Jump to content

DHill

Verified
  • Content Count

    239
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by DHill


  1. Gen: I was wondering how you were doing up there. I hope Cairns isn't being affected at much as Townsville!

     

    Martin: it woiuld be good to make the meet-up something of a regular event - maybe we can make sure the next one happens when you are available.

     

    Stephen: thanks for organising it - see you in the afternoon (maybe late afternoon?) of 17th.

     

    Ilya: I hope you can make it. Will be good to meet you, too!


  2. On 19/01/2019 at 05:36, Bryan said:

    I'm a peripheral dabbler with LR, so can't offer any sound advice, but I do have a problem with response times when entering keywords.

     

    Occasionally when I start to enter a commonly used string of characters the software briefly hangs up - just a second or two - and I was wondering if I was storing too much information, in particular too many keywords.  For the record I have around 22,000 images and a single catalogue. I do virtually all of my keywording in LR, so there is lots of text. Would using a second catalogue alleviate this problem, or would it mean that I could not access the keywords between catalogues?

    Switching off auto-complete will probably help, but there may be another thing happening, too. I find that if I inadvertently pause slightly between, say, the second and third characters of the word I'm entering, LR immediately hangs while it searches for all the kws that include the string I've already typed. It's just an annoying quirk of LR, I'm afraid - something they haven't rectified in a number of versions.

     

    Having said that, I'm gaining a renewed appreciation of LR's handling of key words: I'm switching to Capture One for image processing, which it does far better than LR, but the boot's on the other foot for kws - LR deals with them much better than Capture One.


  3. The D7100 should indeed make a big difference. If you're serious about photography, it'll be a good investment whether you take stock any further or not (as will any number of DSLR and mirrorless cameras of a similar generation). It's often a steep learning curve though from amateur photographer to being successful with stock - I'd suggest getting the new camera, and spending time learning to get the best from it (lenses are important, too, for image quality, though most of the time a cheap kit lens will be OK as long as you get to know its weak spots - often the widest aperture - and avoid them). And I'd also suggest taking the time to learn how stock works - knowing what sells is very important; stock can get very frustrating without this knowledge. 

     

    In short, here are just two things to remember about stock: 

    - the technical quality required is much higher than for most amateur purposes such as sharing photos on the internet and making small to medium size prints

    - pretty pictures often don't sell well (due to low demand and high levels of competition) - the key is to supply the pictures that buyers want to buy. 

     

    I wish you the best of luck! 

    • Upvote 2

  4. 23 hours ago, DDoug said:

    Yes, DHill, I've noticed that also. In this case, they were both taken from the same RAF file, the only difference being the raw converter. I didn't mean take the thread off on a tangent, only to say that X-Trans files give widely varying results depending on how they're processed.

     

    Yep, appreciate they're the same image processed with different RAW converters. There are numerous comparisons on the web with opinions on which does best with Fuji RAF files; this one is just an example: http://blog.thomasfitzgeraldphotography.com/blog/2017/1/one-fuji-x-pro-2-image-7-different-raw-converters Incidentally, the auther acknowledges that his sample image shows 'mushiness' - look for instance at the left side of the buiding in the 100% crops, and the railings. This is the kind of thing I sometimes get with the OIS zooms, and to me is unacceptable - I wouldn't send it to Alamy. If however, you find this just fine for your purposes, you'll probably be fine with the X-T2 or any of the other current-generation Fujis as your main camera. Most of the Fuji primes give much better image quality, as do the zooms much of the time. Disclaimer: I am a bit of a perfectionist when it comes to image quality :-)

    David. 


  5. Don's example looks rather similar to what I've seen a few times - I can take two shots in quick succession, one will be like the example (which, incidentally, I wouldn't submit to Alamy even with the Irident processing) and the other will be just fine. But I've only noticed this with OIS lenses, so it may well be relate to the issues I mentioned above. Other than that, I haven't had many significant problems with the 'watercolour' effect on foliage.  

    Just another of those mysteries you have to deal with when using Fujifilm! I can understand people sticking with full-frame Nikons, if they have no need for anything more compact. 


  6. David re the focusing, have you tried changing the setting so the OIS is in mode 2, ie it works when you press the shutter button rather than the mode 1 continuous setting? When I first got the camera I was finding the focus a bit hit and miss and was recommended to do this - it really made a difference to me. Also turning it off when you don't need it certainly does improve focus. I'm also trying back button focus just now, which I am liking so far.

    My 10-24 is nice and sharp at the edges at 10mm from f8, softer at the edges at f4. 

    Haven't had a problem with the colours yet, but I have not shot any portraits, only landscape and architecture and also always in good light. I'm shooting RAW, initial processing with Lightroom 6. 

     

    btw, video is also quite pleasing, as compared to my 5dII - had some 4K clips accepted in the libraries I submit to anyway :)

    Interesting about OIS Mode 2 (shooting only). I'd have thought Mode 1 (continuous) would work better, because it's already activated when you press the shutter button - presumably it saves having to wait for the moving lens elements to move into the right place. Anyway, I'll try it and see what happens. Thanks! 


  7. This is a funny one. I currently use an X-T2 alongside a Nikon D800, the idea being that the X-T2 is the nicely portable, go-anywhere stock camera, and the D800 (overkill for Alamy stock) with primes is the high-quality potential fine art camera.

     

    I have very mixed feelings about the X-T2. The portability is great (fits in a laptop bag/briefcase well), meaning I take photos in situations I wouldn't otherwise. Everything people say about this camera being a joy to use is true. However, image quality is very mixed (and I guess you're going to get lots of different opinions on this). Colours are quirky - great in good light, but often dirty-looking under cloud or in low light. Skin tones are a good example - great if the light is good, unnatural and ugly in overcast conditions or shade. Even using the x-rite colour checker doesn't compensate for this - I need to experiment further but whereas with the D800, colours just come together with the colour checker, with the X-T2, it just doesn't happen (some reds come out really off, for example).

     

    And those lenses you mention, Martin, are quirky! Or maybe I've just had bad luck with my copies. My 18-55 randomly defocuses the edges - one photo can be beautifully sharp at the edges, the next, blurry at the edges but still sharp in the middle. Fuji Australia say it's 'within parameters'. The 10-24 was only ever good at the edges from 14mm upwards, seems to have trouble focusing (lots of shots are blurry despite the focus confirmation saying otherwise) and sometimes has the same odd edge effect as the 18-55. I suspect the OIS, which both of these lenses have, so I need to experiment with having it switched off all the time. When they're good, they're very sharp edge to edge, but when they're randomly in a bad mood, images are ruined. On the other hand, I've had no problem with primes - and it's wonderful to be able to carry several of them in a small bag!

     

    Now, let the contrary opinions commence!!


  8.  

     

    Interesting. Member services told me only a few days ago that pseudos are still completely independent of each other. It would be interesting to see their response to evidence to the contrary. 

     

     

    They did? That's very odd. I can't remember how I proved it and I'd have to look back at other threads and test results, but my conclusion without any doubt was that they are not independent.

     

    I'll look into that and may post again soon, if I find anything.

     

    [Edit] This is a link to where I proved it. Post 11 in that thread shows the test results.....

     

    http://discussion.alamy.com/index.php?/topic/7237-pseudonyms-per-account-appear-to-be-connected/?hl=%2Bindependent+%2Bpseudos

     

    I'm sorry Alamy if it seems as though I am disagreeing with you again, but those tests prove to me that pseudos are connected. Anyone else can take it as they choose but I'm simply reporting results of my tests.

    [/edit]

     

    Geoff.

     

    Thanks, Geoff. I missed that as I was away on a trip at the time. I'll put it on my to-do list to have a look at what people did there and see if I can replicate it with my own images. I have had my suspicions for a number of years, because some of my little-used pseudos tended to bunch up together - and they weren't median ranked. Hmm. 


  9.  

     

    ... 

     

    I've seen recently that pseudos are linked together rather than being independent as they used to appear to be. That doesn't mean that ranking doesn't come into things at all, but it does mean that something regarding rank and image order has changed. I have a feeling (with possible evidence but nothing definite) that there might be a new way of ranking that uses an average CTR/sales of all our pseudos.

     

    Of course we only supply the images and do all the keywording, so why would we be told anything about the way the search engine works?  :rolleyes:

     

    Geoff.

     

    Interesting. Member services told me only a few days ago that pseudos are still completely independent of each other. It would be interesting to see their response to evidence to the contrary. 


  10. Haha! I hope Alamy are doing something with the BHZ results, because my pseudos appear in pretty much exact reverse order of success! My biggest selling pseudo, with the most zooms, comes almost at the end. The second most successful pseudo comes a little higher. Highest of all is the one I dump images into when I realise there are plenty of better ones of the main subject on Alamy! 

     

    I haven't checked BHZ for several months, so I'm not sure if this is a new thing or not.

     

    Perhaps an algorithm tweak, changing the weighting of, say, supertags and words in the caption compared with tags, would look like a re-rank? 

     

    David. 


  11. My suggestion: hang about on this forum, learn as much as you can not just about photography but also about the type of images that sell, look carefully at the images at Alamy of those photographers who report a good sales rate, buy a camera that has at least 1 inch type sensor as Sandro suggests (preferably larger), build a collection of images that you think may sell (not just aesthetically pleasing - for each image, you should be able to think of several ways it might be used in a publication) - and then you'll be in a position to decide whether stock is the direction you want your photography to follow and whether it's worth submitting to Alamy. 

     

    Of course there's more to it than that, but this forum can be quite informative. As for a camera, it may be surprising what you can find second hand at a good price that would do the job just fine - a small DSLR from a few years ago, or mirrorless, would do the job. 

     

    You seem a sensible person. Good luck! 

    • Upvote 1

  12.  

    So, does this mean I can't export my hierarchical keyword list from LR, import it into Bridge, and then use that to keyword in non-alphabetical order in Bridge? 

     I can't see how this would be possible as Bridge will interpret the exported set as individual keywords and they will appear in alphabetical order in different rows of the Keywords panel - the same as if you had done it in Lightroom. If you really want to have non-alphabetically ordered keywords, then you would need to do what ReeRay suggests - what you are then getting is a single Bridge keyword with the words and phrases separated by commas or semicolons. You can't do this in Lightroom and of course you lose all your hierarchy if you start creating these as non-alpabetical single keywords in Bridge. I think this would be a big waste of time for somebody with an ordered hierarchy of Lightroom keywords.

     

     

    Thanks for clarifying that, MDM. That means that non-alphabetical keywording is a non-starter for me, as it doesn't make sense to set up a new system just for images destined for Alamy. And especially when we don't know what changes Alamy will make in the future that may render any Alamy-specific solution obsolete. 

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.