Adventures with Tripods

Some of you know that I strongly dislike tripods. I have always considered them huge and unwieldy.

Ever since I dipped a toe into the world of stock photography, I've been much more concerned about ensuring my work is suitable for actual licensing and use. The higher the resolution and the larger the file, the better. However, because of motion blur issues, the larger the picture, the less likely that it would be usable in such a context. The slightest blur is totally magnified when blown up to 100%.

So, for the work I like (butterflies), I've decided to break out my tripod and see if I could really see an improvement. I went on a shoot last week, and here are some good examples:





Observations:

1) Get to know the tripod before taking it anywhere. I had to wrestle with it a few times, even after I'd worked with it at home.

2) Butterflies move. A tripod won't solve that problem. However, there's no denying that all of these pictures are far more crisp, clear, and pretty than most that I took as recently as last month. The results do speak for themselves.

3) Tripods are not permitted everywhere. I had to use mine as a monopod, but I still got great results.

Settings and general advice: Auto white balance, ISO 200-400, and lots of experimentation with f-stops, ranging from 3.x to around 6.x. Keep in mind that the higher the f-stop, the more vulnerable you can be to motion blur. It's for this reason that the tripod helped me the most. Play with angles and move around - that's especially important here. Create shapes - the above are good examples. Above all, be patient. Keep trying.

Speaking of which, my next photo shoot will be at a place where I probably won't be able to use my tripod. I'm going back to Hillwood!.

Next time - today's butterfly photo shoot - I had to go back!

Stock Photography - Lessons and Progress

Last month, I researched a series of stock photography sites, and whether or not any of my work would be suitable. I started submitting pictures last week. Interestingly enough, the answer is yes - some of my pictures are suitable, but not the ones I thought, for the most part. I want to keep a constant tally of my "hits" and "misses" (according to them, anyway), and see how my work evolves over time.

Bigstock accepted these pictures:



And did not accept these:





And, interestingly enough, this one:



Why do I say "interestingly" enough? Because this is the photo that Dreamstime accepted. Bigstock ruled that it contained recognizable people. Okay, fair enough.

A few lessons:

1) Bigstock does not want even a speck of a human being (like a dot) on any of its pictures. Dreamstime is far less concerned about that.

2) Bigstock allows you to match your pictures with a theme or a vision. For this reason, my Cabo picture (taken with only a point-and-shoot) was accepted - it lined up very well with its Travel-Luxury theme.

3) Bigstock is not the least bit interested in stained glass.

4) The butterfly picture accepted by Bigstock (which I think is the more particular site) was not accepted by Dreamstime.

5) For both, I need to accept the fact that my notion of distortion, clarity, etc. doesn't always match theirs.

I have to say, I was really surprised by these findings. I'm thrilled that my great butterfly picture was accepted - but I as very surprised that the Cabo one and the mosque one made the cut.

So, what's next for me? I submitted another batch to Dreamstime, and I applied to iStockphoto. iStockphoto is very selective, so I chose the three pictures that were accepted for submission. If I'm not accepted, I'll be able to reapply in a few months. That's fine with me - I am sure my work will have evolved since then.

In the meantime, I need to make sure I do the following:

1) Not take any rejections of my favorite work personally

2) Learn from the accepted pictures, and submit other work within those themes

3) Continue to try and experiment without getting banned :) (hopefully, that won't happen)

Next time - a very interesting article from The Huffington Post - and my thoughts.

I've Done It!

Well, I finally submitted some of my pictures to an online stock photography site. I chose six, and here they are:






A few observations:

1) I needed to come up with more tags and keywords than I'd initially thought. This slowed down the process for me.

2) Dreamstime's workflow isn't

3) I couldn't use any of my 2007 photos in Syria :( because they didn't meet the 3MB minimum.

4) I rejected far more of my pictures than I'd expected - this process makes me even more critical of my work!

5) I found other options for pictures to post - such as cathedral ceilings (I like the way mine look), other travel pictures, and even some architectural shots. I'll therefore post a few more tomorrow.

Given that it will be at least one week before my pictures are reviewed, you won't see an update from me on this topic anytime soon.

Next time - an idea that I need to research involving Apple and its App Store.

Butterflies!

Ten days ago, I bought a season pass to Brookside Gardens. I knew I'd need it. Sure enough, I went out there twice during Labor Day weekend. The first time was my dress rehearsal. I hadn't shot butterflies in around nine months, and frankly, I felt out of practice. I took around 100 pictures, but only six made the cut.

I went back the next day, and took 900 pictures. 66 made the cut. Here are my favorite ones:





So why such a low success rate? A few reasons:

1) I experimented with various depths of field - and took multiple takes per group of shots. This is because I wanted to increase the odds that at least ONE picture would turn out well. The highest f-stop I used, by the way, was right around 6. Any higher made me too vulnerable to camera shake.

2) Some of these butterflies moved around a LOT, especially the ones that were mating, or almost mating. Those required a great deal of trial and error.

3) Experimentation with angles. If you click on one of these, you'll see the other pictures on my Flickr page. I definitely tried as many angles and views as I could.

Some tips that worked for me:

1) Don't use the lowest ISO. I set mine to around 400.

2) Play with both shutter speeds and f-stops. Don't be afraid to make mistakes. The butterflies will still be there.

3) If you can, go when the sun isn't too strong. Two benefits: You won't melt (it's hot in these environments), and you won't have to deal with strange exposures, like with this picture:



This is okay and all, but the ones I took this time around are much, much better.

Also, try for a background that isn't too busy. Simple is best.

It was a highly successful shoot. Next time, when I go, I'm going to try for even more monochromatic backgrounds. I may also bump up the ISO to 800 and see if that helps me.

Next time - the NCCF charity auction and the work I saw. How did mine compare?

Part 3 - My Stock Photography Options

It's a new day, and a new stock photography site to evaluate. Today's choice? iStockphoto.com.

When I started reading the terms and conditions, I admit I was a little frightened. They are pages and pages (and pages and pages) long, or so it seemed. After calming down and taking a closer look, I realized that this site was simply more thorough than some of the other sites. This is not a bad thing.

On to the content:

1) Keyword "orchid": While most of the backgrounds are black or white, there are several multicolored backgrounds. There's potential here, but some of these arrangements are very "editorial", if that makes sense. Also, there isn't much experimentation regarding depth of field (where some flowers would appear sharp and in the foreground, while others are more blurred and in the background). I would likely prefer to go out and shoot new content before submitting any orchid shots to this website, except for:



2) Butterfly - Many of these shots are what I would classify as "cutesy". Some of my newer pictures could work here, including:



3) Abstract - not a fit at all.

4) Nature - I think my work is a little too "soft" for this category. So, I tried "flowers". Yeah, not so much, either.

5) Travel - Most definitely not.

Not willing to give up so easily, I flipped through some of the other categories. Architecture abstract? Maybe. Churches? Quite possible, something like this:



I didn't see any pictures like this at all. So, there's a chance there.

Overall, though, this was about a below average fit for me. I'd have to think about it.

Tomorrow - Shutterstock - did I save the best for last?

My Stock Photography Options

This is proving to be quite a project. Over the next week, I'll cover the following sites (aside from Photographers' Direct, which I already covered before):

1) Bigstock

2) Dreamstime

3) iStockphoto.com

4) Shutterstock

My evaluation criteria will be the work they accept, and whether or not I feel my work fits that mold. I don't care as much about process, and most of the payouts are fairly standard. Once I've evaluated, I'll post a few examples of my work that might fit.

For today, though, I'll start with Bigstock. I was a little worried, at first, when I pulled up the top 500 downloaded images and didn't see any macro work. Before giving up, though, I decided to search by category. After looking at the top 500 pictures in the abstract, landscapes, and nature categories, well ... I felt a little discouraged, I admit. Finally, I searched for orchids, and found that the situation wasn't completely hopeless. However, I did notice that almost all of the pictures had white or black backgrounds. Most of my pictures don't.

Another keyword I chose was butterfly. This looked a lot more promising, actually. More so than I'd thought. Cathedrals, not so much. I'll need to look elsewhere. My work doesn't fit.

As for those that could be a fit for this site:



I wouldn't really consider submitting any of my orchids here. I might submit this flower picture:



But that's really it.

I've signed up, taken their tutorials and quizzes, and will ... set this aside for now. Tomorrow, I'l cover Dreamstime.

Getty Submissions

Back in October, I submitted my work to Getty's Call to Artists Flickr page. While my work was reviewed, it was not selected. The general advice is to try, try, and try.

So I'm back, and I'm going to try again! Here are May's submissions:



My evaluation process was much more thorough this cycle:

1) Can I see these pictures in a magazine?

2) How do they look on my iPad? Do they show well? Even when I zoom?

3) Does the collection provide enough variety? (I believe so)

4) Does the collection look nice as a group? (I think so)

5) Do I demonstrate technical skill and a good eye? (I think so)

I loved these so much, by the way, that I changed my iPad backgrounds to two of these - the leaves and the pink flowers. I look forward to when I can show more people my work, that's for sure.

Tomorrow - my difficult photo shoot on Saturday. I've tried to block it from my memory, but have decided that there were good lessons that I should share with you.