Hmmm, now I´m really confused. I just uploaded a batch of files to Getty Images from a visit at Tio Pepe Bodega in Jerez De La Frontera. I did a quick search on Gettys page to see if it was ok to upload these type of images, and sure, there where images in Gettys catalog from other photographers inside the bodegas of Tio Pepe, images with casks, barrels and winecellars. All the existing images was marked as editorials, so I also marked all the images in the batch as editorials just to be sure. I spent 4 hours with names, descriptions and keywords, and uploaded a batch with 29 images.
Rejection, rejection, rejection
Here´s the really strange part. All the images taken of the buildings from the outside was accepted, and the building exteriors are very much recognizable. But marked as editorials this is normally perfectly fine. But… here it comes, the images from inside the winecellars, where it’s difficult to recognize anything were rejected, even marked as editorial??? This gives no meaning at all. Here are some examples:
Exterior from the Bodega of Tio Pepe and Gonzalez Byass – Image accepted as editorial
And then a rejection from the same shoot (there are several images on Getty with the same motif and from the same location accepted as editorial. So why do Getty accept this from some commercial contributors, and then reject same type of images from others??:
The same building as the image above, marked as editorial, but now i suddendly need a property release??
Ok, don’t buy the need for a property release on this one, so I guess maybe Getty are now using AI for their quality control? Machines taking care of the review? The next image may prove that this is the case, Getty Images is asking for a property release on this image, reason, RECOGNIZABLE PROPERTY, REJECTED!!—-WTF!!!:
I don’t see any recognizable property in this image, do you? If you do, please comment below. If it is a human reviewer, I guess he/she must have been drinking whats in the glasses before reviewing the image
So, dear fellow Getty Contributors, be sure to get a property release before you shoot an image of your coffee cup on a table, and nothing else is visible or recognizable…. just to be shure. So, just as an experiment I also uploaded the images to Shutterstock, Dreamstime and Alamy.
As soon as I have recived the reviews I will do a follow up post with result.
Ahh, it’s Friday. I had a pretty busy week, and I have delivered 58 new images to Getty. In addition I have been working on getting a good workflow with Capture One, and now after processing a large number of files I feel that my editing speed is close to what I had in Lightroom. I’m also stunned about the quality i get from my Fuji X files. So, still excited about C1.
Brexit has been the big thing for stock photographers for a while, and I have produced some stockphotos using brexit as a theme:
I know that both Poland and Spain mentioned leaving the European Union, and i did a small search for “spexit” images. There are a few, but I decided to make two “Concept of Spexit” images. Both accepted by Getty Images:
The really big thing in the news at the moment is he Corona Virus, so I’m also planning to make some consept images with that topic. So, did I take any “normal” images this week? The answer is yes. I went for a trip photographing wind turbines, alternativ green energy is also a hot topic these days. I’m not so sure how green the energy coming from wind turbines is, but it’s a popular topic.
Stock agencies also looking for images of happy seniors, so I did a shoot on the beach. Here in Tarifa they call it the silver generations, or silver surfers.
So, to conclude the week, It’s been really good. I’m also very pleased with my acceptance rate @ Getty, for the last 90 days it’s 86%, not to bad 🙂 Have a great weekend.
I have been a Adobe Lightroom user since it first came out. I know the software in and out, but the last couple of years I have been unhappy how Lightroom render my Fuji files. The typical “worming” issue is really bad after I got my X-T3, and it’s very difficult to solve.
Yes, I’ve been reading and testing all the solutions posted in different groups. The “own” way for sharpen X-trans files, run all the images through Irident X-transformer and so on without any luck. The worming issue and som kind of wierd pixalation is stil very visible on my images. The problem does not show up on all images, but it’s very strong on images taken at sunrise and sunset, also when the camera is on a tripod and the images are taken with lowest calibrated ISO.
I saw a video from landscape photographer Thomas Heaton, He did a test with prints from Lightroom, and the worming effect was not visible on the printed media. He also mentioned the need for using Irident X-transformer, and that solved the problem. However, Irident does not solve the problems on my X-T3 files! I use the standard settings for conversion from RAF to DNG, and the worms are still very visible.
I shoot 90% images for stock, and for me it’s very important that the digital file looks as good as possible, in fact the quality of the digital file decides wether it’s a sale or not.
Goodbye Lightroom – welcome Capture One
Just to do a small comparsion I downloaded a Capture One trial. Oh man… what a difference! The worming effect was gone, and the images are sharp and crisp. The workflow is a little different, but after a couple of hours I got the hang of it. I guess it will take me only a couple of days to get basics of the “software” into my fingers. From there I need to take a deeper dive, but for me it will not be any problem switching from Lightroom to C1. So, I just decided to go for it. I’m now a owner of C1 2.0, and looking forward to dive deeper into the software.
Stock photography is a difficult business. I am with several stock agencies, Adobe Stock, Shutterstock, Alamy, Dreamstime, iStock and Getty Images. I’ve been on and off for the last 10 years, but after I become a Getty Contributor I can really see some potential in making profit as a stock photographer.
To get accepted as a photographer with most stock agencies is pretty easy. Over the years the need for uploading high quality work has gone down, and pretty much everything is accepted for starting a stock photography career. So, how difficult (or easy) is it to make money as a stock photographer? To be honest, it’s very difficult. It demands a shitload of work taking good photos, put good names and descriptions, and not at least add 30-50 good keywords to each image. When that is done you need to upload the images to he different agencies. Lately agencies like Shutterstock startet using AI for the quality control, and the system fails a lot. I’ve got the strangest rejections, i.e. the system can’t see the difference between waves in the ocean and noice. If you decide to take a image with blurred background it will be rejected as “unsharp”. This is really frustrating, and a lot of images must be resubmitted, a lot of extra work.
One year ago I was invited via a good friend to be a Getty Images contributor, and being with Getty simplifies my stock photography a lot. There are of course some downsides also with Getty, but my stock photography has taken a new direction. Since Getty is a macrostock agency, the profit is normally much better. After doing som calculations on my excel spreadsheet it showed me that for average of one image sold with Getty, I had to sell five images with i.e. Shutterstock. Interesting fact that made me start thinking about going “all in” with Getty. In fact, Getty Images demands exclusivity. When I make an upload and the image is accepted, I can’t sell it elsewhere.
I know there’s been a lot of complaints about the contributor page at Getty. But there is a solution, a nice peace of software called DeepMeta. I can work “offline” with all my images, and when everything is done all images are uploaded, and the software makes the batch on the ESP page. From there it’s easy to follow the quality control via the contributor app on my iPhone. The QC normally take maximum 2 days, so much faster than most of the other agencies (except Shutterstock).
Per February 2020 I only has about 180 images in my Getty portfolio, but I sell images every month. I’m impressed and excited. So, to come to some kind of conclusion. From the numbers of my sales vs. size of my portfolio, it’s more or less a nobrainer 🙂
I had a couple of very interesting incidents lately with the Shutterstock quality control. From what I understand Shutterstock need to use AI for the quality control of uploaded images. I suspect that the system can’t see the difference between sand, water and noise. I uploaded a batch of 9 images, 4 of them was rejected because of noise, artifacts or grain.
I could not understand the rejections, the images was from the same shoot. Same ISO, same settings, and the camera was on a tripod. I did a search, and ended up at Alex Rotenberg’s Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock. I saw that I was not the only person having problem with rejections for no reason. So, the tip was just to resubmit the images, and the second time the images was accepted.
It’s not a big deal, but it is frustrating when you know the quality is good, but the automated system fails. It will slow you down, it you need to spend more time on resubmit images that should have been accepted in the first place. Anyway, i hope the AI will improve in the future….
Resubmitted 2 minutes later:
The same went for all 4 images. Hope Shutterstock will look into this.