During the last few months one of my major goals has been to shoot more food photography.? I am really interested in the subject, I enjoy all aspects of it, and I think I can do it well (eventually).

So my past few months have been focused on learning – studying food photos, “becoming” a foodie, learning styling techniques – I never wanted to jump straight into food but rather be a food person who knew how to photograph.? I’ve been studying food, food photos, collecting recipes, deciding on what I want to focus on. In learning to “be” a food stylist/chef? you learn about presentation.

Thus my thought for the moment – become involved in the shots you want to shoot.? You shoot sports?? Go PLAY sports more – referee for the kid leagues, shoot hoops more at the park and watch more games.? See how the pros present sports.? You want to shoot business people?? Get deeper into business – meet with SCORE, talk about business planning and attend a seminar so you can see how someone has designed their speech.? Desire to shoot more animals & nature?? Interact – get out there, follow wildlife, hunt (with or without the gun), track animals – learn their behaviors.

— Related tangent —

When I first started learning to be a wedding photographer I listened to everything wedding photographers said. Advertising, marketing, sales, websites, SEO, photography & lighting, everything!? Eventually it dawned on me that photographers were good at making images.? I should learn advertising from an advertising specialist.? I no longer pay much attention to wedding photographers when they speak on subjects other than booking or shooting weddings.? The thought is very similar to what I’m talking about above.? Learn to be great at your subject – not just aware of it.

Sometimes when I want to shoot something I just pull it up, shoot it, wonder why it doesn’t sell.? I think the main reason is because someone else understands the subject while I just wanted a good photo of it.? Can I take good photos?? Yes.? Absolutely!? I shot models for years – and then I realized that because I don’t enjoy it all that much, the images weren’t high-class.? I can shoot well enough but the connection wasn’t there.? The question is – how involved are you in the shoot?

It doesn’t make sense for a city-dweller to go shoot cows and barns.? It doesn’t make sense for a sporty jock to shoot ballet.? Who are YOU and what can you shoot better than everyone else?

Let me quote myself.

I am not going to stick around and pretend to be something I?m not.? Too many people set goals and fail to reach them, yet still continue the journey unfazed.? I often share my experiences and ideas in hopes of helping you.? If I can?t help myself first, I can?t help you.

If I fail to reach both goals (10k images, $25k for the year) by 12/31/09, NiltoMil.com will close for good whether I continue to shoot microstock or not.

At this point in the year it is obvious that I will not reach 10k approved images OR $25,000 this year.

I am modifying what I wrote above.? I am not going to destroy or delete Nil. I am going to stop posting earnings, stop posting ideas until they are working better.? I AM going to keep Nil up for the archives and the posts that often get referenced.? I AM going to continue to put up posts of interest to me – whether that’s of interest to anyone else or not.? My journey will continue.

I need to help myself first.? I need to figure out the steps I should be taking to reach my goal? and when I do, I’ll be back full force with the full effort I can give Nil.? Until then, expect sporadic updates on what I’m doing, how stock is going and what I am trying to do to improve.

Ok, I know Powerweek was over awhile ago and I haven’t written.? To be honest I needed time to think about my next steps.

Here’s what happened

I submitted 550 images in 4 days.? Easily enough to beat the 700 in 7 days mark.? The “fail” for Powerweek v3 was our image quality.? On day 4, we had a BUNCH of images reviewed across many sites.? And the results were absolutely terrible.? Not my editing, not my keywording – but I had 4000 trip images to sort through and many were unusable at 100%.? I hadn’t noticed that while culling in Lightroom but upon closer inspection I knew it was going to be a hard week.

The second major issue we ran into was overdoing it.? Honestly it’s not a great idea to submit 1000 images in one week.? You lose the benefits of continued growth and spread as well as you “feed the beast” once instead of continually, which results in another loss for you.

1) My process ARE better.? I could easily edit and key MORE images than I should rationally submit in a week.? I like that.

2) I still need to get more new images up – we had several shoots since Powerweek which has kept me busy and one of our major goals is to improve our photography dramatically in the next 12 months.? I definitely think that will help all around.

3) Our trip images were not what we needed.? We had a great time, I’ve sorted through and picked another 1200 or so we can use but overall the images themselves were iffy at best and not very good stock.? Lesson learned.

What’s Next?

I think my next goal will not be a Powerweek but a Growth Month.? I would love to grow our gallery fast still.? I think a better way than 700 in a week and 150 for the rest of the month would be 50 new images uploaded 3 times per week.? 150 new images a week for a year is not enough but I can add some in whenever possible to add to that.? I still want 10k up by the end of this year although I’m not certain I will close N2M if I do not, given our new education.

I still need – I still hunger.? I have to work on my lessons and what is next for us.

All in one place and organized by microstock agency, I present to you the canonical list of rejection reasons microstock agencies use to kick your photos (not vectors or videos)? to the curb.

There are two quick notes on this:

1) It’s incomplete – IStock and StockXpert refused to give me a list.? The 123RF list was given to me by Alex and should be fairly complete.? The Bigstock list is fully done.? I believe I caught every Fotolia and Shutterstock reason.? The other lists are created from my own rejections, a bit of research, and some help from an anonymous reviewer.? Vivozoom provided a list as well.

So feel free to contribute to the list, help me make changes, edit things I added if they’ve changed since I last received a particular rejection.? Whatever – it’s interactive and incomplete.? Thanks to the commentators who’ve helped me improve this list!

2) As mentioned above, this is for PHOTOS only.? I am not including the list for vectors or video because a) they weren’t given to me and b) I don’t submit many of those file types so I have way less experience there.

123RF

• Poor Lighting/Composition
• Minimal commercial value
• Potential copyright issue
• Visible branding/logo
• Similar image accepted
• Keywords in English Only
• Bad composition
• Bad focus
• Enlargement has been done and it?s not tolerable.
• Looks like a snapshot.

Bigstock

• Artifact Problems: Noise/Grain/Chromatic or other artifacts due to low light, blue or purple fringing, high ISO, over-sharpening or post processing techniques.
• Blurry: Image is not very crisp or is blurred when viewed at full size.
• Dull, lifeless color: Colors are dull or lackluster.
• Exposure problem:? Image is too dark or too light, not properly exposed.
• Hard shadows:? Caused by on-camera flash. Try not to use flash, use more fill light instead. Flash often creates hard ugly shadows, thanks
• Jagged edges: Isolation has jagged edges, anti-aliasing problems, or background is not clean.
• Low interest subject:? Probably little demand/selling potential for this image. Try for more marketable shots.
• Not newsworthy enough for Editorial Use:? Images submitted as Editorial need to be news, or current events, or commentary worthy. This image does not appear newsworthy enough.
• Poor composition/Cropped subject: Chopping off part of subject makes photo harder to use generally
• Potential copyright / trademark / privacy issue with photo (could be: copyrighted art, visible logo, license plate number, etc)
• Recognizable person without Model Release…
• Similarity: Image too similar to others already submitted. Try selecting only a few of your very best shots for submission of this subject.
• Snapshot composition: This image is more of a snapshot than a marketable stock image. Overall problems can include poor lighting, poor composition, non-interesting subject matter, etc.
• Subject not evident enough – hard to tell what the subject of the photo is
• Too Sexually Explicit:? Can’t accept fully exposed breasts, buttocks or genitals. Or image may be too overtly sexually suggestive.
• Upload problem: Please re-upload this image, there appears to have been a problem with the original upload, thanks.
• We have enough of this subject already…sorry.

Dreamstime

• The image contains elements that might be protected by copyright/trademark (logos, brands, specific buildings etc.), can identify a property/product (letters, numbers), or could raise usage problems, therefore it doesn’t qualify as a RF stock image.
• Poor color: this image has a low color profile and needs improvement in order to increase its sales potential.
• Poor lighting setup, poor contrast or incorrect exposure.
• This is a very well covered subject in our data base or the subject of your image is too specific. We are looking for images that exceed the technical quality and creativity of the images already online.
• The image includes recognizable humans. It cannot be accepted without a model release signed by your subject(s). If the people within your photo are not the main subject but their faces are visible, then you also need a MR for each person whose face is visible.
• Distorted pixels due to poor sensor performance, image was interpolated, poorly scanned, upsampled or JPG was not saved at the highest quality.
• This image is overfiltered. Its use for the potential designers is limited because of this, therefore the image is disqualified as a RF stock-oriented image.
• Image is out of focus or too much of the subject is out of focus (DOF too shallow or DOF not justified) / Image is shaken. Use a faster speed or a tripod.
• Witness’s print name missing
• Model Release document is incomplete.
• Lack of composition.
• Model’s signature missing.
• We have reviewed your file and this is not quite what we?re looking for.

Fotolia

• Quality of the photograph – Your photograph did not reach our desired level of aesthetic quality.
• Type of photograph – Your photographic work is excellent but does not meet the needs of the Fotolia customer base.
• Technical problems – The image contains one or more technical problems:
  • Blurry or out of focus
  • Over/Under exposure
  • Framing problem
  • Over or under saturated colors
  • Problems with contrast
  • Noise or Pixelation
  • Quality of routing
  • Interpolation problem
• Model/Property Release – However we discovered a problem (legal problem, lack of signature, wrong file format, or it was illegible) with the model/property release that you submitted.
• Overabundant Category – Fotolia has received an overabundant amount of high quality images similar to this photo and does not have need of more photos like it.
• Non conformity – The photographs in the Fotolia database are intended for sale to multiple buyers. Your photograph while attractive does not meet a level of neutrality for our buyers.
• Similar Photograph – the same or similar photograph was already submitted to Fotolia.

IStock

• The execution of isolation contains stray areas that are either too feathered or rough.
• This file contains artifacting when viewed at full size. This technical issue is commonly created by the quality settings in-camera, in post-processing or in RAWsettings. Artifacting may be the result of other factors such as excessive level adjustments.
• We found the overall composition of this file?s lighting could be improved. Technical aspects that can affect the overall quality of lighting are: flat/dull colors, blown-out highlights, harsh reflection, shadows or lens flares. These can all limit the usefulness of a file.
• In review of this file, we found the lighting underexposed
• We found this file over filtered from its original appearance/quality.
• This file contains artifacting when viewed at full size (probably due to oversharpening). This technical issue is commonly created by the quality settings in-camera or in post-processing.
• The keywords used for this file do not appear to be fully relevant to the subject.
• Your file contains stray/hot/dead pixels or sensor spots.
  • Sensor spots: Commonly caused from dust on the sensor of your camera. These darker areas usually show up in lighter areas of the file such as skies.
  • Hot Pixels: Dead pixels on your camera?s sensor. Sometimes caused by extreme temperatures, and may become permanent.

Thanks to Tim for the IStock list!

Shutterstock

• Focus–Your image is not in focus or focus is not located where we feel it works best.
• Composition–Limited commercial value due to framing, cropping, and/or composition.
• Poor Lighting–Poor or uneven lighting, or shadows. White balance may be incorrect.
• Lighting Problems–Purple fringe, blown highlights or lenses flare.
• Noise–Noise, film grain, over-sharpening, or artifacts at full size.
• Glitch–There was a technical problem with your upload. Please resubmit.
• Trademark–Contains potential trademark or copyright infringement–not editorial.
• Overuse–Overuse of noise reduction software.
• Keywords–Your keywords must directly relate to the image (relevancy). Please edit your keyword choices and resubmit.
• Editing–Your illustration has rough edges.
• Limited Commercial Value–We do not need this image at this time
• Similar Submissions–Too many of the same subject.

StockXpert

• Image contains too much noise/grain/pixilation
• Some keywords are not relevant to the image.
• Image requires a model release.
• Please improve isolation/editing.
• Thank you, but we have too many like this.
• Poor Lighting.
• Image requires a property release.
• Thank you but we are not interested in this subject matter or situation.
• Poor isolation – elements of the background are not acceptable.
• Cropping should be improved.
• Image contains too much dust.

VivoZoom

• Focus issue
• Overfiltering/Sharpening/Upsizing
• Over/Under exposed
• Digital Noise/Jagged lines/Pixelation
• Image content not required
• Lighting issue
• Composition/Cropping issue
• Copyright/Trademark issue
• Provenance
  • Model release missing or insufficient
  • Property release missing or insufficient
  • Sample text needs to be removed
  • Text copyright issues
  • Supply original image used to create illustration
  • Release on original artwork missing or insufficient

Today is going to be fun I hope – I’m going to show you how I edit.? I don’t claim it’s the ONLY way.? I’m not even sure it’s the BEST way.? But it’s fast.? REALLY fast.

This image was shot over grey instead of white because I like the flexibility of being able to isolate on white OR having some texture to a background if I want to colorize the available texture with some sort of blend mode.? For stock, I’d always turn this white though and let the buyer decide what to do with it later.

The entire edit ends up taking less than 2 minutes.? You can add another 15 seconds because after I finished recording I realized his shirt had a few small mistakes on the edge so I cleaned it up.? At any rate, editing at this speed would give you 30 images per hour or slightly under.? At even 20 images an hour, you could edit 100 images in 5 hours.? That would be quick and gives you 3 hours of “work day” to keyword, upload, push and submit those 100 images.? People have asked me before how I plan to sub 100 a day – this is the general idea.? Of course some days you have to shoot.? Some days you don’t get 100 edited and subbed.? Heck, MOST days I don’t.

Every trick you can learn will help you.? The difference in 10 images per hour and 15 is also the same as 1000 online vs 1500 or 10,000 vs. 15,000.? The difference in 5 images per hour and 30 is 6x your income each month.? Speed IS necessary.

Click the photo above for the video on what I did.? There’s no audio – it’s a visual process.? Tools used:

• Wand – grab the grey background.
• Lasso – select and unselect with shift and alt after the initial selection has been made.
• Feather 1, backspace – clear the grey background.
• F5 – custom action for curves.? Just brightens it up 2 steps.? I undid one to find a happy balance.
• [ and ] to resize the brush.
• Dodge/highlights around the hair.
• Eraser to trim unclean edges.
• Contrast for skin tone.
• Clone for the logo.
• Brush – for the screwdriver (alt-clicked the color nearby to grab it)
• Smart sharpen – 60/1.3 I think.
• After the vid ends, I also used clone on the edge of the shirt a bit.

To show you what my 2 minutes did, I’ve uploaded a watermarked version of this finished image to here.? One of my next goals is to upload some actual Photoshop tutorials – one using only the keyboard, NO mouse.? One as a speed drill and whatever else you guys want.

(chart taken from StockXpert top portfolios)

Figuring out where I rank on stock sites is a curiosity more than a necessity.? I don’t need to know – my goal is $1,000,000 regardless of whether Yuri or Lise has made $55,000,000 or what Lumaxart is doing.? However, it’s interesting to compare progress and see where we’re at and where we reach in what time periods.

Here are the tracking tools I’m aware of:

Istock Charts

Bigstock Gallery Size Listing

StockXpert Gallery Size Listing

(Araminta Studios has a great listing but it’s currently offline.)

As far as my own rankings are concerned, I only? have rough estimates of past results and all of today’s current data.? These rankings are for GALLERY SIZE only.

IStock – last time I looked, I was roughly 7900th.? Today I’m 7213th.

Bigstock – last time I looked, I was on page 9 ranked roughly 420th.?? Today I’m ranked 267th and on page 6.

StockXpert – last time I looked, I was roughly 750th.? Today I’m ranked 338th.

So it looks like there are roughly 350ish photographers with? larger galleries than I have online.

What would it take to make progress?

On IStock, just 100 new images would raise my ranking from 7213 to 4480.
Also on Istock, just 300 new images would raise my ranking from 7213 to 2375.
Real progress would be 369 new images and top 2000.

On Bigstock, just 130 images raises me to page 5 and rank #240.?
On Bigstock, just 750 images would raise our ranking from 267th to 144th.
Real progress would be 1360 new images, bringing us in the top 100.

On StockXpert, just 100 images would raise us from 338 to 295th.
On StockXpert, just 620 images would raise us from 338 to 200th.
Real progress would be 1738 images and would take us from 338 to 100th.

3000 new accepted images (my goal for 2/28/09) would give us the following rankings:

Istock (140 new images max) – 3180th.
Bigstock (3000 new images) – 43rd.
StockXpert (3000 new images) – 60th.

So that Istock one may be a bit of a reach – but top 100 on the other sites?? Totally doable.? Where do you rank?? Post below and you’ll always have it to look back on – and compare to!

First of all, I know this is my second post on exclusivity in the last week and so it may appear that I’m considering it.? At this point, we are not.? I do want to consider what exclusivity agencies offer and why it may be beneficial in our future or for others.

123RF

Type of Exclusivity: Per image.
Method: “May be arranged” – asked support and they had no idea.
Terms: An exclusive agreement may be arranged for a better commission.

Dreamstime

Type of Exclusivity: Per image or per photographer.
Method: Per image – upon image submission, check the box.? Per photographer – submit an application.
Terms: Exclusive images earn 10% ($0.10 to $1.40) more per download.? Exclusive photographers earn $.20 per accepted image + 10% more per download.

Fotolia

Type of Exclusivity: Per image.
Method: When submitting a file, choose “Yes” to “Is this file exclusive to Fotolia?”
Terms: Commission is 17% higher for exclusive images.? Maximum sales price on all sizes may also be set higher after contributor reaches the Bronze level instead of Emerald for non-exclusives.? Exclusive images may be opted out of subscriptions.

IStockPhoto

Type of Exclusivity: Per photographer.
Method: Apply when you have 250 downloads, a minimum 50% approval rating, and have no royalty-free stock images, vector illustrations, video footage or Flash files available at other agencies.
Terms: Higher royalties (+5 to +20% so 25-100% higher), extended license bonus, larger upload queue, Exclusive-only events, higher search rankings, business cards.?? Full artist Exclusivity means no images, video or audio files may be sold on other royalty-free sites or businesses with the exception of Getty Images.

Bigstock

Type of Exclusivity: None.

MostPhotos

Type of Exclusivity: None.

Shutterstock

Type of Exclusivity: None.

StockXpert

Type of Exclusivity: None.

So what did we learn?? I think it’s safe to say I won’t be going exclusive for a long time, if ever.? The “best” royalty increase is with IStock on the high end (20%) but as you know, my sales always suck at Istock.? So second best royalty increase is Fotolia.? Again, I make *some* money on FT but not my best results.? 17% more wouldn’t help me enough.

The most likely candidate would be either a) Shutterstock figuring out that exclusive is the way to go or b) Dreamstime.? Dreamstime gives one of the “worst” exclusive bonuses (10%) but 10% of my monthly earnings would almost eliminate one of my smaller agency’s income (say 123RF).? Until that extra 10% would eliminate as well as give me a bonus, I can’t consider it.

Exclusivity has benefits for those photographers in one of three situations:

1) The Time Swamp – if you have a full time job that isn’t microstock and you simply don’t have time to upload *everywhere* you may be better off spending time building your gallery on *one* site.?? At this time, I’d suggest Shutterstock though, and? since they don’t have an exclusive program…

2) The EasySimple – it’s “easier” to upload to one site.? You don’t absolutely have to? use IPTC data for keywords and descriptions, you can manage reading the news on that site, keep up with what’s? new,? and even focus your attention on what downloads when and how you can better yourself.

3) The Student – if you’ve had trouble getting accepted to Shutterstock and IStock and you want to maximize? earning potential it may be worthwhile to try submitting to only Fotolia or Dreamstime for awhile as you grow your talents, not just your gallery.? This is by far the best reason to go Exclusive right now.? Dreamstime and Fotolia are both “difficult” agencies so if you can master them there’s nothing stopping you from Shutterstock and IStock.? Dreamstime and Fotolia both also offer per-image exclusivity so you can “test” exclusivity and see what you like and don’t like about it.

Are you exclusive?? Why or why not?

Welcome back to another exciting episode of SlowLinks, my version of Speedlinks but with far too many for it to be considered speedy.

Today’s SlowLinks book list is all about books you should read in the coming year.? I listed books about photography, microstock, business, branding, personal advancement and growth as well as organization and motivation.

These have been accumulated through conversations with other photographers, small business owners and in my own reading.? I tend to read a *lot* of business books and own about 99.9% of the books on the list.

Nobody will be surprised that the #1 book on this list is The Long Tail.? After that, hopefully more than a few are new to you.? These are *not* in order so read whatever appeals to you.? We’ll probably talk about a lot of these in 2009.

1. The Long Tail – Chris Anderson

2. Light, Science & Magic – Fil Hunter

3. Lighting and the Dramatic Portrait – Michael Grecco

4. Matters of Light & Depth – Ross Lowell

5. The Moment It Clicks – Joe McNally

6. Understanding Exposure – Bryan Peterson

7. Microstock Photography: How to Make Money from your Digital Images – Douglas Freer

8. Digital Stock Photography: How to Shoot & Sell – Michael Heron

9. Tell the World You Don’t Suck: Modern Marketing for Commercial Photographers – Leslie Burns

10. Love is the Killer Ap – Tim Sanders

11. Tipping Point – Malcolm Gladwell

12. Blue Ocean Strategy – W. Chan Kim

13. Good to Great – Jim Collins

14. Getting Things Done – David Allen

15. Talent is Never Enough – John Maxwell

16. Primal Branding – Alan Sklar

17. Creating Customer Evangelists – Ben McConnell

18. It’s Not How Good You Are, It’s How Good You Want to Be – Paul Arden

19. The Millionaire Mind – Thomas Stanley

20. The Brand Called You – Peter Montoya

Disclaimer: these are all Amazon Affiliate links.? If that bugs you, search them on Amazon.

? Tomas Marek, Dreamstime.com

While NiltoMil covers a wide variety of topics from SEO on Technorati to shooting with models, the main point of its existence is to document our progress from $0 to $1,000,000.? As such, the end of the year is a good time for 2008 wrap up and goal setting for next year.

As of December 31st, our total earnings will be just a shade over $6,500.? While a decent amount of money, we will not get to $1,000,000 with years like that.? Obviously there’s? a need to greatly increase our number of salable images quickly.

Goals in microstock may be measured by many different statistics:? RPI, earnings, download rates, sell through, approval percent, size of your portfolio, etc.? For NiltoMil, we’ll focus on the obvious two: portfolio size and earnings.

My goal for 2009 portfolio size is to have more than 10,000 accepted images by 12/31/09 on most of my sites (Istock will be an exception of course, Fotolia may be as well).? Shutterstock, 123RF, Bigstock, Dreamstime, MostPhotos and StockXpert should *definitely* hit this goal for me to be successful.

My goal for 2009 earnings is to earn $25,000 in stock photography for the year. While not “huge” by any definition, this would be around $2000 a month for the year and would represent the figure that would continue our journey in a positive direction.

So here’s a reason to continue reading NiltoMil.? I am not going to stick around and pretend to be something I’m not.? Too many people set goals and fail to reach them, yet still continue the journey unfazed.? I often share my experiences and ideas in hopes of helping you.? If I can’t help myself first, I can’t help you.

If I fail to reach both goals by 12/31/09, NiltoMil.com will close for good whether I continue to shoot microstock or not.

So wish me luck!? I wish you luck in 2009 in reaching all of your goals.? (Luck wishing appreciated by clicking “Comment” below)

Track our progress at the NiltoMil Spreadsheet

Here’s a hint: no matter how good of a photographer you are today, you’ll either be better in three years or you won’t be a microstock photographer any longer.? Standards improve so fast, so much that if you aren’t constantly learning a “new trick” you are going to get? surpassed extremely quickly in image quality, control of light, etc.

We have made it a priority for the last year to improve our work.? I think it has improved a thousandfold and I’m still learning.? One way to do that is by using video tutorials to learn new skills.? Youtube is great for old NBA videos but it’s surprisingly good for instructional video as well.

Try these:

http://www.youtube.com/user/prophotolife 26 episodes of photo goodness

http://www.youtube.com/user/PhotoGavin

and there are incredibly numerous Photoshop Tutorials:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=photoshop+tutorial&search_type=&aq=f

And that’s that! Go learn. No photo because of the vid.