MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Mobile phone instead of DSLR for microstock (photos and videos)?  (Read 2805 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: December 21, 2018, 11:30 »
+1
This is about using mobile phones for microstock instead of DSLRs, and submitting pics and videos taken by phone to all the main stock sites, not just to the sites specialized for mobile photography. So I wasn't sure where to post this - if GSD isn't considered good, somebody put this topic where it belongs the most.

Of course, DSLR is always going to provide higher quality and more possibilities than the best mobile phone camera because of more glass and larger sensor. But are the mobile phones of today good enough for microstock? If yes, then why don't invest in Google Pixel 2 or 3 (or whatever phone is the best or good enough for microstock) instead of investing in more expensive equipment, especially if you take into account that higher res and quality maybe doesn't sell more? It's also easier and more practical to take the phone with you wherever you go, plus it has a nice big screen.

Did anyone used Google Pixel or other phone successfully for producing images and videos which are accepted everywhere and which sell? And how are the sales comparing to the content produced with DSLRs?
« Last Edit: January 04, 2019, 17:26 by stockman11 »


« Reply #1 on: December 21, 2018, 11:34 »
0
I use mobile phones. I'm not a professional and they sell. At least the photos... I use Huawei Mate 10 which has a Leica camera. Mobile phones have lots of limitations. For example, they don't create bokeh effect in objects or persons that are some meters away because they have a fixed number f. Only the very new ones have telephoto or wide angle, but mine doesn't. It shoots in nice 4K but the tripod accesory is small. They have professional or manual settings but mine for example tend to oversature food and plants. It also has issues with white balance without natural light (for example supermarket lights). But I do like to take photos even if they are not professional. I would like to have a DLSR camera for the things I said and also a better macro but for example the last Huawei (Mate 20 Pro) has an incredible good camera: wide angle, telephoto, 40 mpx, like 3 types of focusing system, AI, and supermacro (1cm close to the subject). Rumors say the Huawei for the next year is going to have 10X optical zoom with 8K at 60fps video.

« Last Edit: December 21, 2018, 11:48 by davidbautista »

« Reply #2 on: December 21, 2018, 11:47 »
0
Delete

« Reply #3 on: December 30, 2018, 16:42 »
+1
My mobile is better than some of the cameras I've used for microstock.  I prefer using a camera most of the time though, I'll only use my mobile if its the only camera I have on me.

« Reply #4 on: December 31, 2018, 10:40 »
+1
I have only uploaded a great and very rare photo from a mobile phone three times. They were never bought.

« Reply #5 on: December 31, 2018, 10:59 »
+2
The new generation of high-end mobile phones, launched during 2017-2018, have decent cameras, maybe even better than those entry level DSLRs from 10 years ago. That's especially true for smartphones offering RAW/DNG, alongside JPEG

Given the very relaxed acceptance standards most agencies have theses days, smartphones are just right. As far as I'm concerned, only Alamy still has restrictions on smartphone made photos.

« Reply #6 on: January 02, 2019, 02:05 »
0
I uploaded 3 photos from my Motorola G3 ( just to add I'm mainly a vector contributor but I do have some photos) really more as an experiment to see if they were accepted, and I have sold one of them so far. I have to say the G3 is certainly not a high end phone, and to improve my prospects I've now bought a OnePlus 6T, ( which can shoot RAW) and I will hopefully add more photos this year.

MilanStojanovic

  • I sample life
« Reply #7 on: January 02, 2019, 22:31 »
0
When an iPhone XS Has More Dynamic Range Than a DSLR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3m81493kTM

« Reply #8 on: January 03, 2019, 12:36 »
+1
When an iPhone XS Has More Dynamic Range Than a DSLR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3m81493kTM

Misleading.
He is taking about built-in HDR JPEGs, not about native dynamic range.

True, the lag between DSLR shots can lead to gosting, but besides that, he is comparing "apple" with oranges.

Not professional.

« Reply #9 on: January 03, 2019, 20:15 »
+1
Phone companies are developing computational photography, which means taking multiple photos with different exposures and baking them into the final image, plus reducing noise. Computational photography is advancing faster than sensors, which is why phone cameras are advancing faster than DLSRs these days. Computational photography as an option on DLSRs would be definitely cool.

According to what can be found on google and youtube, Google Pixel 2 and 3 and maybe iPhone XS are probably the best for point and shoot photography. LG V30 and V40 are also up there if you prefer manual controls and if you don't mind lack of image stabilization.

I guess we can conclude that the new high-end phones definitely provide good enough quality for microstock. But what about sales? Is there a significant demand for higher resolution and quality or mobile photography is good enough for most of the buyers?
« Last Edit: January 03, 2019, 20:18 by stockman11 »

« Reply #10 on: January 04, 2019, 17:03 »
0
can I just add :  it's a DSLR   (Digital Single Lens Reflex)   NOT a a DLSR !!

If ur having a problem with that,  then I suggest U stick with ur phone cam ;) 

« Reply #11 on: January 04, 2019, 17:15 »
0
can I just add :  it's a DSLR   (Digital Single Lens Reflex)   NOT a a DLSR !!

If ur having a problem with that,  then I suggest U stick with ur phone cam ;)
Sure, it's DSLR. But was your "witty" remark necessary? If you came to any conclusion about me based on typos on the forum that says more about you than about me.

« Reply #12 on: January 04, 2019, 17:18 »
0
can I just add :  it's a DSLR   (Digital Single Lens Reflex)   NOT a a DLSR !!

If ur having a problem with that,  then I suggest U stick with ur phone cam ;)
Sure, it's DSLR. But was your "witty" remark necessary? If you came to any conclusion about me based on typos on the forum that says more about you than about me.
And I don't know why the "stick with your phone camera"

« Reply #13 on: January 04, 2019, 21:10 »
+3
Phone companies are developing computational photography, which means taking multiple photos with different exposures and baking them into the final image, plus reducing noise. Computational photography is advancing faster than sensors, which is why phone cameras are advancing faster than DLSRs these days. Computational photography as an option on DLSRs would be definitely cool.

According to what can be found on google and youtube, Google Pixel 2 and 3 and maybe iPhone XS are probably the best for point and shoot photography. LG V30 and V40 are also up there if you prefer manual controls and if you don't mind lack of image stabilization.

I guess we can conclude that the new high-end phones definitely provide good enough quality for microstock. But what about sales? Is there a significant demand for higher resolution and quality or mobile photography is good enough for most of the buyers?

That "computational photography" is a fancy name for what we can already do in Photoshop, since quite a while, actually: stacking photos as smart objects, followed by a lossless noise reduction, using the median function.
True, smartphones do it internally with minimal lag between burst shots, but when using the same technique with a big sensor camera, the results are far superior!
« Last Edit: January 04, 2019, 21:17 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #14 on: January 04, 2019, 22:07 »
0
Phone companies are developing computational photography, which means taking multiple photos with different exposures and baking them into the final image, plus reducing noise. Computational photography is advancing faster than sensors, which is why phone cameras are advancing faster than DLSRs these days. Computational photography as an option on DLSRs would be definitely cool.

According to what can be found on google and youtube, Google Pixel 2 and 3 and maybe iPhone XS are probably the best for point and shoot photography. LG V30 and V40 are also up there if you prefer manual controls and if you don't mind lack of image stabilization.

I guess we can conclude that the new high-end phones definitely provide good enough quality for microstock. But what about sales? Is there a significant demand for higher resolution and quality or mobile photography is good enough for most of the buyers?

That "computational photography" is a fancy name for what we can already do in Photoshop, since quite a while, actually: stacking photos as smart objects, followed by a lossless noise reduction, using the median function.
True, smartphones do it internally with minimal lag between burst shots, but when using the same technique with a big sensor camera, the results are far superior!
Of course, there is no mystique in computational photography, it's all about processing data. I would say however that baking multiple photos with various exposures can have it's advantages over taking only one photo with one exposure which you process latter, maybe not right now, maybe not soon, but there is no doubt that the progress of computational photography will continue over the years. There are already mentions of AI which is supposed to further reduce noise and estimate what should be in each pixel, and maybe even enable increasing resolution. Only downside of this is that more computing means more CGI and less "real" photo. I guess some people will debate on this subject.

No doubt that big sensor cameras are far superior, and they will always be when it comes to the "real" photo with more details, but if point and shoot mobile phones are more than good enough, carrying big camera and lens(es) plus using manual mode plus processing latter on the computer makes sense only when you have a good artistic or other reason.

« Reply #15 on: January 04, 2019, 22:25 »
0
Phone companies are developing computational photography, which means taking multiple photos with different exposures and baking them into the final image, plus reducing noise. Computational photography is advancing faster than sensors, which is why phone cameras are advancing faster than DLSRs these days. Computational photography as an option on DLSRs would be definitely cool.

According to what can be found on google and youtube, Google Pixel 2 and 3 and maybe iPhone XS are probably the best for point and shoot photography. LG V30 and V40 are also up there if you prefer manual controls and if you don't mind lack of image stabilization.

I guess we can conclude that the new high-end phones definitely provide good enough quality for microstock. But what about sales? Is there a significant demand for higher resolution and quality or mobile photography is good enough for most of the buyers?

That "computational photography" is a fancy name for what we can already do in Photoshop, since quite a while, actually: stacking photos as smart objects, followed by a lossless noise reduction, using the median function.
True, smartphones do it internally with minimal lag between burst shots, but when using the same technique with a big sensor camera, the results are far superior!
Of course, there is no mystique in computational photography, it's all about processing data. I would say however that baking multiple photos with various exposures can have it's advantages over taking only one photo with one exposure which you process latter, maybe not right now, maybe not soon, but there is no doubt that the progress of computational photography will continue over the years. There are already mentions of AI which is supposed to further reduce noise and estimate what should be in each pixel, and maybe even enable increasing resolution. Only downside of this is that more computing means more CGI and less "real" photo. I guess some people will debate on this subject.

No doubt that big sensor cameras are far superior, and they will always be when it comes to the "real" photo with more details, but if point and shoot mobile phones are more than good enough, carrying big camera and lens(es) plus using manual mode plus processing latter on the computer makes sense only when you have a good artistic or other reason.

Or in our case - actually get paid decently for the work. I haven't looked at the output of the latest generation of phones, but all the ones before that that people said were digital camera killers and so wonderful were seriously lacking. If they aren't there yet, then in a few generations they might be. If all you need is something that looks nice on a 5 inch screen then sure, no reason to have a "real" camera.

« Reply #16 on: January 05, 2019, 13:00 »
+3
I have taken shots on my Pixel 2 which have sold on stock sites. It's no substitute for a DSLR or MFT, but something else, an extra tool perhaps. Particularly for covert shots and those moments when you don't have a 'proper' camera handy. What's that quote about the best camera being the one you have in your hand?

Overall I'd prefer to be shooting for stock with a camera, but a saleable shot is do-able in a pinch with a good smartphone, IMO.


« Reply #17 on: January 05, 2019, 14:34 »
0
What's that quote about the best camera being the one you have in your hand?

"The best camera is the one you left at home"

 :P

« Reply #18 on: January 05, 2019, 18:10 »
0
"Computational photography" is still very young. For example, Huawei started to implement AI in its Leica cameras but I don't like it at all. I just like the supermacro but for example "vegetation" and "food" is just oversaturation of the photo. Phones over 600 USD can take manual photos very good. Just the last Huawei has 3 cameras with different capabilities. It's not going to replace any professional camera but they are very good. I don't understand why sites such as Alamy restrict them. In the US you only have like Apple and other companies, and while they are good, they are not the best (Huawei, Xiaomi, etc)

« Reply #19 on: January 05, 2019, 19:05 »
+1
"Computational photography" is still very young. For example, Huawei started to implement AI in its Leica cameras but I don't like it at all. I just like the supermacro but for example "vegetation" and "food" is just oversaturation of the photo.

That usually happens when you don't shoot Raw. Shoot raw and you will be able to saturate your photos as much as you like.

« Reply #20 on: January 05, 2019, 19:10 »
0
"Computational photography" is still very young. For example, Huawei started to implement AI in its Leica cameras but I don't like it at all. I just like the supermacro but for example "vegetation" and "food" is just oversaturation of the photo.

That usually happens when you don't shoot Raw. Shoot raw and you will be able to saturate your photos as much as you like.
Yes. Or just disabling the AI thing.

« Reply #21 on: January 05, 2019, 20:33 »
+2
I use my iphone and DSLR for stock photos.  My DSLR takes better photos, but I like my iphone if I need to be a little more discrete, like in a store or market.  I can make a decent photo of fruit or other products quickly and easily.

My iphone has limitations.  It is too noisy to make decent twilight photos.  And, if I have to zoom, I just forego the photo, as it will also be too noisy. 

« Reply #22 on: January 06, 2019, 09:39 »
0
Just watched my stats of Gettyimages sales.
5 of my 'most valuable 10 pics' taken on my smartphone. From $76 to $15 each.
Gettyimages accepting all of my pics taken on iPhone 5s.
ps. Yes, iPhone 5s still exists.  8)

cascoly

  • Photography, travel & online games at cascoly.com

« Reply #23 on: January 06, 2019, 15:09 »
0
some DSLR already have computational mHDR, eg - my sony a77ii has 3 HDR modes - one takes 5 bracketed images for later processing; there's also a 3 and 5 pic in camera HDR .  each has its particular uses




Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #24 on: January 07, 2019, 13:35 »
+1
I use my iphone and DSLR for stock photos.  My DSLR takes better photos, but I like my iphone if I need to be a little more discrete, like in a store or market.  I can make a decent photo of fruit or other products quickly and easily.

My iphone has limitations.  It is too noisy to make decent twilight photos.  And, if I have to zoom, I just forego the photo, as it will also be too noisy.

Good point which I've found true. If you need any zoom, using a phone, it's probably not going to be any good. Also same for anything without "good" lighting. That may have changed but I've had a bunch of phones and the iPhone works about the best, still can't beat optical zoom, bigger sensor or settings like ISO.

I won't say phones are bad. They just aren't as good.  :)

« Reply #25 on: January 07, 2019, 13:38 »
0
I use my iphone and DSLR for stock photos.  My DSLR takes better photos, but I like my iphone if I need to be a little more discrete, like in a store or market.  I can make a decent photo of fruit or other products quickly and easily.

My iphone has limitations.  It is too noisy to make decent twilight photos.  And, if I have to zoom, I just forego the photo, as it will also be too noisy.

Good point which I've found true. If you need any zoom, using a phone, it's probably not going to be any good. Also same for anything without "good" lighting. That may have changed but I've had a bunch of phones and the iPhone works about the best, still can't beat optical zoom, bigger sensor or settings like ISO.

I won't say phones are bad. They just aren't as good.  :)
Indeed. Low light and zoom is a main problem in phone cameras but they continue working with that. New Huawei p30 is probably going to have 10X zoom and a very low light sensor.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #26 on: January 07, 2019, 13:47 »
0
I use my iphone and DSLR for stock photos.  My DSLR takes better photos, but I like my iphone if I need to be a little more discrete, like in a store or market.  I can make a decent photo of fruit or other products quickly and easily.

My iphone has limitations.  It is too noisy to make decent twilight photos.  And, if I have to zoom, I just forego the photo, as it will also be too noisy.

Good point which I've found true. If you need any zoom, using a phone, it's probably not going to be any good. Also same for anything without "good" lighting. That may have changed but I've had a bunch of phones and the iPhone works about the best, still can't beat optical zoom, bigger sensor or settings like ISO.

I won't say phones are bad. They just aren't as good.  :)
Indeed. Low light and zoom is a main problem in phone cameras but they continue working with that. New Huawei p30 is probably going to have 10X zoom and a very low light sensor.

Cool! $1,000 for a phone that makes photos? I still want a camera that makes phone calls!  ;D

Not as dumb as it sounds, (but it is mostly humor) lets say, a DSLR that I can upload directly to a news service or agency? Doesn't have to have all the fancy phone stuff, just the ability to log onto the web and send photos. Phone would be nice, just in case I was out shooting and wanted to order pizza?


« Reply #27 on: January 07, 2019, 13:53 »
0
I use my iphone and DSLR for stock photos.  My DSLR takes better photos, but I like my iphone if I need to be a little more discrete, like in a store or market.  I can make a decent photo of fruit or other products quickly and easily.

My iphone has limitations.  It is too noisy to make decent twilight photos.  And, if I have to zoom, I just forego the photo, as it will also be too noisy.

Good point which I've found true. If you need any zoom, using a phone, it's probably not going to be any good. Also same for anything without "good" lighting. That may have changed but I've had a bunch of phones and the iPhone works about the best, still can't beat optical zoom, bigger sensor or settings like ISO.

I won't say phones are bad. They just aren't as good.  :)
Indeed. Low light and zoom is a main problem in phone cameras but they continue working with that. New Huawei p30 is probably going to have 10X zoom and a very low light sensor.

Cool! $1,000 for a phone that makes photos? I still want a camera that makes phone calls!  ;D

Not as dumb as it sounds, (but it is mostly humor) lets say, a DSLR that I can upload directly to a news service or agency? Doesn't have to have all the fancy phone stuff, just the ability to log onto the web and send photos. Phone would be nice, just in case I was out shooting and wanted to order pizza?
That's true. That phone is going to be 600 probably but yes

« Reply #28 on: January 08, 2019, 13:31 »
0
I use my Pixel 2 fairly often, but don't upload alot from it. Out of the 1800 photos in my port, I'd say less than 30 are from mobile. I don't shoot specifically for stock with my phone, but there are always some moments that turn out great and are worth uploading.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

« Last Edit: January 08, 2019, 13:43 by justinmullet »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
17 Replies
8245 Views
Last post December 12, 2012, 15:24
by RacePhoto
9 Replies
3417 Views
Last post April 30, 2012, 22:05
by RacePhoto
54 Replies
8434 Views
Last post September 19, 2012, 08:21
by Sean Locke Photography
3 Replies
1775 Views
Last post November 12, 2012, 23:00
by gillian vann
52 Replies
6097 Views
Last post July 30, 2013, 12:02
by amabu

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors