I looked at the first three photos and tend to believe they got refused on focus issues. The depth of field is too shallow.
Thank you, sir!
7451 is quite nicely done, but it's missing detail and sharpness and bears artefacts introduced by your phone, because of the small sensor size and post-processing. I could also get some more contrast.
3361 some highlights are blown out, the light on the table is too strong. There is noise in the shadows, and the noise reduction has taken out detail and introduced this painterly look. I love the composition, but again, your camera and in-camera processing did a bad job to catch the nice features of your set-up.
1023: Much what I said before is true also here. Just have a look at this painterly impression from your phone's noise reduction (seen at 200%):
0976: Same issues (here seen at 103% from inside the forums tool):
0037: Noise reduction destroyed the details:
I think you need to change to raw shooting. The iPhone 6 may be capable of that. That could improve your pictures because you could apply your post-processing, instead of the in-camera processing. This would help to preserve details. But it is probable, that the camera is reaching its physical limits with this type of pictures and the light conditions. The photographs are nice, but the quality is not good enough.
If you are new to stock, you should consider these resources: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/tutorials.html
Please read the contributor user manual for more information on Adobe stock contributions: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/user-guide.html
See here for rejection reasons: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html
and especially quality and technical issues: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html
Thanks so much for your in-depth reply. It is much appreciated and so more informational than the general site links, although they are useful. Many of your other comments here have also been beneficial during my research. And thanks for the compliments!
I have a Canon EOS 50D that has been collecting dust, maybe I should bring it back to life. But I assume the technology in the iPhone (swapped 6 for 13 recently) is of higher quality. I'm currently looking at apps that will allow RAW format (I guess only 13Pro has ProRAW :(. Thanks again, cheers!
I really believe you should revive that Canon camera. iPhone seems to be among the top phone cameras among phone, but has a few limitations making them not ideal for stock photography. Mention is already made about the sensors and the inability to shoot in RAW. However, there are still others including the fixed aperture. Samsung tries to address that with a single adjustment but that's not enough. You can read more about the limitations of phone cameras here.
@jacquelingphoto2017 is correct. The 50D is great when shooting raw with the correct lenses. The lenses are indeed here more important than a newer sensor (of the same size).
Lightroom allows for raw photography with an iPhone.
Thank you @jacquelingphoto2017 and Abambo. I agree, the lens is such an important factor. All these years I've been shooting with inferior lenses. I'm seeing the poor result while sifting through thousands of photos with a newly acquired keen eye for technicality for stock worthy prizes. Out of focus mostly...and that's not to say there is no operator error, like shake. For the most part just nearly imperceptible blur that goes unniticed when printing fairly small for shows (3'x6'). I got away with it and even sold some!
I'm going to go on a verbose tangent with too much information, no worries if you don't feel like engaging. I've recently had some down time due to a broken ankle, so I thought why not go through my photo backlog to see if I can make passive income in the stock game. I got excited about stock many years ago, did a little research, gathered my best images but then realized it's not the kind of shooting that energized me. So I gave up on it, and then tried the art game with shows which was REALLY fun but really expensive with little payout. SO here I am, in 2022, entering the stock world with the idea that it will most likely be passive...as in I don't imagine I'll post 10-20 photos per week. I am excited about fine tuning the woodworking/metalworking photography (thanks again for the tips) but the worldwide stock pot is SO saturated I wonder if even that amount of effort is worth it, regarding time spent/money made. I am not retired.
I feel like I should end this with a question. The million dollar question all those YouTubers are trying to answer. What is your opinion on the future of stock photography?
I'm sorry I cannot answer your question. I am not an expert in that area of research. For now stock-photos are required I have no idea the direction of the wind tomorrow. Frankly I rather not worry about tomorrow, but deal with the concerns of today.
No worries! I appreciate your honesty. That's a good perspective to have, for life in general.
Don't do stock photography if you want to become rich. Some people get a decent income from it, I do it as a fun thing. I'm using pictures that I have anyway, and I'm posting them and occasionally, I see them back on the web or elsewhere.
Same here, I'm using photos I already have...but I expect I will continue to have fun making woodworking photos and uploading them just to see what happens. I definitely do not expect to get rich from stock. I contributed to Dreamstime in 2009 and forgot about it until now. So far I've earned $29. : )
Thanks for your input.
Stock photography still fills the need for current images in technology, human interaction, current issues, etc. However, I'm pretty sure there are enough images of sunsets, sunrises, waves, beaches, puppies, kittens and flowers to last for eternity - or until camera technology evolves to the point where current 2D static images are rendered obsolete.
However, I'm pretty sure there are enough images of sunsets, sunrises, waves, beaches, puppies, kittens and flowers to last for eternity - or until camera technology evolves to the point where current 2D static images are rendered obsolete.
Hey, my kitten images sell…at a really low rate. As I said, I do not shoot for stock, but I put images I have into stock! My latest upload was a sunset, just to see if they still get accepted, as many uploaders have difficulties with them. And yes, when correctly processed, they get accepted. However, the work you need to put into this won't get monetized.
It's incredible how saturated the market is, and a wonder stock sites keep accepting anything. I suppose that's a testament to human creativity...but I see lots of photos that make me wonder how they got accepted. Also, it's quite sickening the percentage that goes to the creator. I totally agree the work put into it won't get monetized. For me, I have been wanting to go through my thousands of photos, consolidate and categorize so I can say I did it, finally. Even though it's a lot of work (because my photos are by far less than perfect) it's still fun to upload and know someone could purchase them. Thanks broken ankle.
Now I'm going down the NFT rabbithole. I have a specific series that might spar some interest, which won't be posted to stock.
Thanks for your comments, everyone! I love getting the insight.
Here you get 33% of a sale on an asset. But because this is on a per-asset basis, the resulting pay-out per picture is small. You need to sell a lot to make a decent earning.
Understod. Thanks for that link. I've made one sale since uplodaing on April 18th...$0.33 earnings so far!! I'm going to stop checking everyday. Haha!