Steve Bower

I didn't anticipate that the order would be different depending on where in the world it was viewed. My choice was taken by icemanphotos, which has a large portfolio of fantastic beach images. I'm impressed that our friend is able to compete😉.

Mr.Music The second shot is great, I wish I had taken it. However, I never would have uploaded the #1 and #3 image if they were mine. Surprisingly 😆, those were taken by OlegRi. My most popular "Beach" has been sold nearly 600 times and it doesn't appear until page 10. I could be wrong but it almost appears that Oleg is not playing by the same rules🤣.

oleschwander, I hate to be nit picky but the figures you quoted (i.e. "rose" 36,000 images) are actually pages not images. I did a cursory check and it appears that there are approx. 100 images on each page. If my math is correct, that is over 3.5 million rose images and his wilted rose is ranked # 1. Strangely, enough he also has an image of a water drop which has a rose colored hue that is also found on the first page (#61 ) of over 3,5 million rose images when you look up the single keyword "rose". I agree, this sounds, looks and smells a bit suspicious.

Mr.Music, I apologize! When I read that his images were ranked on the first page of the "Top Images" I thought you were dilutional. I was wrong, THEY ARE and consistently. Obviously, I didn't look up his whole portfolio but rather picked out a few very common images and used the most obvious key word. Example #1, "Mallard Duck" (his is ranked #1 out of nearly 150,000 images) and as other have pointed out, his images are average at best. Example #2 "Cow". His underexposed hardly recognizable cow was ranked # 12 out of 7948 pages or somewhere near 800,000 images. He has either

BALANCE in an image. While we alluded to certain aspects of "photographic balance" in some of the past pages we never explained exactly what it is and how to accomplish it. The following is an attempt to summarize this topic. The most obvious and easiest way to create a balanced photo is to place the subject right in the middle of the image. We see an awful lot of photographers that consistently do this, especially beginners and myself. However, you can create balance in a photo without placing the subject in the center of the image, ways that most people find much more appealing.

Trevor, Beautiful Shot! I understand personal preference, I tend toward a lighter more saturated image. I use Curves in Photoshop in order to lighten some of the darker portions of an image to give it more contrast. But again, it's personal preference. Keep up the good work, Again Beautiful image!

David, I'm not sure your current images will have a great number of sales. I would practice the things I mentioned and those things you learn on the forum and on youtube when taking future images. Keep in mind that the micro stock industry was started to provide commercial establishments and individuals a source of inexpensive images to market their products, expertise, interests and or ideas. Unless your images lend themselves to this end they won't be in great demand. You will also need a huge number of images (1,000s) before you can expect consistent income and even then unless the

David, I've got a few recommendations that might make your images more commercial and saleable. I could be wrong but these are my suggestions. The good, I think your best image is of the homeless person and his dog. The following are things I think you need to change or work on. 1. Exposure. Most if not all of your images are under exposed in my opinion. Snow should be white. Check your image histograms. 2. You crop most if not all of your images far too closely. Don't cut off elements within your image. Examples: chess shredder, bike handle, dog and glass c

Kate, You have been the only bright spot we contributors have had with Shutterstock of recent date. We wish you the best in your new job. We will miss you!

I appreciate Rudy's knowledge and comments and I'm sure others did as well. Let's not spit hairs here. The intent is to help each other, inexperienced and experienced. Lets keep this thread as free from all the normal forum bickering as we can. I think that is something we all would appreciate.

Let's hope these get some attention. I think the thread may a have died though. I've already proven I'm not very good at this but my preference is in the order you have place them, 1,2,3. While the closeups are good, I like the rule of thirds placement of the Ram in the first photo.

Tim, While it was not my intent to make this a critique thread, it might be a good opportunity to start the discussion on lighting. I'm not a studio photographer but like Rudy, I think your lighting is a bit flat. I assume you are using a single overhead light on the majority of these last images, is that correct? While I understand funds are limited, two lights would substantially improve your lighting options. At the very least I would move your one light to the side in order to create more shadow and use a reflector on the other (even white poster board) to help even out the

I'd like to think that we all had bigger dreams for our photography than the nightmare of 10 cent microstock. When a lot of us started (in the beginning), stock photography was a great opportunity for a photographer to make good money, that is no longer the case. I've chosen to continue photography (and upload) out of a love for the hobby and the challenge to make my next image better than the last. I have limited knowledge of the subject but take satisfaction in passing on what I do know to those that have a real desire to learn. Anything that will help those of us that want to impro

I hate to be redundant but "Anything can sell", even flowers. The attached image has been on Shutterstock less than three years and has sold nearly 200 times and made me well over $150.00. I have other flower images that have been here much longer that have done even better. As I recall, the keyword "flower" is one of the most often used keywords. Someone must be looking them up and buying flower images.

I wanted to give everyone, that might be interested, a chance to participate before I "summed it up" and it's now obvious interest has waned. Can SS's BOT predict the most appealing photo? Given the limited participation, I don't think we have enough statistics to come to any concrete conclusions. In addition, SS attempts to actually rate images on a scale of visual appeal while my question attempted only to see if a group of people would consistently rate SS's BOT highest rated photo ("10") higher than images of lesser ratings ("9" or less). Believe it or not, given my specific