Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone!  I am a newbie here!

My question involves photographs that are post-processed for artistic effect.  Oftentimes these get rejected because of focus, noise, or artifacts, when these things can actually be part of the artistic effects.  Is there a different category for this type of thing, or is it just something that Shutterstock does not accept?  I am attaching an example that was rejected by Shutterstock.  It is a closeup of a bell on top of an old fire house in the ghost town called Bodie in California.

Thanks,

Dave

DP_T_D_031.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Shutterstock does not accept photography that was post-processed in a way that causes the image to have technical errors like grain, noise or artefacts. There is also no category for this.
If you manage to edit a photography in a way that it looks like a painting, you can submit it as illustration, but your example is not suitable for this. It still looks like a photo with extreme technical flaws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If after post processing if it looks like an illustration submit as an illustration, and attach the original photo (in the property release field -just the photo no release needed they will know what it's for) as the reference image. They need this as proof you own the copyright to the original photo.

If it still looks like a photo submit as such, but very clearly in the description state that it is a manipulated photo done for artistic effect. The reason for this is twofold. Firstly so the reviewer understands the effects are deliberate and not technical issues, and also so the potential buyers are clear about what they are buying.

Whether the reviewer decides it is up to standard is another thing, but they will accept them if done right. I have several in my port myself. Over exposed, with added grain, desaturated etc 
Here's one example, check the description, it might help: 
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/added-grain-creative-grunge-effects-powerful-1357922738

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Linda Bestwick said:

I have several in my port myself. Over exposed, with added grain, desaturated etc 

On an unrelated (or perhaps related note) just went through your port thanks to your link and saw this picture of Mumbai from back in 1962. That's such an invaluable image, a peek into my city from way before I was born. I had to do a double take on the year because it doesn't look too different from how it looks now save a couple of the vintage cars on the left. Who took the picture if you don't mind revealing?

And yeah, I guess if 35mm slide film could get accepted, it opens a new window for all sorts of things that could get in if we play our cards right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, balajisrinivasan said:

On an unrelated (or perhaps related note) just went through your port thanks to your link and saw this picture of Mumbai from back in 1962. That's such an invaluable image, a peek into my city from way before I was born. I had to do a double take on the year because it doesn't look too different from how it looks now save a couple of the vintage cars on the left. Who took the picture if you don't mind revealing?

And yeah, I guess if 35mm slide film could get accepted, it opens a new window for all sorts of things that could get in if we play our cards right.

There's another from a different view point, did you see that one too? I love that it meant something to you :) My father took the picture, he was in the merchant navy and travelled a lot of the world. I have a lot more images he took, I uploaded some of the ones I thought may have some historical interest. 

These images are what they call 'vintage content'. Images taken between 1930 and 1990, off the top of my head. Older images they consider public domain and they wont accept. There are strict rules for vintage content, but if you get it all right, which can be a mine field and nightmare, they can accept them. 
 

Here's the other one: https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/bombay-india-circa-1962-vintage-photo-1182617248

Oh, and there's this one :) https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/bombay-india-circa-1962-vintage-photo-1182617242

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Linda Bestwick said:

If after post processing if it looks like an illustration submit as an illustration, and attach the original photo (in the property release field -just the photo no release needed they will know what it's for) as the reference image. They need this as proof you own the copyright to the original photo.

If it still looks like a photo submit as such, but very clearly in the description state that it is a manipulated photo done for artistic effect. The reason for this is twofold. Firstly so the reviewer understands the effects are deliberate and not technical issues, and also so the potential buyers are clear about what they are buying.

Whether the reviewer decides it is up to standard is another thing, but they will accept them if done right. I have several in my port myself. Over exposed, with added grain, desaturated etc 
Here's one example, check the description, it might help: 
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/added-grain-creative-grunge-effects-powerful-1357922738

 

Thanks for the information and advice!

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Linda Bestwick said:

There's another from a different view point, did you see that one too? I love that it meant something to you :) My father took the picture, he was in the merchant navy and travelled a lot of the world. I have a lot more images he took, I uploaded some of the ones I thought may have some historical interest. 

These images are what they call 'vintage content'. Images taken between 1930 and 1990, off the top of my head. Older images they consider public domain and they wont accept. There are strict rules for vintage content, but if you get it all right, which can be a mine field and nightmare, they can accept them. 
 

Here's the other one: https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/bombay-india-circa-1962-vintage-photo-1182617248

Oh, and there's this one :) https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/bombay-india-circa-1962-vintage-photo-1182617242

Fantastic images, all of them! Thanks for sharing :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...