Jump to content

Chris P

Verified
  • Content Count

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Chris P

  1. Thank you. Me too. It was probably a unique occasion so I'm pleased that I've managed to salvage someting after my own stupidity with the camera setting.
  2. Thank you. I can see that it doesn't look right but I can't explain the anomalies. I've just recreated the process I used for that trial image with two other images from the same shoot. Very slight exposure adjustments in LR. Exported to my archive of images processed for Alamy with format "jpeg" and quality 100%. No changes to Image Sizing except resolution changed from 72 to 240. Once again the dimensions showing in my preview pane are 3008x2000 but the resoluton has moved from 72x72 of the original to 240x240 and image size a little over 3MB in both cases according to the LR Library view of the processed images. All of the original open sizes from the shoot show in LR Library as around 2.5MB. I, too, would have expected square images but they are most definitely rectangluar with the same visible proportions as the originals. These two images have just uploaded successfully and I'll see what QC makes of them next week.
  3. I'm not sure now where I saw resolution 240x240 - possibly in the preview pane on my iMac. In Lightroom, the original JPEG was 72x72 (small setting on camera). Dimensions show as 3008 x 2000 and file size 2.53 MB. Whatever I did to it before uploading, the same preview pane for the uploaded image after passing QC showed resolution as 240x240 and the file size had increased to a little over 3 MB.
  4. Thank you all for your help. My test was successful. The (potentially) below standard jpeg passed QC. I had increased the resolution to 240x240 (which as I recall was my old standard Nikon value) ending up with a nice image of around 3.5MB whaich was enough to satisfy QC. Should anyone want to see the image its ID is WCCXNR. Chris
  5. I was using a Fujifilm X-T2 with 16-55 mm lens. ISO mostly 200, sometimes 400. They look really good in Lightroom including at 100% enlargement. Well exposed, sharp, good depth of field. 3008x2000 dimensions but only 2.52MB (the Alamy minimum is 5MB I think). I suppose all I can do is put one up for QC and see what they make of it. It was an event in Gloucester held only once a year and, this year, in lovely light. Thank you all for your comments and suggestions. Regards Chris
  6. I've inadvertently taken a series of images with the camera set at JPEGs with the resolution too low for Alamy. I can't find a way to attach an example. Does anyone know of a way to salvage them to fit Alamy's quality requirements please? They have dimensions (EXIF - Lightroom) of about 3000x2000 but come out as JPEGs of about 2-3 MB. For some time now I've abandoned the habit of taking RAWs alongsided my JPEGs so have nothing to fall back on. Regards Chris
  7. Thank you for passing these thoughts on. I've been using the D7100 for some months now. I had problems finding a lens which suited me at first (and, incidentally, concluded that VR lenses do not provide images that are clean and sharp enough at 100% for my tastes. My benchmark is a 28-70 f2.8 Nikkor on a D700). But I did eventually settle for a 24-85 f2.8 which works well with the D7100. Images are passing QC without a problem. That combination is certainly a bit lighter and a bit smaller than the D700 with a 28-70 and easier to carry about all day. Not the same as finding a CSC that will give me the quality I want but good enough for me for the time being.
  8. Thank you Martin. I'm sure you're right about needing more than a few test images. I've used Lightroom for RAW conversions for some years and haven't had any problems - other than the need to upgrade every so often to take account of a new camera (e g to LR5 recently to cope with images from the D7100). I'll check to see which CSCs LR5 handles as a RAW converter before embarking on purchase. Chris
  9. Thank you to all who have responded. If only there was a retailer where you could try a few test images from some of the recommended CSCs and examine them at home before buying. Chris
  10. I'm sure this topic has been covered extensively although I can't find many references using the search feature. However, I'm toying with the idea of changing from my tried and tested cameras for work intended for Alamy (Nikon D700 with 28-70 mm Nikkor and Nikon D7100 with 35-80 mm Nikkor) in favour of a good compact system camera such as the Fuji X Pro 1 or, perhaps, the Nikon V1. I know they are on the approved camera list but does anyone have experience of submitting images to Alamy using these cameras or something similar? For a while some years ago I used a Canon G9 which was also on the approved list but rarely achieved the standard required by QC. My photography now is very much what might be called street photography. Am I being completely unrealistic to think that a good modern CSC for this style of photography might come close to the quality I get from the D700 or D7100? Chris
  11. I've had scans of medium-format Velvia accepted in the past. I would still use film if I could allocate space for processing at home. I've kept a Bronica ETRSi, a Hasselblad Xpan and a Nikon FM3a(for infra-red film) all of which I really enjoy using. I doubt that I shall ever print in a darkroom again but will, one day, set up my Nova darkroom tent and use the film cameras again. This, though, would be for the pleasure of doing so rather than with a view to having material uploaded to Alamy.
  12. Thank you Niels. I can see it now. I'm puzzled that only one of my sales over the years shows on the list though. Can this mean that all the others were somehow found and purchased without using the search function?
  13. I wonder if it's possible to see which search terms were used to find an image that has been zoomed and/or purchased?
  14. Thank you to all who have commented. All most helpful.
  15. I realise this a bit off-topic but I wonder if anyone has experience of the 16-85 DX Nikkor on a D7100? I use the D7100 for street and stock photography and want to make sure, if I can, that the lens will be up to the standards for Alamy before investing in it.
  16. I think the D7100 is now on the approved camera list. I've been using one as a lighter and less cumbersome alternative to my D700 for street/stock photography. Initial results on Alamy have been fine. Images with an elderly 18-35 Nikkor D lens are good but I'm planning to buy a 16-85 DX lens soon which will, I think, give better results. There were some software upgrade issues of course. I had to upgrade both Lightroom and Elements in order to process the D7100 images. The files are significantly bigger than those from the D700. Slightly off-topic but upgrading Elements has meant that Bridge has been replaced by Organiser which is, in my view, not as useful. I can't, for example, rename and copy my D7100 images from Organiser in the way I can with Bridge. Sorry if this is a little late for your deliberations on camera choice.
×
×
  • 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.