Ed Rooney Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 Would you shake a red cape in front of the CQ people by submitting this image? I put it on FAA to allow people to see it and use the 100% enlarger for details. http://fineartamerica.com/featured/green-bean-salad-ed-rooney.html And what do you think of extremely shallow DoF on food shots in general? I'm not mad about it, and frankly here I was testing the Scene Selection Hand-held Twilight mode on my RX10. (Yes, 'wit' is Dutch for 'with'. Or is that Norwegian, Indonesian or Vietnamese?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert M Estall Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 but did you enjoy your lunch Ed? Jane and I had Oysters bread and cold beer on the beach in Norfolk earlier to-day. No plates glasses nor DoF involved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 Would you shake a red cape in front of the CQ people by submitting this image? I put it on FAA to allow people to see it and use the 100% enlarger for details. http://fineartamerica.com/featured/green-bean-salad-ed-rooney.html And what do you think of extremely shallow DoF on food shots in general? I'm not mad about it, and frankly here I was testing the Scene Selection Hand-held Twilight mode on my RX10. (Yes, 'wit' is Dutch for 'with'. Or is that Norwegian, Indonesian or Vietnamese?) I won't comment, Ed, since I seldom check my salads at 100% (either do most photo buyers, I imagine). Also, there are much more expert pixel-peepers than I on the forum. I'm always jittery about submitting shallow DOF shots in general. However, I nervously uploaded one (not a food shot) on Tuesday, and it just passed QC, so I guess I did something right for a change. Hope you packed this delicious-looking salad to go, just in case you need something to munch on in the... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted July 24, 2014 Author Share Posted July 24, 2014 John, I did enjoy eating half of those beans after clicking in Parm, and I'll have the other half tonight with some red wine, boiled-then-lightly-fried potatoes, spinach and a very small piece of salmon. Beer, bread and oysters, Robert? What could be better? My favorite oysters were consumed in Sydney, down under. Sydney Rock oysters. Also had great oysters in Seattle and Northern France. The OP is not gonna like all this food talk. Oh, I'm the OP. Never mind. I was talking to a Dutch family of 6 today on The Street. It turned out they are all foodies, even the little ones. The Dutch are smart people. The Nazis taught them to be smart, and now it's in their DNA. So I told them the truth: "If you know the food in Italy, this ain't it. Most of these restaurants are just tourist traps, over-priced, red-sauce places. Only Angelo's is good, if also a red-sauce place . . . and it will cost you. Think of NYC as another area of Italian cuisine." I sent them to an Italian place run by people from Italy in Nolita, just four blocks away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Ed, said I wouldn't comment, but there does seem to be some softness and noise in your French beans. I'd try downsizing to 24 MB for starters to see what kind of difference it makes. Again, more credible opinions will no doubt follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 I already downsized, John. And yes you see softness -- some of the beans are sharp and others are totally out of focus, which I mentioned: shallow DoF. But it's a mute point since I find myself again in the sin bin. I was out for one day, got 30 images accepted, then I submitted 37 more, then . . . nothing. So I assume I'm back in my cell. Most discouraging. I had almost 7 years without a failed image and now I'm unable to submit anything. The 37 images were all safe, conservative, nothing even borderline. So you know I'm not going to upload the green beans. I'm at a loss as to what to do. I see nothing wrong, nothing that would fail an image, with any of the 37. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 I already downsized, John. And yes you see softness -- some of the beans are sharp and others are totally out of focus, which I mentioned: shallow DoF. But it's a mute point since I find myself again in the sin bin. I was out for one day, got 30 images accepted, then I submitted 37 more, then . . . nothing. So I assume I'm back in my cell. Most discouraging. I had almost 7 years without a failed image and now I'm unable to submit anything. The 37 images were all safe, conservative, nothing even borderline. So you know I'm not going to upload the green beans. I'm at a loss as to what to do. I see nothing wrong, nothing that would fail an image, with any of the 37. Sorry to hear that, Ed. Hopefully it's just a delay in the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 Nah, it's been 9 days. Not counting weekends, my normal turnaround is 24 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Nah, it's been 9 days. Not counting weekends, my normal turnaround is 24 hours. Doesn't sound good. The offending image is never the one you think it is IME. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Jordan Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Ed, On the little screen I am working on I cannot upsize your delicious looking beans sufficiently to comment on the DOF, although from what I can see, it does look OK. Insufficient DOF is my most common reason for deciding against uploading food pictures, which are such a popular subject with us retired folks. Sometimes I get camera shake, but that is easy to deal with being a definite no no, whereas DOF is a much more subjective matter. Some people seem to adopt very shallow DOF as a style choice, but personally I do not care for it. I have only ever had one failure of a food picture, It was a fish pie with a glazed pastry crust. It was failed for being soft, but that stuff on top of the pie crust made it look soft, that is how it was. My best selling food picture was an earthenware plate full of garlic prawns with a nice crusty roll beside, Shot at an outdoor table in blazing mid-day sunshine in the Canary Islands. Easy to get that one right. Hope you are not in the sin bin, I have had up to 12 days to wait before passing so it might get through soon, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Jordan Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Ed, Now I have had another look at the image, I had previously forgotten about the FAA tool for viewing parts of the image at 100%. As I see it, the center of the image is sharp as is the edge nearest the camera. Towards the rear of the plate it gets softer. I think this is a good rendering, if it were mine I would upload it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 I have a number of shallow DOF images that I'm reluctant to upload. Here's an example: http://2-john-mitchell.artistwebsites.com/featured/wooden-ink-stamps-john-mitchell.html Although this shot looks fine to me, I'm concerned about the fact that the wooden stamps are all at different angles to each other and not in the same plane, making the focus uneven. I'm actually thinking of going back to the location and trying to retake this picture using a tripod and smaller aperture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Jordan Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 John, The focus looks consistent enough all over to me, but it is your decision, and as I always tell people "if in doubt - leave it out" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Bell Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Nah, it's been 9 days. Not counting weekends, my normal turnaround is 24 hours. Been 8 days for me to date. At least you will have company you know, even if you don't like him. Allan Bye the way with regard to your OP I think the image is fine. But what do I know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 Thanks for the Dutch lesson, Philippe. But I was joking. It was a simple typo. We can't edit and correct words in the title box. While we're on the subject, are Dutch and Flemish the same language? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jools Elliott Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Ed, I wouldn't take a chance on that photo. using the viewer and moving around the middle part of the image it doesn't appear crisp. I would er on the side of caution with that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betty LaRue Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 I have submitted many food shots with only the front edge sharp, with no problems. Here is one. You can search: Betty LaRue,pie and pick out some more with shallow DOF. OOPS, this link gives all of the pies. OK, look at the whole cherry pie with a piece missing, showing the cherries. http://www.alamy.com/search/Imageresults.aspx?CreativeOn=1&adv=1&ag=0&all=1&creative=&et=0x000000000000000000000&vp=0&loc=0&qt=B4PC1G&qn=&lic=6&lic=1&archive=1&dtfr=&dtto=&hc=&selectdate=&size=0xFF&aqt=&epqt=&oqt=&nqt=>ype=0#BHM=foo%3Dbar%26st%3D0%26pn%3D1%26ps%3D60%26sortby%3D2%26qt%3DBetty%2520LaRue%252cpie%26qt_raw%3DBetty%2520LaRue%252cpie%26qn%3D%26lic%3D3%26mr%3D0%26pr%3D0%26aoa%3D1%26creative%3D%26videos%3D%26nu%3D%26ccc%3D%26bespoke%3D%26apalib%3D%26ag%3D0%26hc%3D0%26et%3D0x000000000000000000000%26vp%3D0%26loc%3D0%26ot%3D0%26imgt%3D0%26dtfr%3D%26dtto%3D%26size%3D0xFF%26archive%3D1%26name%3D%26groupid%3D%26pseudoid%3D%26userid%3D%26id%3D%26a%3D%26xstx%3D0%26cbstore%3D1%26lightbox%3D%26resultview%3DsortbyPopular%26gname%3D%26gtype%3D%26simid%3D%26saveQry%3D%26editorial%3D%26nasty%3D%26t%3D0%26edoptin%3D%26customgeoip%3D B3NCEJ sold for $700 for packaging. Ed, I don't want to insult your camera, but is it true that these last two failures came from RX10 images? Most of my failures came from shots taken with the D7000. Or...heck, that just may have been the time frame when Alamy begin being so picky. Betty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 Ed, Now I have had another look at the image, I had previously forgotten about the FAA tool for viewing parts of the image at 100%. As I see it, the center of the image is sharp as is the edge nearest the camera. Towards the rear of the plate it gets softer. I think this is a good rendering, if it were mine I would upload it. Allan, we're cell mates? Are you a chess or checkers man? Peter, thanks for the Go Signal, but in the present climate of QC rejection, where I reside, I do not have the brass to submit those beans . . . which I remember as French beans or Kenya beans from my time in the UK. American string beans are big, tough and fibrous, and for me inedible. I thought you'd be interested in the fact that I used the Scene Selection Hand-held Twilight mode on my RX10. For those of you who own the RX10, this is an alternate way of shooting in low light without a tripod or upping the ISO. Have you tried this setting? Edo. on a nice summer's day in Little Italy in New York City Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Bell Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 I have submitted many food shots with only the front edge sharp, with no problems. Here is one. You can search: Betty LaRue,pie and pick out some more with shallow DOF. OOPS, this link gives all of the pies. OK, look at the whole cherry pie with a piece missing, showing the cherries. http://www.alamy.com/search/Imageresults.aspx?CreativeOn=1&adv=1&ag=0&all=1&creative=&et=0x000000000000000000000&vp=0&loc=0&qt=B4PC1G&qn=&lic=6&lic=1&archive=1&dtfr=&dtto=&hc=&selectdate=&size=0xFF&aqt=&epqt=&oqt=&nqt=>ype=0#BHM=foo%3Dbar%26st%3D0%26pn%3D1%26ps%3D60%26sortby%3D2%26qt%3DBetty%2520LaRue%252cpie%26qt_raw%3DBetty%2520LaRue%252cpie%26qn%3D%26lic%3D3%26mr%3D0%26pr%3D0%26aoa%3D1%26creative%3D%26videos%3D%26nu%3D%26ccc%3D%26bespoke%3D%26apalib%3D%26ag%3D0%26hc%3D0%26et%3D0x000000000000000000000%26vp%3D0%26loc%3D0%26ot%3D0%26imgt%3D0%26dtfr%3D%26dtto%3D%26size%3D0xFF%26archive%3D1%26name%3D%26groupid%3D%26pseudoid%3D%26userid%3D%26id%3D%26a%3D%26xstx%3D0%26cbstore%3D1%26lightbox%3D%26resultview%3DsortbyPopular%26gname%3D%26gtype%3D%26simid%3D%26saveQry%3D%26editorial%3D%26nasty%3D%26t%3D0%26edoptin%3D%26customgeoip%3D B3NCEJ sold for $700 for packaging. Ed, I don't want to insult your camera, but is it true that these last two failures came from RX10 images? Most of my failures came from shots taken with the D7000. Or...heck, that just may have been the time frame when Alamy begin being so picky. Betty YUM! YUM! I fancy one of your pies Betty. Even the pictures look good enough to eat. Allan PS: Can you send one of your pies with file enclosed so Ed and I can hack our way out of clink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Bell Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Allan, we're cell mates? Are you a chess or checkers man? Looks like we're in together, and I'd be happy to be your cell mate, unless there is a reprieve for either or both of us. Take your pick chess or checkers. I believe your checkers is the same as our draughts. Silly name, I always think of draughts as unwanted air currents. Allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 Yum Yum Yum! Those pies look as if they taste sooo good, the most important thing with food images. Cakes and pies lend themselves to the shallow DoF style, which was all the rage in 1990s food magazines. Jools, I agree. I am not going to submit that image . . . and when we close this post, I will delete it from FAA. I use FAA as a display site, since I don't have a Website of my own, nor do I use sites like Flicker. Betty, I feel the verdict is not yet in on the RX10. Is it the reason for me taking up semi-permeant residence in the sin bin? There are too many other factors to come to that conclusion; understand that I've had hundreds of images accepted by QC that were taken with the RX10 . . . so has Peter J and Jeff G. And DavidK speak highly of the camera. It's true that the camera is not like the Nikons we use. And it takes getting used to and an understanding of how it works in different situations. Frankly, I don't believe the RX10 is the reason for my QC problems . . . but it could be. ??? Maybe for those of you who are interested, you might want to take another look at this image of the Freedom Tower: http://fineartamerica.com/profiles/ed-rooney.html why did it fail? Using the 100% viewer on FAA, you will see little somethings, interruptions on the bright edges. Those things are actual somethings on the building itself, not aberrations, but I think QC may have seen them as something picked up in my PP. A few people in the forum suggested 'haze.' It was a clear day with a deep blue sky, as you can see -- no haze whatsoever. Of course I should move on. One can't win an argument with QC any more than one can win an argument with the police. Edo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 John, The focus looks consistent enough all over to me, but it is your decision, and as I always tell people "if in doubt - leave it out" Thanks for your comments, Peter. As mentioned, the image looks fine to me, and I wouldn't hesitate to send it somewhere else. However, Alamy says it wants a "clear centre of focus" with shallow DoF shots, and I'm not sure how this can be achieved with a shot like this. I'm also more much more paranoid than I used to be. Anyway, I'm going to try rephotographing the ink stamps, fooling around with different focus points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Yum Yum Yum! Those pies look as if they taste sooo good, the most important thing with food images. Cakes and pies lend themselves to the shallow DoF style, which was all the rage in 1990s food magazines. Jools, I agree. I am not going to submit that image . . . and when we close this post, I will delete it from FAA. I use FAA as a display site, since I don't have a Website of my own, nor do I use sites like Flicker. Betty, I feel the verdict is not yet in on the RX10. Is it the reason for me taking up semi-permeant residence in the sin bin? There are too many other factors to come to that conclusion; understand that I've had hundreds of images accepted by QC that were taken with the RX10 . . . so has Peter J and Jeff G. And DavidK speak highly of the camera. It's true that the camera is not like the Nikons we use. And it takes getting used to and an understanding of how it works in different situations. Frankly, I don't believe the RX10 is the reason for my QC problems . . . but it could be. ??? Maybe for those of you who are interested, you might want to take another look at this image of the Freedom Tower: http://fineartamerica.com/featured/freedom-tower-ed-rooney.html Again, why did it fail? Using the 100% viewer on FAA, you will see little somethings, interruptions on the bright edges. Those things are actual somethings on the building itself, not aberrations, but I think QC may have seen them as something picked up in my PP. A few people in the forum suggested 'haze.' It was a clear day with a deep blue sky, as you can see -- no haze whatsoever. Of course I should move on. One can't win an argument with QC any more than one can win an argument with the police. Edo Ed, I had some initial QC problems when I switched to the NEX system. However, it was mostly a matter of my taking a long while to get used to the cameras, especially the focus systems, which are highly accurate (perhaps too accurate) but have a tendency to do unexpected things such as back focus. In my case, I had been using the same camera, a somewhat clunky but very predictable Sony DSLR, for years, and I wasn't prepared for all the newfangled technology of the NEXs. Perhaps you are experiencing something similar with the RX10, which by all reports is a very capable machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 "and I wasn't used to all the newfangled technology of the NEXs. Perhaps you are experiencing something similar with the RX10, which by all reports is a very capable machine." -- John M Absolutely, John. In film days, I was in charge; I told the camera what to do. With digitals, especially the NEXs and the Sony RX10, we are dealing with menus of 100 items . . . and I often feel as if the camera is in charge. I looked at the image you posted above on FAA. It's much the same problem of a mix of sharp and soft as my green beans, although yours is less confusing as to what is what. Should you submit it to Alamy? Too risky, I think (we think) . . . although yours makes perfect sense to me as to what is going on. This is a very negative place we find ourselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 "and I wasn't used to all the newfangled technology of the NEXs. Perhaps you are experiencing something similar with the RX10, which by all reports is a very capable machine." -- John M Absolutely, John. In film days, I was in charge; I told the camera what to do. With digitals, especially the NEXs and the Sony RX10, we are dealing with menus of 100 items . . . and I often feel as if the camera is in charge. I looked at the image you posted above on FAA. It's much the same problem of a mix of sharp and soft as my green beans, although yours is less confusing as to what is what. Should you submit it to Alamy? Too risky, I think (we think) . . . although yours makes perfect sense to me as to what is going on. This is a very negative place we find ourselves. Yes, the two images have similar characteristics. I'd certainly call it a confusing place we're in. Plus it's not worth the risk of being put out of commission for 30+ days in order to find out if images like these are acceptable. It's far simpler and less aggravating just to send them elsewhere. Too bad, but so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.