10 reasons why I think Stock photography companies are making users more stupid and hurting the photo industry

Pelican in flight at sunset

Doing tests can be fun. Doing tests to proof others stupid is no fun. Doing test to proof bad influence can be good but when it shows how really bad the influence is its not good. This is the case of a simple test I did with delivering images to a stock company. 

All the images in this article where declined for various reasons with soft or lacking definition as the favorite word to be used and chromatic aberration as the second favorite. I know what these images can do. I have seen them large as posters printed on different media. I also know they are not perfect for analists with in the photo industry and the deffinitely are not flat an with hyper focus. But they touch feelings, that I know from peoples response,  which most images in stock photography do not.

Here are 10 images that failed and with them 10 reasons why stock photography sucks and why it is teaching the users that photography has to be boring. 

Kristjan Logason is an Icelandic photographer based in Norway at the moment, where he mainly works in fine art and commercial fine art photography.Kristjan owns and runs The art of Icelandic photography.You can contact Krissby phone: +47.916.62749