Recommended Posts

You mean the Cavern Club :D

 

Any way I had a look and to be honest apart from softness at the edges which is to be expected it looked OK to me

you focussed on the neon sign which is fine.  However shooting at ƒ/3.5 is going make for a narrow depth of field which probably the real reason it got rejected I'd have probably gone for f8 or f9 to get more of the elements in focus.

 

Noise? From that image I couldn't see any major noise issues

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, David Pimborough said:

 

 

Any way I had a look and to be honest apart from softness at the edges which is to be expected it looked OK to me

you focussed on the neon sign which is fine.  However shooting at ƒ/3.5 is going make for a narrow depth of field which probably the real reason it got rejected I'd have probably gone for f8 or f9 to get more of the elements in focus.

 

Noise? From that image I couldn't see any major noise issues

 

The flickr image isn't at full size so it's not possible to be sure.

Can you repost somewhere at 100%, or at least a 100% crop of the centre of the pic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that QC would expect anything but the illuminated Cavern Club sign to be in focus, so shallow depth of field probably isn't the main culprit.

 

However, as Mark said, you need to post a 100%, unsharpened version of the image.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is at least the fourth time if I recall correctly that you have posted on the forum about failing QC for noise or softness so there is clearly a problem with technique. However, and I am sure that this has been said in your previous posts (as well as spacecadet's comment above) but it is pointless posting an image that is not available for download at full size as it is simply not possible to make an informed judgement looking at an image at anything less than full size.

 

I am guessing you are shooting JPEGs which is definitely far from ideal, particularly when working in low light as you have far less control over noise for one thing. If this is the case, then that would be the first thing to address I think. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your replies. I may have to take another look at shooting RAW. Never got the hang of processing them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, liverpix said:

Thanks for your replies. I may have to take another look at shooting RAW. Never got the hang of processing them.

 

 

Check out DxO PhotoLab (formerly DxO OpticsPro). It makes processing RAW images easy, and it does a terrific job on noise reduction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, liverpix said:

 

Sorry but as it's the main subject it does look very soft to me. Red neons can be tricky but the surrounding areas should be sharp.   Should be pin sharp for Alamy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, liverpix said:

Thanks for your replies. I may have to take another look at shooting RAW. Never got the hang of processing them.

 

 

Shooting RAW would not fix the basic depth of field problem I'm afraid.  Just shoot at f8 or f9 probably max out at f11 you'll get more of it in focus before you hit the softness caused by smaller apertures.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Mitchell said:

 

Check out DxO PhotoLab (formerly DxO OpticsPro). It makes processing RAW images easy, and it does a terrific job on noise reduction.

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, David Pimborough said:

 

Shooting RAW would not fix the basic depth of field problem I'm afraid.  Just shoot at f8 or f9 probably max out at f11 you'll get more of it in focus before you hit the softness caused by smaller apertures.

 

If I shoot at f8 or f11, that would mean slowing down my shutter speed quite a bit. Maybe as slow as 1/20 sec. I guess I could use a monopod; a tripod could get in peoples' way. Thanls for the advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, liverpix said:

If I shoot at f8 or f11, that would mean slowing down my shutter speed quite a bit. Maybe as slow as 1/20 sec. I guess I could use a monopod; a tripod could get in peoples' way. Thanls for the advice.

 

I have a number of night images on Alamy shot at f/1.8 to f/4 (RAW, 35mm lens, handheld). No problem with QC as long part of the frame is sharp and no noise.

 

This one was shot at f/2.2

 

canada-place-sails-and-cruise-terminal-d

 

 

Edited by John Mitchell
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, liverpix said:

 

4 hours ago, liverpix said:

Thanks for your replies. I may have to take another look at shooting RAW. Never got the hang of processing them.

 

 

 

Looking at the centre only is next to useless in figuring out why the image failed QC. You really need to post a full size image if you want a properly informed opinion. Dropbox is very useful for this purpose.

 

If you want to produce professional quality images suitable for stock photography in low light, then you really need to shoot raw as they will be definitely be noisy. Not only that but you are out on the limits of what is possible for handheld walkabout photography as has been pointed out in relation to depth of field and shutter speeds. 

 

It is not difficult to learn how to process raw images and gives so much more control over what you . I recommend the Adobe CC package which costs about £10 a month and gives you Lightroom and Photoshop. If you don't start shooting raw now, you will almost certainly keep on failing QC for noise if submitting low light images and you may well regret it down the line if you do eventually take to shooting raw as it is a whole other world in terms of control and potential quality.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would add that these days with modern digital DSLR's and some compacts it is sometimes better to raise the ISO then it is to use

a slow shutter speed or wider f stop.  It is also important to know how your equipment performs at specific f stops and zoom settings

if you are using a zoom.

 

I also do not shoot JPEG's, just RAW or NEF and process in LR.

 

I do have images on Alamy shot at f3.4 at 3200ISO using a NIKON D800 in NEF.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, liverpix said:

Thanks for your replies. I may have to take another look at shooting RAW. Never got the hang of processing them.

 

You said it. The image has a "plastic" look to it from the jpeg compression that just shouldn't be there. You should be able to see the pores on the bricks.

I regularly get images through QC wide open on a kit lens. RAW, as they say, makes all the difference. The simplest side-by-side test will show detail that is just thrown away in a jpeg.

The forum convinced me a few years ago. Let us convince you now.

I think that the only thing between that image and a QC pass is that it's a jpeg. One can usually pass with jpegs, and you obviously do, but only usually. You can't tell which images will let you down.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, liverpix said:

If I shoot at f8 or f11, that would mean slowing down my shutter speed quite a bit. Maybe as slow as 1/20 sec. I guess I could use a monopod; a tripod could get in peoples' way. Thanls for the advice.

 

There are ways to shoot with a tripod that would minimise a safety hazard. Stand still and spread your legs slightly. Open the legs of the tripod so they do not extend further than the distance between your feet. The tripod won't be as rigid as if you had fully spread the legs, but will be sufficient. Then to trip over the tripod someone would have to walk into you, not very likely. Also, public liability insurance isn't expensive. Then shoot at a lower iso and typically F8. Shoot again using manual focus incase autofocus wasn't accurate in poor light. Be quick, then move on. This works for me, and recently at Waddesdon Manor at night, until security asked how much longer I would be, I was pushing it. Exposures were from 1 up to 20 seconds. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My suggestion would be set your camera to record both RAW and jpegs - then you will have copies you are used to working with and RAW files to practice on.  You won't risk losing something through unfamiliar processing but will have the full RAW if it becomes necessary

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Starsphinx said:

My suggestion would be set your camera to record both RAW and jpegs - then you will have copies you are used to working with and RAW files to practice on.  You won't risk losing something through unfamiliar processing but will have the full RAW if it becomes necessary

 

When processing RAW images in LR or PS if you go wrong it can be reset back to the original file. Then you can start over.

 

Allan

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Allan Bell said:

 

When processing RAW images in LR or PS if you go wrong it can be reset back to the original file. Then you can start over.

 

Allan

 

 

It was more for someone new to RAW processing who takes photos they want to use or upload quickly - RAW processing is a learning curve - and at first, tends to take time as you learn what does what and how to correct that - and that's before you want to go back and start again.

I know when I started using it I had the camera set for both - so I could get the jpg, make the quick alterations, and it looked OK, especially if I was short of time or had no peace.  Then I would wait until I had some time without disturbances and sit down and work at the RAW.  The end results were, of course, better but they did take time.  So if someone is having issues with RAW processing I recommend shooting both - then play with the RAW at leisure once the jpg is out doing its stuff.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Starsphinx said:

It was more for someone new to RAW processing who takes photos they want to use or upload quickly - RAW processing is a learning curve - and at first, tends to take time as you learn what does what and how to correct that - and that's before you want to go back and start again.

I know when I started using it I had the camera set for both - so I could get the jpg, make the quick alterations, and it looked OK, especially if I was short of time or had no peace.  Then I would wait until I had some time without disturbances and sit down and work at the RAW.  The end results were, of course, better but they did take time.  So if someone is having issues with RAW processing I recommend shooting both - then play with the RAW at leisure once the jpg is out doing its stuff.

 

 

Can't you just produce jpg in Camera from RAW file then?  this is what i do if i want a quick copy of a RAW file to send to someone and i don't have my laptop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, meanderingemu said:

 

 

Can't you just produce jpg in Camera from RAW file then?  this is what i do if i want a quick copy of a RAW file to send to someone and i don't have my laptop

Depends on the camera I'm afraid, some cameras have a RAW converter, most don't.

Easy option is to shoot both JPEG and RAW, most cameras will do this. If you need a quick file for Live News, use the JPEG. However, if you have the time, and for all stock, use the RAW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TeeCee said:

Depends on the camera I'm afraid, some cameras have a RAW converter, most don't.

Easy option is to shoot both JPEG and RAW, most cameras will do this. If you need a quick file for Live News, use the JPEG. However, if you have the time, and for all stock, use the RAW.

ok thanks. i guess i assumed that since my entry level Fuji had it, that it was standard.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now