Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Fess up! I know some of you do it (I may have done it -- maybe). What I'm curious about is just big (or  small?) a reduction do you make? How many mega bites do you aim for? 

 

Don't worry -- I won't tell Alamy, and this shall remain totally secret . . . except for the people who read this open forum. 

 

Edo  :huh:

Edited by Ed Rooney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4500 usually, 3250 for high ISO or if I don't trust my glasses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glasses! I knew there was something I was supposed to do in 2017. (I did buy some wine glasses.) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ed Rooney said:

Fess up! I know some of you do it (I may have done it -- maybe). What I'm curious about is just big (or  small?) a reduction do you make? How many mega bites do you aim for? 

 

Don't worry -- I won't tell Alamy, and this shall remain totally secret . . . except for the people who read this open forum. 

 

Edo  :huh:

 

I tend to leave images at the maximum size I am confident there will be no QC problems related to sharpness or noise, both of which are helped by downsizing. This is usually native size but occasionally I reduce them a little or more than a little if shot at high ISO or if they are time exposures shot at night even at low ISO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do them as large as possible.  If sharp at full resolution, why reduce in size?

 

Jill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I leave most at full size , which is usually 16 MP (4952 / 46 MB) for me.

 

If I think it's warranted, I'll go down to 12 MP (4290 / 35 MB) or sometimes 11 MP (4000 / 30 MB). I try not to go any smaller than that but do on occasion with difficult subjects.

 

P.S. I think that less can be more if it improves the look of an image significantly. I find that sometimes even a relatively small downsize can make a big difference, depends on the lens and focal length.

 

 

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good question.  I generally upload the image at the original size, after cropping, if any, unless the ISO demands a reduction due to excessive noise.  I did notice that for a while I had mistakenly set my output instructions to 4256px on the long edge (12MP).  Fortunately it didn't cause any problems.

 

I reduce down to 3000x2000 if the image is a keeper and might not make it otherwise.  Even a 3000x2000 should print nicely in a magazine, book or display properly on a website or in a blog.

 

Rick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I  only ever reduce the size if I am concerned that the full size quality is marginal, and really, if possible, I'd much prefer to take the shot again and get it right. Can't recall the sizes I've used.

 

I've only done it a few times, and, being brought up a Methodist - before converting to atheism,  didn't feel good about it. :wacko:

Edited by Bryan
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to know if you all think the file size makes any difference in sales, considering what the majority of buyers use them for here.

 

Rick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rick, I have seen searches for “file size” on my own images. Not often, but it happens. That would be for large file size, of course. What we don’t see is whether we have images excluded that are too small. Just recently two images of mine were used for large displays, one of them being to a zoo.  I’m assuming they would print at the minimum a poster size, but possibly larger.

I’ve seen very large prints used for display in businesses. 

In fact, at my local camera shop, they have prints at least 48” long side hanging on their walls.

Betty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rick Lewis said:

I would like to know if you all think the file size makes any difference in sales, considering what the majority of buyers use them for here.

 

Rick

 

Depends upon the type of image. If news probably largely irrelevant, but photos that could be used for an office mural for example (my best $ sale to date), may be size dependent.

 

Like Betty, I have occasionally seen FS searches within my own collection, but these are in a small minority. Of course I may be missing some of these searches as my files are too small!

 

Overall I suspect that file size is of secondary importance, there are other considerations that deserve greater attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I own 3 cameras. I always aim for the most megapixels possible. I always take a image regardless of conditions and will sometimes have to downsize as far as 12 megapixels to increase lens sharpness or eliminate noise. I would not submit anything below 12 megapixels

 

Camera (1) A 14 megapixel Nikon waterproof. The files are great at 14 megapixels, and I have never downsized with this camera.

 

Camera (2) A 20 megapixel, take anywhere shoot anything, Sony RX100 that I will sometimes downsize as far as 12 megapixels because of wide open lens opening or high ISO noise, but only if necessary.

 

Camera (3) A 50 megapixel Canon, that I will downsize in two ways.

 

(A) Crop the image to extend the focal length of my 70-200 mm zoom out to about 300mm, Or to crop a vertical out of a horizontal.

 

(B) Downsize due to lens or high ISO to obtain maximum quality.

 

For instance my 18mm prime Zeiss lens is only capable of 35 megapixels.

 

ISO 400 noise - 50 megapixels no downsizing. ISO 800 down to 28 megapixels because of noise. ISO 6400 with any lens goes straight to 12 megapixels because of noise. However for hand held night shooting it can’t beat at 12 megapixels.

 

I judge on the monitor at 100% and downsize as far as 12 megapixels, but only if necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, interesting topic. I haven’t ever downsized, so far, even for images taken with pretty high ISO. I take care to deal with noise in Lightroom, and so far, fingers crossed, all images have passed QC. But I will remember to experiment with downsizing for those kinds of photos in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same here, I've never downsized, only occasional cropping. Usually shoot 24 mp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I've been doing lately: I usually downsize and submit a jpeg of 30 to 40 MB.

 

I am not a true believer in downsize, but I'm doing a year-long test for myself. Most of my Sony images are native at 20 to 24 MP, and almost all would have no trouble passing QC at their native size.

 

I shoot my tabletop food at a higher ISO than I would prefer, most at about 800. I use one window light and cannot setup a tripod. 

 

I see myself as a retired pro shooter who now aims at producing mostly editorial RM images for Alamy. I don't think about advertising sales or that one rare mega sale. 

 

Thanks for your input. 

 

Edo

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since I now work almost exclusively with D800's, I do downsize finished images to 7200 by at 300DPI.

I downsize to keep the files manageable and also to give it a bit of edge for sharpness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Usually I keep images at full size. Only downsized a small quantity of images when there has been no option.

 

Do not downsize on a regular basis.

 

Allan

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Allan Bell said:

Usually I keep images at full size. Only downsized a small quantity of images when there has been no option.

 

Do not downsize on a regular basis.

 

Allan

 

 

 

No option, Allan? What about the option to not upload?

 

And Chuck, large files for stock is indeed an issue. The D800 would be my choice for assignments, but I'm just doing editorial stock now. 

 

Edo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Ed Rooney said:

 

No option, Allan? What about the option to not upload?

 

And Chuck, large files for stock is indeed an issue. The D800 would be my choice for assignments, but I'm just doing editorial stock now. 

 

Edo

 

I got my first D800 series camera not long after they became available for purchase in the summer of 2012. Previously I had for many years used hyperfocal focusing using the barrel markings on my manual focus lenses when shooting landscapes. This worked fine with film in 35mm SLRs and with my 12MP D700 but I learnt the hard way in assuming this would work with a 36MP camera. StupidIy I went travelling without testing first and it was only after I returned that I realised I had a lot of landscapes with unsharp backgrounds. One of these failed Alamy QC in July 2012 which is actually the last time I had a QC failure. 

 

However, all was not lost as I discovered that downsizing these images to the same size as my D700 files produced not only totally usable images but they were in fact sharper than the native D700 images using the same 50mm Nikkor lens. And that was without any sharpening whatsover in software on images from either camera. So as it happened I managed to save a lot of images by downsizing that would have been otherwise fit for the bin at native 36MP size. 

 

Another well known issue with high MP cameras is that the lenses have to be excellent or there will be fall off of sharpness at the edges and corners. Lenses that worked well on my 35mm and D700 were no longer adequate across the field and I am talking Nikkor AIS prime lenses. But again it is possible to achieve more than satisfactory sharpness by downsizing. As time went by I upgraded my lenses in order to produce 36MP images at native size that are sharp edge to edge but, as I said above, sometimes it is necessary to downsize to reduce noise from high ISO images.

 

Downsizing won't help images that are unsharp because of camera shake but it can save otherwise unusable images. However, if one finds it necessary to always downsize, then it is time to think about better lenses or shooting technique. If handholding, then VR lenses are very useful.

 

Finally the D800 is a really great camera but it has its limits. For example, if it is necessary to shoot at a high frame rate, then it is too slow and the buffer size too small. It just hangs. 

 

 

 

Edited by MDM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Ed Rooney said:

 

No option, Allan? What about the option to not upload?

 

And Chuck, large files for stock is indeed an issue. The D800 would be my choice for assignments, but I'm just doing editorial stock now. 

 

Edo

 

I do not upload lots of images because of various faults, but downsizing produces a better image suitable for Alamy stock then I will go that route.;)

 

Allan

 

 

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