Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Well I have 3 photos that passed and went out in the snow on Sunday up to the ski jumps to try for the fourth and got some potentially great shots, deleted the damn lot by accident when I got home. Talk about amateur...... !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Straightforward images are the thing for the initial sub. Stopped down, fastish shutter speed, normal focal length, low ISO, that sort of thing. You can push the boundaries later. It's easy enough to see if an image is pin sharp at 100% (or at least it used to be- haha).

Link to post
Share on other sites

You really do need to re-read MDM's post--you said "barrage of ridiculous questions" . . . MDM said "barrage of questions" . . . see the difference?

 

MDM was actually supporting you, and offering a mild rebuke to the original post you (rightly) took exception to. LIfe's tapestry is rich enough without having to be distorted to prove a point, no?

 

dd

 

 

 

Thanks DD for pointing that out. I try to avoid insulting people here and on the internet in general. It's all too easy to be misinterpeted but being misquoted is something else again. Now that would get the adrenalin flowing. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Accepted, my mistake.  I suppose the barrage of questions made my post feel ridiculous.  3rd attempt at passing QC under way...  Rapidly approaching the conclusion that my EF-S 55-250 is just too soft at the long end without 'help' in post-processing.  I'll get there.

You asked 7 questions in one post. That is a barrage indeed by my estimation but no insult intended. And it could take some considerable time to (re-)answer all of those questions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Goodness - there has certainly been some valid points raised since my original post...I'm really glad I put this up as it has encouraged a very lively, informative discussion that clarifies Alamy's rules and how they need to be approached.  Its great to see long time users giving us newbies some advice - it certainly makes me feel more confident in asking questions again.  Thank you :))

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Accepted, my mistake.  I suppose the barrage of questions made my post feel ridiculous.  3rd attempt at passing QC under way...  Rapidly approaching the conclusion that my EF-S 55-250 is just too soft at the long end without 'help' in post-processing.  I'll get there.

In my experience the EF-S 55-250 fails both at the long end and at closer distances.  I've got a couple of images on Alamy taken with it but it's not one I'd rely on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Accepted, my mistake.  I suppose the barrage of questions made my post feel ridiculous.  3rd attempt at passing QC under way...  Rapidly approaching the conclusion that my EF-S 55-250 is just too soft at the long end without 'help' in post-processing.  I'll get there.

In my experience the EF-S 55-250 fails both at the long end and at closer distances.  I've got a couple of images on Alamy taken with it but it's not one I'd rely on.

 

 

I've found that downsizing unsharpened images can often help with these types of lenses, especially at the long end. Won't work if the focus is off, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

You really do need to re-read MDM's post--you said "barrage of ridiculous questions" . . . MDM said "barrage of questions" . . . see the difference?

 

MDM was actually supporting you, and offering a mild rebuke to the original post you (rightly) took exception to. LIfe's tapestry is rich enough without having to be distorted to prove a point, no?

 

dd

 

 

 Thanks DD for pointing that out. I try to avoid insulting people here and on the internet in general. It's all too easy to be misinterpeted but being misquoted is something else again. Now that would get the adrenalin flowing. :)

I'm pretty sure I only quoted you within the quote? But again, apologies.

 

 

 

 

Accepted, my mistake.  I suppose the barrage of questions made my post feel ridiculous.  3rd attempt at passing QC under way...  Rapidly approaching the conclusion that my EF-S 55-250 is just too soft at the long end without 'help' in post-processing.  I'll get there.

 

You asked 7 questions in one post. That is a barrage indeed by my estimation but no insult intended. And it could take some considerable time to (re-)answer all of those questions.
I'll remember to limit the number of questions in future posts. However, I'm not sure those questions had been answered unless I'm expected to have read every forum post before engaging with the forum. Again, makes one feel quite ridiculous... Lesson learnt.

 

 

 

 

Accepted, my mistake.  I suppose the barrage of questions made my post feel ridiculous.  3rd attempt at passing QC under way...  Rapidly approaching the conclusion that my EF-S 55-250 is just too soft at the long end without 'help' in post-processing.  I'll get there.

 

In my experience the EF-S 55-250 fails both at the long end and at closer distances.  I've got a couple of images on Alamy taken with it but it's not one I'd rely on.
Unfortunately, I can only use the glass I have and try to make the best of it.

 

On the brighter side, I have passed QC at the third attempt. I've used forums for many years and have rarely been pulled up in this way. Not my intention to insult or cause bad feeling, but I do like to be concise and brief in equal measure.

 

I've still not discovered why an uncompressed jpg size is quoted by Alamy when it serves to confuse and confound. That'll be here somewhere...

 

Cheers all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've still not discovered why an uncompressed jpg size is quoted by Alamy when it serves to confuse and confound. That'll be here somewhere...

 

Cheers all.

 

. Have a look at a selection of your own images. The size on disk will be  different for all of them because the compressed size depends on the amount of detail in the image.

The uncompressed size is fixed for a given camera, cropping aside, regardless of the content of the image. So it's the only constant Alamy can quote.

It doesn't confound and confuse when you learn the reason.

Edited by spacecadet
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

I think it's worth noting that there are a variety of sharpening modes these days, whereas there really used to be only one in previous years.

 

1. Capture sharpening can be done in camera, but IMO is actually best performed in Lightroom: Mask, Detail, Radius, Amount in that order, using the ALT ket to preview whilst at 100%. Assuming your images are practically spot-on in the first place, this can really bring them up to scratch for Alamy or anyone else for that matter. Older RAW images benefit from this too. http://www.peachpit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1951754&seqNum=4

 

2. Print sharpening was pretty much the only thing you could do in previous years, and it was easy to overdo. Martin Evening et al used to recommend multiple passes to maintain the subtleties in your image. It's probably in every photo book since the late nineties. I wouldn't recommend this to anyone submitting images to a library these days.

 

Equipment can also be a nightmare too though. Even some new L-lenses can be soft at 100% around the edges(although many used to be accetable years ago - 1990s). I've used certain cameras from the Canon lending library only to find they are a bit messy to say the least. Best to experiment with your own lenses and camera bodies, especially before any big shoot on another continent.

 

If in doubt, shoot at higher ISO, faster shutter speeds etc.

HTH.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very simple to see if your method works: test it on a single image and submit. If it passes QC, you were right (or not caught).

 

Remember you may not be the last one to sharpen the image. If the one that sharpens it for output, down the line, makes the image fall apart, it will be not his/her fault, but yours.

 

wim

Link to post
Share on other sites

I always sharpen my images, always have since my first stock submissions back in 2005. If you shoot raw, go ahead and sharpen. if you look at jpegs output at standard settings by basically all cameras, they apply substantial sharpening in-camera. these jpegs are well accepted by every agency i know of including Alamy.

 

if you shoot raw and develop yourself, sharpen if you like. Just don't overdo it. less is more.

 

About sizes, many of my images were grossly up-sized during last decade when Alamy wanted tiff files of at least 48 megs with Adobe RGB profile. Times change. Such a file at 90% quality jpeg is about 1/10 the size. As mentioned, the gear you have is fine in native format.

Edited by Mike R
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.