On Photography: Making Pictures That Sell

January 26, 2011

A bison grazes in Hayden Valley, Yellowstone National Park, Wyom. f 5.6 at 1/400 sec. 70-200 mm zoom lens

I consider myself to be a very lucky person.

An ancient Roman philosopher supposedly said that luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity. I think that’s largely true, but I believe that there is special, magical quality to luck, too.

Last week, my luck was in full force when I attended a meeting for photographers represented by National Geographic Image Sales (this agency sells some of my own photographs). I felt incredibly fortunate to be part of this group, along with some of the world’s greatest photographers.

Note: Click on any photo to see the gorgeous full-sized version!

I mean, I think that I take nice pictures… but I don’t believe — by any stretch of the imagination — that I’m one of the best photographers out there today.

For me, the meeting’s highlight came during a presentation about the reasons why our largest distributor rejects images from even the greatest shooters. The presentation was invaluable for a couple of reasons:

First, of course, I’m only human, and I want to know why some of my photos get rejected – mostly so I can do something about it!
And second, there was tremendous irony in sitting, there, alongside photography legends and masters as they were lectured on why their artistic endeavors sometimes go unappreciated by a general interest, mass-market photo distributer. It was priceless.

Here are some of the top reasons why stock agencies give photographs the thumbs down…

Poor production value—This can mean anything from the way your subject is dressed to the type of lighting you use, to including a lot of clutter in the picture. This particular stock agency wants clean, uncluttered photos that are well lit. No ratty clothes, no messy toenails, no overly dark underexposed faces, and definitely no clutter.
Because of the cuttered trees in the background, the deer are difficult to see.
Over subscribed images—The agency already has too many photographs of certain subjects and doesn’t want to see any more (even if yours really is better!). For our group, those subjects included photographs of penguins, waves, flowers and clouds. Of course, if you make the world’s best cloud or penguin photo you should still submit it, but realize that the odds are against you.
Logos, model releases and other legal issues—This particular distributor won’t accept photographs of people without a signed model release (A quick Google search can help you find some of these forms). Similarly, photos containing recognizable logos or buildings need signed property releases. This protects the distributor from lawsuits, but it can put the photographer in the uncomfortable position of having to alter a photograph digitally to sell the picture.
Technical issues—If you want to sell your photos as stock, they need to be perfectly exposed, totally sharp but not over-sharpened, absent of grain and noise (all those blotchy-looking pixels).
Being dated—Sometimes this makes sense and sometimes it doesn’t. For example, if you have a photograph of a cityscape that is 20 years old, I can see how a distributor wouldn’t want it because the skyline has likely changed. But personally, I just don’t understand why a close-up of a 30-year-old wildlife photo would be rejected. It’s not like the elk and bears dress (or look) differently than they did a couple of decades ago. But those are the rules!
The clean background in this image allows the elk to be clearly seen. f4 at 1/800 sec. at 300mm