Ancient Bessa triumphs again!

[PaulC]

I just got this shot from the 1930s Bessa with it's f6.7 triplet accepted at BOTH Alamy and Shutterstock:



I stuck some Photoshop filters on it to liven it up a bit.

I'm almost regretting giving that folder away, now. But I've got several others that will do just as well.

[Attila]

Congrats!! I have one too I never gave to her a second chance , need to try it out.

[Nesster]

Woo Hoo! Yep, while there's been a general improvement in IQ over the years, really, the bigger advance has been to the area of competence of a given camera - within its more limited area of competence, a vintage folder can indeed be competetive with modern equipment.

Plus, then there's the question of what direct connection between sheer IQ and photographic effectiveness really is - I suspect it's different with different types of photography, and different aims.

Beautiful shot.

[bogolisk]

so beautiful!

[PaulC]

Of course, the "sensor" is a modern film (slide in this case), so the only bit of the camera really being critically tested is the lens and on a 6x9 neg you don't need many lines per mm. In any case, I've used triplets on a 5D and they are perfectly adequate.
Come to think of it, even a 1930s film would suffice ... if it were Kodachrome!

The rest of it is just technique - using a tripod, shielding the lens before opening and closing it to avoid accidental jarring, getting the exposure time roughly right and tightening the film slightly just before taking the shot to ensure it is flat.

It's still fun to sell photos on the internet from cameras that age

[cooltouch]

Well it is a quite remarkable image. I really like the effect the time of day has on it. You've got the great colors from the sunset in the sky and the glow from the artificial lighting is becoming noticeable. Very effective.

So have you used Alamy and Shutterstock before? Have they made any money for you? I've got thousands of stock photos that I'd like to do something with someday, which is why I'm asking.

[PaulC]

As of this minute, I've made $24,947.70c (less tax) at Shutterstock and a few thousand at Alamy. Shutterstock is my second biggest earning agency.

If you want to join please feel free to use my referral link (and there's dreamstime, too, if you're interested)

http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=262
http://www.dreamstime.com/register-resi554

You may be surprised by how tough their inspection process is.

[Katastrofo]

Excellent catch, Paul, love the lighting and the colors, congrats!

[poilu]

congrats! magical colors, does the agencies know it's from a 1930's Bessa?

[fish4570]

Good on you ...

[cooltouch]

[PaulC]

iStockphoto is the biggest but it is in the middle of a major crisis at the moment and seems to be determined to make it almost impossible to get a worthwhile return there any more. Equally stringent inspections and very restrictive upload limits are one problem, together with falling overall sales and their latest decision to cut commission rates from 20% to 15% on the grounds that they want to have larger profits (which has not gone down at all well).

I don't want the hassle of models, model releases, studio rentals and then having to compete with top-quality specialists, so I stuck mainly to food and travel. The competition is less intense and images don't date according to fashions. And, of course, the more you do, the better you get at it, which also helps sales. On top of which, I'm getting more and more adventurous in the kitchen (but not any thinner, sadly)

[PaulC]

[cooltouch]

Thanks for the additional info, Paul. Sounds like iStockphoto might in fact be in the middle of its death throes. Gouging the people who supply it with what it needs to stay afloat is, to me, a sure sign of this. Whenever I see this sort of activity, I assume the business will not be long for this world unless it realizes its fatal mistakes, and I'm almost always right in my assumptions when I see this behavior.

One thing about many of your stock photos that I wanted to comment on, but forgot, and sorry in advance for straying off the topic of this thread, but I'm gonna ask anyway

You composed many photos with a plain white background -- or close to white -- and I'm wondering if you use a light box for this. I've seen threads at other sites where people have built these small boxes out of cardboard (small meaning table-top size, maybe 2-foot cubes or so) where they mount exterior flashes and use a seamless white background material inside the box. The photo examples I've seen from these are remarkable in their lack of shadows and even exposure. It seems to me, after viewing many of you photos, that this would probably be ideal for many sorts of stock subjects. Is this also what you use?

[PaulC]

No, I use a light table (translucent plastic) with flash underneath it and one or two flashes with a softbox or umbrella off to the sides. Sometimes I use white card as the background but now I find that just balancing the light works best for me. White card is always a bit grey.

The stock sites have got increasingly pissy about "flat lighting" with no shadows at all so stuff needs to have some shadow detail, while avoiding overall light fall-off across the scene, which can be an issue with a single flash (and avoiding double shadows, which can be a problem with two flashes).

In a way, a light tent is just a softbox wrapped all round an object. I made one once, it was OK for small objects but mine restricted camera angles a lot. I'm not very good at "Blue Peter" handicraft stuff.

Of course, you can balance the light in a tent to get a gentle shadow, too.

If you sort my portfolio by age you will find the lighting gets progressively worse the further back you go. A lot of the early stuff was done with table lamps on exposures sometimes running into seconds. That stuff probably wouldn't be accepted today. My skill level has roughly kept pace with the rising quality standards, so that my rejection levels remain fairly constant at about 15% to 20% of submissions.

[Farside]

Cracking pic.
Is it local, or taken in Greece?

[PaulC]

It's the harbour at Rethymnon, Crete. There's nothing more than 40 years old left standing in Qatar.

I hadn't thought of fake exif but it's not really needed. After all, it did get accepted. It's OK as long as I don't start them thinking it is impossible for it to pass muster before they even look at it.

[ellepi]

Very nice colours and light

[PaulC]