Why my work will never sell
For a number of times, I tried selling some of my work as stock images, and each time my work gets rejected. Their reasons are these: poor lighting, unacceptable borders, no commercial value, not in focus or focus is not where they want it to be, autotracing (I have yet to figure out what that means), simple filters (I don't know what this means either) or artificial framing, poor or uneven lighting or shadows, white balance may be incorrect, noise, film grain, over-sharpening, or artifacts at full size. I should be thankful. Why? Because I know that my work is not like everybody else. This is why my work will never sell as stock images. They are quite simply not to be considered as stock.
Comments
mycymuff is the magic word, almost sounds relevant.
it's too bad that people distinguish art and commercial work... why can't it be both? i'm not sure if you've been to my RedBubble gallery but i have stuff there that so eclectic that one would think they're created by different artists... but that's my point... for instance, why can't a photographer do both scapes and film noirs? we're complex people so we ought to appreciate and create major and minor themes...
yea there's a lot of dylan songs that sounds better covered, e.g. all along the watchtower, like a rolling stone (hendrix), down on the easy chair (byrds), knockin on heaven's door (clapton), It's All Over Now, Baby Blue(Van Morrison), Blowin' in the Wind(Peter, Paul, and Mary), etc.
take care, mate :-)