Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just on that topic I have noticed that sometimes panoramics display very badly in the search results, as if they were badly out of focus. It seems to depend upon where they happen to show up in the grid and it tends to be the more extreme examples of around 3:1 or more. The threshold for the panoramics filter under orientation seems to be an aspect ratio of 2:1 and that can just be a cropped full frame provided it is over 17MB uncompressed but that filter can be used in conjunction with the file size filter to get the high resolution photomerged options.

  • Love 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blow me down if I haven't just sold a panoramic:

 

A Summer cricket match on Greys Green Rotherfield Greys, Oxforshire. Stock Photo

 

This is the cropped variety though on my X-T2 just to exclude a lot of extraneous blue sky. Probably should have left it on anyway (copyspace?).

 

Actually as I've said in the 'Images sold in February' thread, I sold 3 other similar images at the same time, all for Presentation Use, so the fact that this is a panoramic probably didn't contribute to the sale at all. I thought that if I was going to crop it I might as well make it 2:1.

Edited by Harry Harrison
  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Robert M Estall said:

photographers like panoramas, picture editors do not. best use of space on the printed page is more a priority.

But web designers do like them for web-page banners/headers. Not as lucrative as print uses though.

 

Mark 

Edited by M.Chapman
  • Love 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a number of panos on Alamy, but none has ever licensed. Had a few zooms, though. I really like making panoramas. However, it's usually easy for buyers to crop regular horizontal images for website banners. Back in film days, I used to take along a couple of those cheap disposable panorama cameras on trips with me. The results were pretty good. I even toyed with the idea of buying a real panorama camera, but they were bulky and expensive. Kinda glad I didn't bother...

 

 

Edited by John Mitchell
  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have about 400 panoramas on Alamy from which I've had 35 sales.

 

Years ago I played around with a MPP 5x4 field camera and a 6x12 roll film back, and two of the panoramas were from this (never sold any 5x4 though).  Probably borderline panoramic but it was sold as a 'panoramic' back.  That's my excuse anyway..😀

 

Only five sales of the 6x12s from the MPP, four of them from one image - Kylesku Bridge, Scotland.

 

BNX624.jpg

 

 

Edited by Vincent Lowe
  • Love 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in the days of film, I did toy with the idea of buying one of those 6x12 cameras, but they were just too expensive to justify. As a photo library we sent out originals or increasingly, quite a lot of 6x9 dupes up from 35 mm slides mostly. We did quite a few cropped to 6x12 which we thought looked pretty impressive, but I don't think we ever sold any. Was it Leica who made that little 35mm pano? Neat, but pricey

Edited by Robert M Estall
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Robert M Estall said:

Was it Leica who made that little 35mm pano? Neat, but pricey

Hasselblad Xpan, still popular, and expensive, but Hasselblad stopped supporting it years ago once they ran out of circuit boards.

 

https://www.hasselblad.com/about/history/xpan/

 

Regarding Leica, they developed a special panoramic version of their S2 just for Josef Koudelka:

 

https://leicarumors.com/2015/06/03/leica-made-a-special-one-of-a-kind-s2-digital-panoramic-camera-for-josef-koudelka.aspx/

 

Nice.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup, Hasselblad Xpan was what I was thinking of. It was quite a lot of money but nothing like as much to haul around as the 6x12s. It was a pano, but not really very wide angle. And I already had too much gear! And too many formats. If I had wanted the Xpan format, all I had to do was take a pair of scissors to a bit of 120 film from either my Fuji wide or my SW Hasselblad. Or my Pentax 67 with 45mm lens. If they could have offered something like a 30mm lens, that could have been a game-changer. But they didn't and that saved me quite a lot of money

Edited by Robert M Estall
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This one licensed for $$$ for a marketing campaign in early January 2021:

 

rocky-neck-state-park-niantic-east-lyme-

 

It's 10727 x 4773 px so I imagine it could be printed quite large. 

 

I find they sell best as fine art - I've had particular luck with an agent who sold 3 nice large ones to hospitals this past year, from 5 to 7 feet long, for hallways and waiting rooms. 

 

I think I've had maybe two others licensed here since 2009.  And a handful of others on my own or via other agencies. 

 

Interestingly, in searching for uses for DACS I've found a few of my photos - some taken long ago with my 12 MP D700 - cropped to wrap around book's covers and backs. I even found one on a Dutch book that I'd cropped into a square used as a two-page spread for cover and back. I guess paperbacks and even most hardcovers are smaller than a magazine spread. In fact, most of the book covers I've found have my image wrap around - probably because I tend to place my copy space off to one side and usually on the left side since I seem to put my rule of third axis on the right. I can only think of one book cover where I licensed a pano that wrapped around. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
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
×
×
  • 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.