candinamaria 2 Posted June 3, 2015 Hi, everyone! I'm getting ready to submit my first four images, and I'd love some CC before I do so. Here's a link to the pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/candinamaria/sets/72157653959199135 Thanks! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NYCat 1,601 Posted June 3, 2015 All Alamy checks for is for technical adequacy and they look good to me but I am NOT the best one to judge that. I can tell you that the girl jumping and boy shaving are really terrific and probably very likely to sell. I assume you have model releases. Your cute kids? Paulette Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spacecadet 2,598 Posted June 3, 2015 (edited) QC can only be judged at 100%. THere is quite a bit of shadow noise in the one of the girl jumping What is CC? Edited June 3, 2015 by spacecadet Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
candinamaria 2 Posted June 3, 2015 All Alamy checks for is for technical adequacy and they look good to me but I am NOT the best one to judge that. I can tell you that the girl jumping and boy shaving are really terrific and probably very likely to sell. I assume you have model releases. Your cute kids? Paulette Thanks! Yes, they're my little wild ones. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
candinamaria 2 Posted June 3, 2015 Thanks! Yes, they are my little wild ones. CC=constructive criticism. Good point about the noise. I'll see if I can get rid of some of that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Armstrong 427 Posted June 3, 2015 (edited) These look really saleable imho. They have a really nice style. In the photo of the little girl jumping on the bed there are dust spots that need to be removed. There are three between the two pictures on the wall and there is a curved piece of dirt just above the headboard. There are more but that's just to give you an indication. I would also clean up the actual physical marks on the wall Michael Edited June 3, 2015 by Armstrong Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
candinamaria 2 Posted June 3, 2015 These look really saleable imho. They have a really nice style. In the photo of the little girl jumping on the bed there are dust spots that need to be removed. There are three between the two pictures on the wall and there is a curved piece of dirt just above the headboard. There are more but that's just to give you an indication. I would also clean up the actual physical marks on the wall Michael Thank you! I guess I have to decide if it's easier to clean my walls or fix it in Photoshop! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Armstrong 427 Posted June 3, 2015 The little girl on the boat and the little boy shaving look good to submit in my opinion. There are quite big areas of blown highlights on the pigs shot. I think the highlights on the ears might be acceptable but I'm not sure about the areas on the back. Anything where I'm not sure I don't submit. Michael Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Armstrong 427 Posted June 3, 2015 (edited) These look really saleable imho. They have a really nice style. In the photo of the little girl jumping on the bed there are dust spots that need to be removed. There are three between the two pictures on the wall and there is a curved piece of dirt just above the headboard. There are more but that's just to give you an indication. I would also clean up the actual physical marks on the wall Michael Thank you! I guess I have to decide if it's easier to clean my walls or fix it in Photoshop! It's a lovely shot. I think you might need to leave this one out. As Mark said it is quite noisy and if you look at the little girl she isn't as sharp as say the little boy shaving. Don't be discouraged though. Looking at your Flickr stream it looks like there are plenty more candidates! Michael Edited June 3, 2015 by Armstrong Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
candinamaria 2 Posted June 3, 2015 These look really saleable imho. They have a really nice style. In the photo of the little girl jumping on the bed there are dust spots that need to be removed. There are three between the two pictures on the wall and there is a curved piece of dirt just above the headboard. There are more but that's just to give you an indication. I would also clean up the actual physical marks on the wall Michael Thank you! I guess I have to decide if it's easier to clean my walls or fix it in Photoshop! It's a lovely shot. I think you might need to leave this one out. As Mark said it is quite noisy and if you look at the little girl she isn't as sharp as say the little boy shaving. Don't be discouraged though. Looking at your Flickr stream it looks like there are plenty more candidates! Michael Thanks! I took the jumping girl out. There was just no way to clean up all the noise. Luckily, she'll be thrilled to do a reshoot! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
candinamaria 2 Posted June 3, 2015 The little girl on the boat and the little boy shaving look good to submit in my opinion. There are quite big areas of blown highlights on the pigs shot. I think the highlights on the ears might be acceptable but I'm not sure about the areas on the back. Anything where I'm not sure I don't submit. Michael Thanks! I ditched the girl jumping -- no amount of noise reduction is going to save that -- and lowered the highlights on the pigs so they weren't blown. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joseph Clemson 920 Posted June 3, 2015 I'm wondering about the blown out areas of the cow's face as well as the pig's backs. I generally find that when areas are blown out to that extent may not be possible to rescue them, though you may have a chance if you shot in RAW to begin with. You need to be able to see all the detail of the blown area for it to be acceptable to QC. I find reducing the highlights often just creates a uniform grey in the area which was previously blown out to white, rather than restoring the fine detail of the animal's hide (as it is in this case). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joseph Clemson 920 Posted June 3, 2015 On a slightly different tack, if you are planning to use shots of your children with releases to make them available for commercial use, be sure you are comfortable with the lack of control you have over how those images are subsequently used. Buyers are required to adhere to terms and conditions which prohibit sensitive use, be we still get stories cropping up of people who've signed releases and then later been uncomfortable with the context their image has appeared in. I've featured by own children in released shots in the past and never had any problems but it's something that the photographer needs to be aware of when using family or friends as models. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spacecadet 2,598 Posted June 3, 2015 (edited) +1 on the blown highlights. Less of a problem with the piglets but the cow is blending in with the sky. In LR you would pull them back with Recovery. Edited June 3, 2015 by spacecadet Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiskerke 2,655 Posted June 3, 2015 (edited) These look really saleable imho. They have a really nice style. In the photo of the little girl jumping on the bed there are dust spots that need to be removed. There are three between the two pictures on the wall and there is a curved piece of dirt just above the headboard. There are more but that's just to give you an indication. I would also clean up the actual physical marks on the wall Michael Thank you! I guess I have to decide if it's easier to clean my walls or fix it in Photoshop! It's a lovely shot. I think you might need to leave this one out. As Mark said it is quite noisy and if you look at the little girl she isn't as sharp as say the little boy shaving. Don't be discouraged though. Looking at your Flickr stream it looks like there are plenty more candidates! Michael Thanks! I took the jumping girl out. There was just no way to clean up all the noise. Luckily, she'll be thrilled to do a reshoot! Make sure you clean your sensor first: it's all sensor dust that shows up because of f=11. It is quite easy to correct it in post. However there are a lot of dust bunnies. Older Canons are real dust magnets: I have some myself. Maybe check it by shooting a blank monitor screen at f22 and 100 iso. Open it in Photoshop and do an auto level. There's a huge hair also, that will probably be gone by now, but it may lurk somewhere inside, ready to jump back onto the sensor, but now in a more inconvenient place, like on someone's face. Great images btw. wim edit: hey what happened to the editor there with all that code? Edited June 3, 2015 by wiskerke Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ann 308 Posted June 4, 2015 Candinamaria, any of the photos in your CMOpro set, except for the pigs, should work very well, assuming the tech qualities are okay at 100%. Your lovely, lovely photos look exactly like the type of Real Life photos agencies such as Alamy are looking for. After your first 4 are accepted: As mentioned in earlier posts, Alamy QC is based on technical proficiency, but - in my opinion - the more creative (in marketable way) and/or desirable (photo of high-profile person or event...) the photo, the more forgiving it might be on the tech specs. Conversely, for mundane subjects, such as random street curb, photo better be technically perfect, though I doubt You will ever be spending your time taking, let alone submitting, such photos. All the best - Ann Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
John Mitchell 3,222 Posted June 4, 2015 (edited) "...random street curb.." (?) Is that an NYC thing? Edited June 4, 2015 by John Mitchell Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spacecadet 2,598 Posted June 4, 2015 I think she means kerb. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
John Mitchell 3,222 Posted June 4, 2015 Alamy "curb" search = 8226 mundane images Alamy "kerb" search = 4967 brilliant images Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spacecadet 2,598 Posted June 4, 2015 Curb yourselves now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
candinamaria 2 Posted June 4, 2015 Thank you all so much! Y'all have given me a lot to think about! I mostly do portrait work, so stock is new to me. I love dramatic light and I shoot with a Canon so old it doesn't have any marks , so a lot of my work is noisy. Great point about the sensor. It definitely needs to be cleaned! The four currently in the set were accepted, in case it helps any other newbies. I dropped the highlights a bit on the pigs and the cow, and did a little noise reduction on the boy. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
candinamaria 2 Posted June 4, 2015 On a slightly different tack, if you are planning to use shots of your children with releases to make them available for commercial use, be sure you are comfortable with the lack of control you have over how those images are subsequently used. Buyers are required to adhere to terms and conditions which prohibit sensitive use, be we still get stories cropping up of people who've signed releases and then later been uncomfortable with the context their image has appeared in. I've featured by own children in released shots in the past and never had any problems but it's something that the photographer needs to be aware of when using family or friends as models. This is a great point, and something I definitely think about. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
candinamaria 2 Posted June 4, 2015 Candinamaria, any of the photos in your CMOpro set, except for the pigs, should work very well, assuming the tech qualities are okay at 100%. Your lovely, lovely photos look exactly like the type of Real Life photos agencies such as Alamy are looking for. After your first 4 are accepted: As mentioned in earlier posts, Alamy QC is based on technical proficiency, but - in my opinion - the more creative (in marketable way) and/or desirable (photo of high-profile person or event...) the photo, the more forgiving it might be on the tech specs. Conversely, for mundane subjects, such as random street curb, photo better be technically perfect, though I doubt You will ever be spending your time taking, let alone submitting, such photos. All the best - Ann Thank you! I didn't think stock agencies like black and white? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ann 308 Posted June 4, 2015 (edited) candinamaria - oh my goodness, I didn't even notice they were black and white!I suspect there are other members who can make more useful comment on B&W VS color than I can.A few times I've included both a color (or selective color) and monochromatic version of image.----------------------------------gentlemen, gentlemen, gentlemen... (aka John, Mark, Doug) please kerb your enthusiasm!re: "...for mundane subjects, such as random street curb..."Alamy random + curb search = 2 brilliantly pleasant imagesAlamy random + kerb search = 5 brilliantly technically-proficient imagessmiles - Ann Alamy "curb" search = 8226 mundane imagesAlamy "kerb" search = 4967 brilliant images Edited June 4, 2015 by ann Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
