying the stable market, but for those willing to adapt and work at it, there shouldn't be a ton of concern.

Fighting "perfection"

telephone pole anchor
Originally uploaded by punkd0rk

It seems that I'm attempting to reach two opposite photography goals simultaneously.

First, I'm working on my microstock skills. This means ABSOLUTELY NO NOISE. Set your camera to ISO 100. Get LOTS of light. Shoot it bland, no feeling or emotion that isn't marketable to a business man please. "Perfect" exposure. No shadows, shadows are the devil. Extreme depth of field, no brokh.

Secondly, I'm trying to work things from the Strobist angle. This means, play with light. Have fun. Shoot organically. Drop the ISO to help you balance the ambient light. Blow out highlight? No problem as long as you meant for it to happen. What's in the shadow is as important as what's illuminated. Imperfect white balance? Okay, again, as long as it's intentional.

So I present to you this picture. A perfect example of my what in the hell is going on style. First, I just like looking at everyday objects from a different point of view. This is taken just outside a parking lot at Target in Issaquah. Its an anchor for a telephone pole. I took this thinking about things from a stock photography mindset. But oh no, look in the background, the sky is Seattle Gray(tm). That's not acceptable, all sky must be blue blue BLUE! Also, what will this sell? I guess it could represent an anchor or strength, but really, who would recognize it?

So the challenge for myself is to shoot what I want, how I want. If I want to shoot stock, then fine, work within the rigid standards. There is nothing wrong with building up my technical skill. If I want to shoot something interesting, then by all means, fast and loose. If I want to shoot my son, do whatever it takes to get the shot. Time's to precious to waste trying to get everything right.

I do find I can throw up a light stand and flash up really quickly and get some decent light to give me better depth of field and shutter speeds and start shooting in less than 3 minutes. This is where practice comes in. Almost every night I find myself coming home and shooting 10 - 100 frames of my son. If for no other reason than to experiment.

As everyone says, they grow up so fast. At least with the number of pictures I'm taking we can look back and see it all happen.

Another approval, this one has me excited - Photshelter

This site is definitely a lot more interesting to me. You can see the start of my portfolio. What I really like is that they are primarily a site geared towards photographers. They don't have the same stringent style standards that the microstock sites have. You can sell art there whereas most photographs that aren't cookie cutter are rejected by microstock sites.

The pricing structure is much higher, so without very cool photos I don't expect to make a ton. But when one picture will sell for $55 at its lowest price, you don't need a ton of volume for things to become significant.

Things are happening, sort of...

I just cheked in on SnapVillage and they finally approved some of my photos. They were in the queue almost two weeks. From all of their communication they are really gearing up for a big launch so hopefully they'll speed up soon. I'm still looking for a way to link to my portfolio there.

Finally approvals from Dreamstime

Well, I got my first images accepted at Dreamstime. So far they've been the pickiest that have actually accepted any of my photos. Crestock still hasn't accepted anything of mine. We'll see if that changes.

In honor of my first uploads I'll be dropping this Dreamstime counter in the right column of my blog. It links directly to my portfolio at Dreamstime.

Flash doggies

Flash doggies
Originally uploaded by punkd0rk

Two things I experienced during this "shoot". Hard light and fall off. Basic principles are the harder the light, the sharper the shadows and the closer the light to the subject vs light to background, the quicker you'll get fall off. There just wasn't enough ambient light to get a decent balanced exposure on anything higher than maybe iso 800 which a huge aperture. Next time I can just move the flash back, throw on an umbrella and get light everywhere. If only I had another flash. Well, somebody go buy some of my pictures!

Misty Falls

snoqualmie falls 1
Originally uploaded by punkd0rk

I don't know if there's anything more overexposed on the microstock sites than waterfalls. But hey, I have one less than five minutes away from my house so I ran by this morning and took a few shots. You can see from the lighting that I'm dealing with overcast skies. Hopefully I can stop by on a sunny day soon and even catch a rainbow. Anything to help it stand out. I also plan to drive down to the bottom of the falls and see what I can grab as well as bring a tripod to get some long exposure, smooth water shots.

Third time's the charm?

iStockPhoto is another one of those sites who has an approval process. Submit three pictures, if they pass, you're in. They differ a bit from Shutterstock after that. If only one of your shots is accepted then next time around (after a one week wait) you have to submit two shots. Throw your next set at them and then another might be approved and then you wait another cycle and hopefully your third submission is your last. If you're lucky and or have better pictures to start with then you can easily end up accepted all at once. Sine iStockPhoto seems to be one of the biggest earners you definitely want to get in. In the long run, stricter entry policy should mean better quality photos which should mean better traffic to the site from serious buyers. We'll see.

For the examples of what was and wasn't accepted so far, look below.


Rejected for lighting. The lights are too bright and the shadows too dark. Hindsight being 20/20 this is a no brainer. I do love the look of the geckos though.


Rejected due to artifacting. I think this was a nice way of rejecting rather than saying that I should leave the vacation snapshot at home.


This one was approved. Looking back I'm a little surprised as the composition and lighting are only so so.

Round two.


Rejected, lighting composition. Interesting technique using a snoot. I learned about snoots from Strobist. However, not really stock photo styling.


Approved.

Now I'm waiting for round three. 47 hours to go.

10 swings, 8 strikes at Shutterstock

Shutterstock has a policy that before you can submit as much as you want, you must become an approved submitter. This process involves submitting your "top 10" pictures for review. In order to be approved, 7 of 10 need to be accepted. If you fail, you're on time out for 30 days. I bit the bullet and through 10 at them today (I don't really have a large portfolio of stock work as of yet) and got turned down. Here's what I submitted and their reasons for refusal:


Poor lighting. This photograph was accepted by 123RF and Fotolia. Declined at Crestock, out of focus (depth of field I think).


Poor lighting. Accepted at 123RF. Declined at Crestock, out of focus (depth of field I think).


Poor lighting. Accepted at 123RF. Declined at Crestock, out of focus (depth of field I think) and sharp shadows.


Composition/Limited Comerical Value. Accepted at 123RF and iStockPhoto. Declined at Crestock, Limited Commercial Value.


Accepted. Also accepted at Fotolia and 123RF. Declined at Crestock, sharp shadows.


Potential trademark or copywright infringement. Declined at Crestock, out of focus (depth of field I think) and sharp shadows.


Potential trademark or copywright infringement. Accepted at 123RF. Declined at Crestock, out of focus (depth of field I think).


Accepted. Declined at 123RF and Fotolia for lighting. Declined at Crestock, out of focus (depth of field I think). Declined at Dreamstime for lighting and "lack of concept" (its an image of a Kokopelli, what other concept do you need?) I need to re-shoot this guy with better lighting and the camera on a tripod. He's got sharp edges and is very reflective so it's challenging.


Focus. Accepted at Fotolia, declined for lighting at 123RF. Declined at Crestock, out of focus (depth of field I think).


Composition/Limited Commercial Value. Approved at iStockPhoto. Declined at Crestock, doesn't meet their creative standards (snapshot I suppose).

From this you can see there is quite a bit of varience of what is considered acceptable at different agencies. Standards will also vary from one reviewer to another. I'm still waiting to hear back from other agencies and I'll update this post when I get results

Another thing you might've picked up from this post is how limited my current stock photography skills and portfolio currently are. Hopefully, by the time another 30 days rolls around I should be into Shutterstock with no problem.