spacecadet Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 Unfortunately they're still not 100% crops so can't be viewed as QC view them. Even so, couldn't you have covered them with DoF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted June 10, 2013 Author Share Posted June 10, 2013 Unfortunately they're still not 100% crops so can't be viewed as QC view them. Even so, couldn't you have covered them with DoF? Yes, if I had had a tripod handy. Again, my concern is not that the stairs are not in 100% focus, but rather that QC might think that they were meant to be the centre of focus rather than the arch. In my caption, I clearly state that this is a photo of the archway, but captions apparently don't get read during the QC process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnB Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 Don't necessarily want to be over pessimistic - but I seem to recall that Alamy has said in the past that if it looks sharp in the thumbnail then it should be sharp at 100%. So deliberately oof areas should be really oof. Might err on the side of caution. Nick Yes, that was my primary concern. However, anyone interested in this image would be leasing it for the piece of clothing, not for the blurry background greenery. I included the plants because I thought they complemented the floral design on the huipil (blouse), but this is really a "content" image more than a "design' image. I'd be surprised if Alamy had a problem with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.