Jump to content
C S Wimsey

Identifying the finish line for QC - do I risk this image?

Recommended Posts

I have an couple of images which if they had been taken with my current camera body I think they would pass QC.  Unfortunately these were some of my last photos taken on my old D200.  When the images is are smaller they are fairly sharp, but because the D200's sensor can be a bit "soft" at 100% I'm not confident they will pass QC. I'm really worried that if I submit these photos I might be placed in the sin-bin of doom which I have read about in this forum.  Is it right that I could be frozen for 28 days?

 

Do you think these images are worth risking through QC?

 

This is the link to the images on the Flickr Album 

 

https://www.flickr.com/gp/120450234@N07/1x003D/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome,

 

Just looked at the images on flickr and personally I would not submit them as they appear to be soft and would, in my opinion, fail.

 

Others with more experience may differ or offer other advice.

 

Allan

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome,

 

Just looked at the images on flickr and personally I would not submit them as they appear to be soft and would, in my opinion, fail.

 

Others with more experience may differ or offer other advice.

 

Allan

 

I agree with Allan, I wouldn't submit them either. They look soft even at a less than 100% size.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the above.

 

And looking at the EXIF, it's the fault of the lens rather than the D200 sensor, IMO.

 

Zoom lenses like that tend to be soft at the long end, especially wide open as these shots were.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also agree with the above, no way would I submit those

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I confess to struggling to see whether or not they're soft without a 100% zoom. I have some very sharp images that look like that when they are zoomed out.  Maybe you could show a 100% of the in-focus area?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even at that size they look way too soft to me.

 

It can be hard when you first join Alamy because it's easy to come here thinking "I've got loads of older pics that I'm very fond of which would make a great start to my portfolio". I had fond expectations of uploading scans of thousands of my favourite 35mm pics and got a very rude awakening when I realised that 95% of them would never pass. If some images are borderline it's worth trying them out in your early days as there's nothing like a couple of QC failures to focus your mind on what's acceptable and set you up for continued success in the future. But from what I can see, even at the small size, I think these fall well short of the border.

 

Alan

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not just that it's soft and blurred, but QC doen't like overly sharpened and processed images.

It would be perfect for Stockimo though. Pity it's not taken with a phone.

 

wim

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys.  You all confirmed my gut feelings on these pictures.  I think the issue is more the camera body than the lens because I have used the same lens at 500mm with my new camera body with far better results (which have passed QC).  Undoubtedly though a 500mm prime would be sharper.

 

I'll be picky which photos from my backlog portfolio go in, and enjoy taking many new pics :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"When the images are smaller they are fairly sharp,"

 

Why don't you try downsizing the images (un-sharpened versions, of course). Alamy's minimum file size is now 17MP (about 3000 pixels on the long side). It might just do the trick. Most editorial usages are small anyway. 

Edited by John Mitchell
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't look at the exif data but i've had plenty of images pass QC with the D200 but "pro" zooms or primes were used

I agree that I probably wouldn't have submitted these particular images

Good luck

John

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't look at the exif data but i've had plenty of images pass QC with the D200 but "pro" zooms or primes were used

I agree that I probably wouldn't have submitted these particular images

Good luck

John

 

To be fair John I'm key-wording some D200 shots myself which have also passed QC, so agree it isn't just the camera.  I moved away from the D200 mainly because of noise even at medium ISO.  Used sensibly I can't knock the D200 - and you're right about the glass :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys.  You all confirmed my gut feelings on these pictures.  I think the issue is more the camera body than the lens because I have used the same lens at 500mm with my new camera body with far better results (which have passed QC).  Undoubtedly though a 500mm prime would be sharper.

 

I'll be picky which photos from my backlog portfolio go in, and enjoy taking many new pics :-)

 

 

Usually if you think they might fail - they will do!

 

John.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Thanks guys.  You all confirmed my gut feelings on these pictures.  I think the issue is more the camera body than the lens because I have used the same lens at 500mm with my new camera body with far better results (which have passed QC).  Undoubtedly though a 500mm prime would be sharper.

 

I'll be picky which photos from my backlog portfolio go in, and enjoy taking many new pics :-)

 

 

Usually if you think they might fail - they will do!

 

John.

 

 

My approach is if I feel the need to ask about sharpness - it in't. In my heart I know I am clutching at straws because I love the image too much.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that's interesting.  Reading Jeff Greenberg's post I had another look at the goose on eggs.  at 100%.  It looked awful - but yes the grass was definitely in focus (if a tad soft maybe).  I then remembered you guys had spotted sharpening which I must have done a while ago when I first took the pic.  I took it out - and Mmmm.  Way better - maybe still a bit borderline, but hey.  Tempting.  It's a little soft because of the glass and the camera sensor being a little soft too - I'll have to have a think about that..

 

I've uploaded the amended image to the original flickr link

 

https://www.flickr.c...234@N07/1x003D/

 

It may be that Alamy isn't the right place for it (borderline), but I think I might be able to do something with it.

 

I have my sights not set on some more prime lenses,  This was taken on the sigma 150-500 zoom, at 500mm - but - cardinal sin - 2x teleconverter - so I was on 1kmm (yes I was using a tripod...).  It's that money thing...  or lack of it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would personally not upload those images they look excessively soft with the dog being the least soft of the 3. It's not worth the stress of the sin bin.

 

Regards

Craig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

Motion blur is quite acceptable but t needs to be sharp where it's expected to be- the nose and beak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really glad I asked you guys - and thanks for your honesty.  I've learned much;

 

There's a tendency to "hold onto those favourite images" even if you know in your heart they're not technically there.  Guilty m'lud.

 

Best to take more images knowing the specifications needed than to try and ram an old square peg into a round hole where you know it doesn't belong.  Time is finite - spend it wisely.

 

I'm going to enjoy taking plenty more images with an eye to their sharpness.  What a penance...  I hate photography ;-)  

 

I'm feeling a lot better now as I've now had around 50 images passed by QC in 3 batches and believe I've learned so much from that experience and by listening to you guys on here.  

 

Thank you all so much.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice shots but they are soft so do not submit them.

 

L

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

×
×
  • 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.