solway moss Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Hello all - this is my first post. I am editing insect pictures in LR 5 with substantial cropping. Original file size was 5184 x 3456 on Canon 1 DX, now 1964 x 2496 - 17.9MP as crop in Loupe info in RAW before exporting. Will this be too small for Alamy? I can increase size when exporting in LR but is this wise? I don't have Photoshop and not familiar with interpolation. Advice much appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niels Quist Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 I am not familiar with LR 5 - and instead of trying to explain the way Alamy calculates size - I'll give you a link to an Alamy sizechecker to use on the final jpg file.. http://www.braeside.plus.com/photography/alamy/alamy.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Gaffen Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 As I understand it, the minimum file size has to be 24MP. I am sure that your crop down to 1964 x 2496, 17.9MP will be too small for Alamy QC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 It is too small and will need resizing to at least 24MP. In LR, exporting at 5000px on the long side will do as long as the aspect ratio is preserved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCat Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 3600 on long side will do it. You can specify that in the Lightroom export and I have had no problems with images I have upsized in that manner. Not terribly knowledgable though so maybe there is a better way. Hard to find one that is easier. Paulette Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSnapper Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 cropping down that much and then interpolating up to 5000px is probably unwise... export from LR with the longest edge set at 3400/3500 will give you a file big enough to meet the Alamy minimum km Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabbro Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 It is too small and will need resizing to at least 24MP. In LR, exporting at 5000px on the long side will do as long as the aspect ratio is preserved. Upsize from 2496 to 5000 will no doubt introduce SoLD. It's not going to pass QC. Don't do it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiskerke Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 What would your teacher say? What would your client say? wim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solway moss Posted February 4, 2014 Author Share Posted February 4, 2014 Most grateful, everyone. Niels I have bookmarked link and will enrol,, thanks. Alas, Wim, I have neither teacher nor client! As I understand it now, file size dimensions are the key here. Longest edge should be at least 3500 and width in proportion. Is that right? The four images I have submitted so far are in the 4000 X 3000 range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Travelshots Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Can you not find bigger insects .......LOL. There are some pretty big ones here in the Caribbean...BDW4E5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 My mistake, I'm thinking back to the days of the 48MB minimum. 3600 is right. It's about 5000/ root 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solway moss Posted February 4, 2014 Author Share Posted February 4, 2014 Can you not find bigger insects .......LOL. There are some pretty big ones here in the Caribbean...BDW4E5 If they didn't have wings, I could get a lot closer! My mistake, I'm thinking back to the days of the 48MB minimum. 3600 is right. It's about 5000/ root 2. No idea waht 5000/root 2 means, but 3600 is all I need to know - thank you v much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jill Morgan Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Can you not find bigger insects .......LOL. There are some pretty big ones here in the Caribbean...BDW4E5 If they didn't have wings, I could get a lot closer! My mistake, I'm thinking back to the days of the 48MB minimum. 3600 is right. It's about 5000/ root 2. No idea waht 5000/root 2 means, but 3600 is all I need to know - thank you v much The 3600 rule is good, but if your long side is 3600, then the minimum for your short side is 2400. But its not a fast rule. As long as the pic is 24MB, then the sides can be any dimension. This pic of mine is 3325 x 3081 and is 29MB, so I actually could have cropped it a bit tighter if I had wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Can you not find bigger insects .......LOL. There are some pretty big ones here in the Caribbean...BDW4E5 If they didn't have wings, I could get a lot closer! My mistake, I'm thinking back to the days of the 48MB minimum. 3600 is right. It's about 5000/ root 2. No idea waht 5000/root 2 means, but 3600 is all I need to know - thank you v much When the size requirement halved, the long dimension required was reduced by the square root of 2 which is about 1.414. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
York Photographer Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 I don't crop anything, upload as is and let the buyer decide. If you crop to a strange aspect ratio, your limiting how it can be used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 I think he is cropping his insects so they show better as thumbnails. But I agree, I usually lock the AR if cropping. There must be a reason why 3:2 has stuck for so long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solway moss Posted February 4, 2014 Author Share Posted February 4, 2014 Thank you for example Jill - and all - though he is a she! Cropping has not been an issue for me until I started photographing insects - and there are some you just can't get too close to or they fly off - and unless you crop, you can't see the detail - which is what I want to show. According to Alamy's How to prepare section, a 6MP camera can produce a 17 MB image. So, theoretically, my 18MP sensor - image size 5184x3456, should produce a 51 MB image - but none of my RAW files are that big. They are all in the 23-30MB range whether I'm using a wide angle or 300 mm lens. Where have I gone wrong with the maths? Obviously, the larger your image size to start with, the more you can crop. Alamy says your cropped image should be at least 17MB uncompressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jill Morgan Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Thank you for example Jill - and all - though he is a she! Cropping has not been an issue for me until I started photographing insects - and there are some you just can't get too close to or they fly off - and unless you crop, you can't see the detail - which is what I want to show. According to Alamy's How to prepare section, a 6MP camera can produce a 17 MB image. So, theoretically, my 18MP sensor - image size 5184x3456, should produce a 51 MB image - but none of my RAW files are that big. They are all in the 23-30MB range whether I'm using a wide angle or 300 mm lens. Where have I gone wrong with the maths? Obviously, the larger your image size to start with, the more you can crop. Alamy says your cropped image should be at least 17MB uncompressed. You are looking at the size when you hover the mouse over the image in a folder. That's a compressed size. Mine show the same when hovered over, but are 51MB when opened in Photoshop. I don't know where in Lightroom you see your file size as I don't us it. I do have it, so maybe I'll take a peek. I find it more confusing that Photoshop. Edit: okay, looked in Lightroom and couldn't see where you could easily spot the size of the photo. Dimensions, yes, but size no. Perhaps a Lightroom user could fill you in. Jill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panthera tigris Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 I am an "insect photographer" with a preference for tight crops as well, life is now a bit easier that you can get 24 MP cropped sensor bodies. I often wondered why, after a lot of hard work, I was never as dynamic as many others (flickr et al) and realised it was because I was shooting for stock standards rather than "image display". Its one of the hard truths about meeting commercial standards, especially with smaller subjects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zigzagmtart Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 I do not think Lightroom shows the file size anywhere. I have not seen it anyway. Lightroom is working with your RAW and has noway to know what format you will eventually export in. And your RAW file size is not what you should go by. Just export @ 3600 on longest and you should be good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solway moss Posted February 5, 2014 Author Share Posted February 5, 2014 Thanks, Jill - I joined the Lightroom Forum this evening and have just asked that very question - I'm guessing that you multiply the MPs by 3 to get the MBs. Annoyingly, Canon give you file size in KB's so you have to work that out too, and when I go to My Pictures and look at the file sizes of the downloaded CR2 RAW files from my 18MP camera, it is giving me what you call a compressed size - half of what they would be if I opened them in Photoshop. I cannot understand how something so fundamental is this confusing. Hello Panthera tigris in Thailand. I went for the 1DX because it's so good for birds which I photograph in winter. I also have the Nikon 800e which has huge file sizes and I could have cropped with impunity, but the macro lens is not fast enough to get the bees in flight. It's very good, however,at getting meadows in focus which I also photograph. Perhaps I should look into the 24MP cropped sensor body for the bees etc. I have the 7D but that's 18MP. Your insect pics are amazing by the way, labelled like an entomologist - are you on Twitter? All best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solway moss Posted February 5, 2014 Author Share Posted February 5, 2014 I do not think Lightroom shows the file size anywhere. I have not seen it anyway. Lightroom is working with your RAW and has noway to know what format you will eventually export in. And your RAW file size is not what you should go by. Just export @ 3600 on longest and you should be good. No, Lightroom just shows MPs and file dimensions, no MB's - but would be useful when exporting into jpeg to know what the eventual MB size will be. LR forum advised trial and error for resizing up and much scrutinizing of monitor! Many thanks. I will start with 3600 and see what happens! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Apart from a very large upper limit he JPEG file size is irrelevant to Alamy. It's also not predictable as it depends on image content. My 16MP jpegs average 5MB but vary between about 2 and 8. If your images are sharp enough they should withstand resizing from 2900 to 3600. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solway moss Posted February 5, 2014 Author Share Posted February 5, 2014 Many thanks, much appreciated. Lightroom Forum has taken lack of any MB indicator on board and noted as useful feature request. Can you please explain what SoLD is? I have googled in vain. Just so I know what to look for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inchiquin Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 I cannot understand how something so fundamental is this confusing. It's not really confusing. The image size is measured in pixels and is fixed because the image content consists of pixels. The file size is measured in bytes and can be any size depending on whether it's compressed or not. It's just like a book - the number of words in the text is fixed but the book can be any size depending on the font used. Can you please explain what SoLD is? I have googled in vain. Just so I know what to look for. Soft or Lacking Definition. Common reason for failing QC. Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.