F'in iStock...

I'm not a major iStock contributor. Partly because I'm lazy and don't want to deal with all the filing and keywording. Though, whenever I do upload to iStock, it can be so frustrating at times, I really don't put much effort into making 'stock' ready shots anymore.

I like to shoot for fun, and shoot for income, which can be fun as well. Most of my photography income derives from portraiture, products and at times, events. Shooting for stock isn't much fun for me. At first it was, but not anymore. It feels like a job you really don't want to do, and for a photographer, that could break you.

Here are some things I learned about submitting stock photos. Don't take it personally when they reject your files, for whatever reasons. They usually explain to you why images get rejected. From artifacts, noise, nothing in focus, composition, lighting and blown highlights. All of which are valid and understandable. Another thing is to always treat stock photos like you were on a real paid photo shoot. Otherwise you'll go around blasting at everything and anything, at high iso, blurry images with nothing in focus. Sure they'll look cool, especially at 500x320 from your flickr page but, stock houses will reject the majority of pics that don't meet their quality requirements.

Now, all of that is quite alright, it's a business, and I understand that the stock judges who evaluate these files closely want nothing but the best quality files to add to their already enormous library. Sometimes, I really think they don't know wtf they are doing. I've seen lots of inconsistencies when judging submissions.

I recently uploaded this image:

Which did take some time and preparation only to get rejected by iStock, because it had blown out highlights... Are you fuckin' serious? It's a white cup, on a white plate, with white milk being poured into it! Are the whites whats' blown out? you gotta be kidding me right? You can clearly see the separation of the cup from the plate, and you can tell that liquid is milk. Contributors at times, do get the opportunity to fix their mistakes then resubmit but, I didn't even get that chance. They just said "oh shit, there's too much white in here, those are blown out highlights, this can't be fixed, better luck next time, buddy"

I've been rejected numerous times before, sometimes I would upload two similar images, with same ISO and exposure values and one would get rejected for reasons very unreasonable. Take into account that I mentioned same exposure values and ISO speed, they would reply with some BS like "we found artifacting and noise and your composition sucks... but we like the other image that's almost exactly the same..."

I don't think it's personal. I do think they need more consistency when evaluating images. I've shot some stuff at f1.4, nothing in sharp focus but, very somewhat in focus and they've accepted it.

I'll still continue to upload to iStock because I don't have 401k and eventually as I get older I'll need other sources of income. It's very easy to get discouraged by all the rejections but, my advice would be to keep trying, even if it is at times, bullshit.