| gillinfrance |
| Newbie |
|
| France |
|
|
| None Specified |
|
| Wednesday, November 04, 2009 |
| Sunday, November 22, 2009 9:48:16 AM |
2
[0.00% of all post / 0.10 posts per day] |
|
As another newbie, Darrell has my thanks. Threads like these are immensely useful - especially hearing other points of view, and I agree that it's very useful to see rejections too, though perhaps not a lot of people want to post their rejections. I've been reading this and other fora to get an idea of what standard is required, and have no intention of submitting anything until I think I'm up to it. I'm not a complete novice - my first camera was a brownie 44A  , and I developed the films and printed the prints when I was old enough. I had film SLRs, but over the years technology passed me by and I've got a lot of catching up to do.
I think it's true that some people don't appreciate the effort that is needed to get a good image with DSLRs, that it's not just point and click, and a month or so ago I didn't know what a raw file was either. Luckily I worked in pre-press for a while and knew what Photoshop and jpegs were. There's really no substitute for reading/learning as much as you can, experimenting, and being genuinely self-critical, as in almost anything else you want to achieve.
Anyway Darrell, keep up the good work - it's appreciated.
|
Hi, newbie here. I'm glad I did a search as this was just the question I was going to ask.
I decided to jump in to contributing stock while looking for images for myself (starting a business selling plants), and not being able to find the ones I wanted (botanical). There are some of the images I was searching for on this site, but I never would have found them via Google, I found this site from the contributor side (fora etc). I think that's a shame as, although there are billions of "flowers" on many sites, there isn't really a comprehensive library - not Google-searchable anyway - of botanically correct named varieties. There are individual's sites with a limited range, and probably other sites that don't appear in searches and are equally hard to find, but I can't help feeling that they - Alamy and others - could be losing out on potentially bigger clients.
Ok, maybe it's a limited market, but small businesses can grow, and that probably applies to other limited markets as well. At the same time, is it worth me putting my own photos here if they can't be found?
One of the problems for the agent in this case I think, is being sure that images are correctly labelled.
Sadly, my own photos would just be lost in the crowd here, even if there was no other exact specimen, and I'm not a novice in photography. If anyone knows of a good home for them, please drop me a pm  ). This aversion to Google visibility means photographers can't find them either.
(and before you ask, no I can't take the photos I need myself - buying from wholesalers and selling before they flower  )
|
|
RSS feeds