iStock Editorial - Deconstructed

First pagePrevious pageof 7Next page
Displaying 101 to 120 of 122 matches.
graemenicholson
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Feb 26, 2013 1:23PM
Posted By kelvinjay:
Thanks to everyone for their feedback on the issues raised in the OP.

If anyone wants to discuss any other general aspects of editorial photography and any potential moral or ethical issues, please feel free to open a thread in the editorial or photography forums. This thread isn't a good place for such musings.

Two posts have been deleted because they have been deemed off topic, which I suppose they were, albeit slightly, but what the Hick! 'Such musings!' Downright insulting. Who TF do you think you are with your condescending attitude? Bitterly disappointed and the last time I will participate in the Forums, and yeah, go ahead, delete this.
Lobo
Mask of the Diablo Azul - Member has won between 1 and 3 Steel Cage matchesThis user has the power to wield the BanHammer, a weapon forged in the fires of hell for that get-off-my-planet quality you can't get anywhere else. You betta reckonize.Forum Moderator
Posted Tue Feb 26, 2013 1:44PM

Posted By graemenicholson:
Posted By kelvinjay:
Thanks to everyone for their feedback on the issues raised in the OP.

If anyone wants to discuss any other general aspects of editorial photography and any potential moral or ethical issues, please feel free to open a thread in the editorial or photography forums. This thread isn't a good place for such musings.

Two posts have been deleted because they have been deemed off topic, which I suppose they were, albeit slightly, but what the Hick! 'Such musings!' Downright insulting. Who TF do you think you are with your condescending attitude? Bitterly disappointed and the last time I will participate in the Forums, and yeah, go ahead, delete this.

Did you post something or were the posts by someone else? I didn't see the posts live but I now know what the posts were about:

Photographing Poor people - The Ethics

and a response from someone.

So if deleting those two off topic posts is what has you steaming mad maybe you do need to take a break from posting in the forums.

We have an Editorial forum for questions related to shooting editorial. It's not that confusing.
graemenicholson
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Feb 26, 2013 1:57PM
I am not confused. Actually it's quite simple, but although it was off topic it was important and I was disappointed there was no leeway and now I'm going to bed.
PeskyMonkey
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsExclusiveAwarded to fabulous photographers with more than 100,000 downloads
Posted Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:01PM

/
/Content guidelines are way too restrictive to encourage contributions.

And then when iStock actually requests certain content and then a few months later decides the subject matter is no longer suitable and deactivates our images (like the turnaround we saw on brand logos) this is even more discouraging. I'm not going to waste my time actively shooting and uploading content that can suddenly be deactivated and rendered worthless (since, as an exclusive, I can't sell deactivated/rejected images anywhere else).

Rejected/deactivated images being held captive by istock is a serious detriment for exclusives. This policy certainly discourages me from submitting some of my best editorial images (shot in low-light or with motion blur etc) because I know 99% won't be accepted due to subjective application of a strict technical check-list. Beautiful editorial images are very rarely shot on tripod with perfect studio-like lighting. Quite the reverse in fact, take a look at the recent World Press Awards. If iStock doesn't want the image, fair enough, but we should be free to sell them elsewhere. 


 

(Edited on 2013-02-27 03:27:00 by PeskyMonkey)
mikedabell
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Wed Feb 27, 2013 2:51AM
I submit less editorial then I could because of the high number of pedantic rejections, and the amount of  extra effort that has gone into submitting the photos.
 If  who, what, where, when is such a big deal  why not add them to specific fields, so that these can be searched on, not just accessed via the key words that don’t always match US / Canadian expectations.
wcjohnston
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:51AM
Editorial Video would be good.
helovi
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:56AM

I shoot editorial whille I travel and would be grate to have editorial video as well. To have possibiliti to edit the file not to have to subbmit it again. 


I agree that rulles are to strict.
jimplumb
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:57AM
Yes for editorial video, content transferred to Getty, edit capabilities on captions.

Do you shoot and upload editorial content to iStock? If yes, why? If not, why?

Yes, I do, because I prefer to shoot real-life people and events.

How prolific are you with uploading editorial vs creative?

About the same, although I haven't uploaded much content recently.

Do you set-out to specifically shoot editorial or are your editorial images happy accidents that you capture in your random travels?

Yes, I will specifically go to events I feel will have editorial interest. Of course, there are happy accidents that do fall into my lap on occasion.

How do you feel about the current content guidelines? Are they too restrictive?

The sports guidelines are too restrictive. Any publicly held sporting event such as a marathon or sports exhibition should be fair game.

Now that iStock is accepting images produced on mobile devices, are you taking advantage of this?

Not yet

Would you be more inclined to upload editorial content if there was a streamlined mobile app to submit it to iStock?

Yes, we need a mobile app to directly upload content to editorial.

Have you read or shot content related to one of the editorial creative briefs?

No

Do you feel there needs to be more direction on shooting editorial content? More detailed and frequent briefs?

No.

How do feel about the Editorial homepage? The search results?

No opinion
NRedmond
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:12PM
Rules are way too strict. I am primarily an editorial photographer, working for various clients. Most allow me to sell my "outtakes" after I submit a selection from event to primary client. I have covered sporting and political events as a credentialed photographer and submitted images from the event to istock editorial, only to have the uploads rejected. Very frustrating.
slobo
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Audio Artist
Posted Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:42PM

I don't shoot much editorial. I struggle with Caption field and subject choice. I don't think "Street photography" has much commercial value so I stay away.


I think Getty restrict us too much here on iStock. I also do not like that first thing you see on Editorial page here is Celebrities lightbox which is reserved for Getty only images.


I definitely think it should be more detailed and frequent briefs. By the way, where can one find and read previous briefs (I expect to find in in Editorial forum or Editorial landing page?


I like the idea of the mobile app.


 
jtyler
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusive
Posted Thu Feb 28, 2013 1:57PM
Posted By slobo:

I don't shoot much editorial. I struggle with Caption field and subject choice. I don't think "Street photography" has much commercial value so I stay away.


I think Getty restrict us too much here on iStock. I also do not like that first thing you see on Editorial page here is Celebrities lightbox which is reserved for Getty only images.


I definitely think it should be more detailed and frequent briefs. By the way, where can one find and read previous briefs (I expect to find in in Editorial forum or Editorial landing page?


I like the idea of the mobile app.


 


I agree with the above.  I was putting up a lot of pretty decent editorial, and while some have sold, I am very disappointed after then actually looking at what is there and how few have sold for IS contributors.  I'm going to use all my restraint and not talk about (won't even say the name)


 
subman
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Flash ArtistExclusive iStockphoto VideographerThis member has lost their last cage match. Consider this the black eye the bully gave you after school by the bike racks.Member has had a File Of The Week.Member has won a contest
Posted Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:51AM
It's difficult to reply to all the questions, so I'll just reply the following way:
First I would like to break up Editorial into two segments documentary and illustrative editorial.

1)    Documentary editorial are real-life, un-manipulated moments that tell a story. (Sport, Red Carpet, Current Affairs, Car shows, Festivals etc.).

2)    Illustrative editorial images are creative or conceptual visual representations or interpretations of current events, topics, or themes. (Studio shots of products, Technology devices, people using devices etc.)

Documentary editorial
It seems like there is a misunderstanding regarding Sport, Red Carpet etc. where accreditation is needed. We do accept imagery of these events when a contributor can get the necessary consent from the relevant person(s).

We have documentary imagery accepted in the collection from our members where consent forms helped them to get their images accepted. We have identified the need to address this and will supply some guidelines how to approach and get all the necessary information in obtaining accreditation. We will not supply credentials, so it's up to you to comply with the guidelines set out by the Sport event, Red carpet event, Festival etc.

The Edstock content we have on IStock, all has the necessary accreditation for whichever subject matter is in the imagery. The standards are not different, all content from Edstock and every single other Editorial contributor is treated the same according to the manual. We have some contributors that have supplied excellent imagery with the proper accreditation/consent.

We will come up with some sort of article/forum post explaining or a simple how to approach in obtaining accreditation/consent will really help all contributors in supplying that subject matter.

The Acceptance turn around time is very fast now, so we can supply imagery that is current and newsworthy. That said, our buyers might be more orientated towards the second part of editorial, Illustrative editorial.

-----------

Illustrative editorial
Editorial is doing great in this area. We have a great collection of imagery. We currently have the same strict restrictions on editing for this type of editorial (i.e. not doing things like swapping screens on devices, posing with models, cloning out dust spots, adding reflections, adding clipping paths for screens, etc.).

We are looking at how we can better define and relax these rules to make it easier for members to get their files accepted within our guidelines.

-----------

Personally, its really great to see the content coming in, it's great to see imagery that gets approved within an hour or two from when the moment happens. We can only go higher from here. Keep an eye on the editorial forums and also feel free to contact me regarding any questions towards editorial.

I think the important part from here onwards is to get the information out, either through the manual, briefs or even sticky examples in the forums as a crucial part in helping contributors getting accustomed to the way we approach editorial.

Whenever I go out and shoot editorial I keep this in mind:
Are you invading someone’s privacy, personal space, private property, a minor’s personal space, a right to commercial photography or someone’s right to copyright?

If the answer is even slightly yes, then it’s always safer to acquire the relevant consent in order to make sure you are within your rights to take images for editorial.

Consent does not mean a model release or a property release, verbal consent is appropriate but we need to know that you talked to someone and gained permission to capture photographs for editorial purposes. The iStock consent form is a document that shows who gave you this consent. e.g. the manager of a shop or cafe or the owner of a property or the parent of a child.

Download the Editorial Property Consent form here.
Editorial Property Consent form (All languages).

(Edited on 2013-03-14 02:54:12 by subman)
Tempura
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is an InspectorExclusiveMember has won a contestMember has had a File Of The Week.
Posted Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:12AM
Thanks subman helpful post.
Personally I get much better images when I make that litle extra step and ask for consent. Results are always much more rewardign. Here is an example where did the effort to get a persmision and what could have been a quick grab shot  turned into a good oportuntiy to document how shadow puppets are hand made. http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-21174208-yusoff-shadow-poppet-maker.php?st=eedce6a
wagnerm25
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorMember has had a submission accepted to the Designer Spotlight
Posted Thu Mar 14, 2013 1:14PM
Subman, your explanation of "Illustrative editorial" has nothing to do with an eventual rise of "editorial for illustrators", right? I'm asking because english is not my mother tongue, so i have some understanding problems.
subman
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Flash ArtistExclusive iStockphoto VideographerThis member has lost their last cage match. Consider this the black eye the bully gave you after school by the bike racks.Member has had a File Of The Week.Member has won a contest
Posted Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:50AM
Posted By wagnerm25:
Subman, your explanation of "Illustrative editorial" has nothing to do with an eventual rise of "editorial for illustrators", right? I'm asking because english is not my mother tongue, so i have some understanding problems.



By Illustrative I was referring to "setup" editorial shots, products in studio, concepts that contains copyrighted material, devices and content that we currently accept.


Editorial for illustrators as you mean is still the same policy, we do not accept that at the moment. That does not mean that the standards won't evolve over time.

(Edited on 2013-03-15 03:08:28 by subman)
argiope
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:09PM
I have only sent in one editorial image which was rejected for dust spots. Subman says here that we aren't allowed to clone these out yet I got a messsage from the inspector that once this was taken care of I could resubmit it. If I did take care of it I would have to clone them out but this isn't allowed. I wonder if all our minders are on the same wavelength.
Lobo
Mask of the Diablo Azul - Member has won between 1 and 3 Steel Cage matchesThis user has the power to wield the BanHammer, a weapon forged in the fires of hell for that get-off-my-planet quality you can't get anywhere else. You betta reckonize.Forum Moderator
Posted Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:50PM

Posted By argiope:
I have only sent in one editorial image which was rejected for dust spots. Subman says here that we aren't allowed to clone these out yet I got a messsage from the inspector that once this was taken care of I could resubmit it. If I did take care of it I would have to clone them out but this isn't allowed. I wonder if all our minders are on the same wavelength.

I think it's important you contact Scout about this, or maybe even send a sitemail to Subman with the file number of the image in question.
slobo
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Audio Artist
Posted Fri Mar 15, 2013 8:25PM
Posted By argiope:
I have only sent in one editorial image which was rejected for dust spots. Subman says here that we aren't allowed to clone these out yet I got a messsage from the inspector that once this was taken care of I could resubmit it. If I did take care of it I would have to clone them out but this isn't allowed. I wonder if all our minders are on the same wavelength.

Where did you read that? My understanding is that we can do minor adjustments (artifacts=dust spots removal, crop, tilt, etc) for as long as you do not alter the main subject of the image. You are even allowed to isolate the object from the background.
graemenicholson
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:01AM

'Moderate level and color correction are fine. Black and white conversion is fine. Basically, anything that you could have done in a dark room is acceptable, so long as it isn't pushed to the point where it begins to change facts about the image.'


Scource:  Editorial Photography - Updated Contributor Training Manual
argiope
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:54AM

Illustrative editorial
Editorial is doing great in this area. We have a great collection of imagery. We currently have the same strict restrictions on editing for this type of editorial (i.e. not doing things like swapping screens on devices, posing with models, cloning out dust spots, adding reflections, adding clipping paths for screens, etc.).

We are looking at how we can better define and relax these rules to make it easier for members to get their files accepted within our guidelines.


This is published by Subman further up the page of this thread
This thread has been locked.
First pagePrevious pageof 7Next page
Displaying 101 to 120 of 122 matches.
Not a member?Join
Cart (0)