pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Another photo rejected by SS  (Read 7058 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: June 07, 2016, 09:59 »
0
I use around F5.6 to F8 for landscapes. Can't say about smaller apertures, I don't think I've used them.  Tend to use bigger apertures (lower f numbers) if anything.


I use the RX as a "walking around" camera though. I have a DSLR as well. Having said that I've not had any problem with images from the RX with iStock or Alamy. I wouldn't expect to have problems with iStock TBH since they lowered their acceptance standards.


I've not tried any add on lenses with the RX, tends to cancel out the "pocketability" IMHO, but I do know that any "add on" lenses are going to introduce their own problems.


If you shoot well composed and exposed images with the right WB using optimal settings, then you shouldn't need to "pull the image around" too much in LR. I'd certainly leave shadow reduction alone as much as possible. Use a reflector(s) to get light into the shadows with still life type stuff.







« Reply #51 on: June 07, 2016, 10:18 »
0
Hi DifyDave, I use the Magfilter adapter and macro lens with the RX100M3 but only for art. For flower macro photography. Great photos but maybe because I use a lower f setting. I don't know what happened but one of my images was nominated for an award. Different software but it was also before I was told to shoot in f8. The photo I sold today was shot on tripod with f4 because of not that much light and in the hope my Maine Coon boy wouldn't move an inch. Two photos accepted by SS. 3rd one has the tip of one rear very slightly less sharp. All 3 accepted by DT. I will now use Bracket Pro and lower f numbers again. Thank you so much. I have not send a photo using a macro add on lens to microstock yet. Not true, one image to DT. I couldn't resist. A bumblebee on top of a flower. I nearly fell into the flowerbed because of the bad zoom. Doesn't it bother you that this camera can't zoom in a lot? I would love to have a camera with a better zoom and a real macro lens. I have never been into macro but really enjoy it as a hobby. The Magfilter comes in a little pouch which I clip onto my camera's carry bag. Are your DSLR photos less noisy?

« Reply #52 on: June 07, 2016, 11:42 »
+1
There's a difference between "art" photography and "stock", although the difference gets pretty fuzzy sometimes.


At the extremes "stock" is flat lit, good depth of field, sharp focus. Good for use as illustrating a point, or as an element in a brochure or whatever. "Art" on the other hand can be whatever is pleasing to the eye, or thought provoking. With few if any technical considerations.


It doesn't really bother me about the lack of a really "long" lens. It's not what I bought the camera for TBH. Whatever camera / lens combination you have you will always a wider angle, or a longer focal length. That's the nature of the beast. Learn to work with the equipment you have.


My DSLR is a Pentax K5 and is getting a bit old in DSLR terms, but yes, it is better noise wise. It also has the advantage of course of being able to change the complete lens when different focal lengths are called for. That's always going to better than putting an add on lens in front of a lens. 

« Reply #53 on: June 08, 2016, 04:15 »
+2
i think this happybunny is taking us all for a ride. iso 80 outside in sunlight and still have noise. right

« Reply #54 on: June 08, 2016, 04:20 »
0
I can send you the Raw file. I even remove noise a little bit for at but not as much as for microstock. At the beginning even the outside ones were rejected for noise. You may not forget that this camera has a small sensor. I had removed noise on one image, DT accepted it, SS didn't because noise . I tell you, I was sitting here searching for that little bit left over noise. I removed more and it was accepted. I get my art images rejected when there is noise in them but they never expect me to remove that much.

« Reply #55 on: June 08, 2016, 05:01 »
0
is it noise or compression artifact ?

« Reply #56 on: June 08, 2016, 05:10 »
0
My files are saved in 100% quality. Affinity compresses even less than LR. I only had once a complaint about artifacts. That was a photo taken in Jpeg with my old camera. I wonder if SS has humans looking at the images or is that a computer searching for noise.

Fudio

« Reply #57 on: June 08, 2016, 06:52 »
+2
i think this happybunny is taking us all for a ride. iso 80 outside in sunlight and still have noise. right

I don't believe HappyBunny is taking us for a ride. I would rather believe HappyBunny just doesn't understand the nature of Raw files completely. Nor do I believe HappyBunny fully appreciates the complex algorithms and background processing involved in creating out of camera jpegs.  As mentioned many times throughout this post, HappyBunny has no problem at all with in-camera processed jpeg files. Noise free and tack sharp every time. It's only when HappyBunny tries to process Raw files that the trouble starts.

Understanding how to properly process Raw files can be a steep learning curve. Attempting to edit Raw files without first knowing the complex relationships between chrominance noise, luminance noise, exposure, etc., and how even minor tweaks to these can affect fine details, color saturation, and so on is always going to end up in frustration.

« Reply #58 on: June 08, 2016, 07:33 »
0
Hold on a minute, I only shot one Jpeg in bright daylight so far. The one nominated for an award was a RAW file. However, I have only edited one file so far with LR because I bought it only recently. True, all is new for me. I edited my first Jpeg files about 6 months ago and that wasn't for microstock. Changing from Windows and Corel AfterShot Pro to a MAC and yet another software in a short time also wasn't fun. I did get on very well with DXO. I was told not to go into the colour channels for microstock, not to sharpen them because the customers want to do that..... I am using Topaz Detail and Topaz Clarity for art. And that software I only bought recently. I did read yesterday that my camera makes mushy photos. It was a review from a magazine and indeed is a noise maker. I have learned a lot in 6 months. I had a 100% acceptance rate on DT and all were RAW files. The rejected ones were because they didn't want any more handbags... I got accepted at SS when I tried the first time. But like I once mentioned, they only accepted 50% of my images. So far I have only edited photos taken inside for microstock. With outside I am even more unsure how to edit them. I use Topaz Detail for art. Lightroom I need to learn first. And I think the noise removal from DXO is way better.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk


« Reply #59 on: June 08, 2016, 07:34 »
0
No, the Jpeg file was not noise free.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk


Fudio

« Reply #60 on: June 08, 2016, 07:52 »
0
I just checked the two images I have taken yesterday. Same images. One in Jpeg, one in RAW. Both shot using Automatic mode and autofocus. Wow, what a difference. There was no colour noise in the Jpeg. Using the colour noise slider made image worse. I pulled noise slider to 30 and noise was gone. Nice looking image. Still sharp. Didn't use Clarity slider nor sharpening slider.
The RAW file: I hate looking at the sky. I stopped at 50. Still not looking good. Colour noise in image. Colour noise slider 64 and noise slider 61. In Affinity I probably would have ended up using 50.
Camera used f5.6, shutter speed 800, ISO 125.

?.

« Reply #61 on: June 08, 2016, 07:59 »
0
Fudio, it's written there that i moved noise removal to 30. I am sure that the camera does some noise removal when processing to JPEG. I would not be able to give the Jpeg to microstock nor art without removing more noise.

« Reply #62 on: June 08, 2016, 08:31 »
0
just a thought. cookies by their very nature, even in real life look like they have noise. maybe experiment with smoother surfaces?
Another thought the sonya55 is a small lightweight camera and noise at 800 is minimal. since it is an older model, they can be found cheap. I got one recently for only 250 usd. because of its size, it comes with me everywhere i go.
I have also found, with the sonys I have had, the lower the iso the softer the image, especially with the 828. with the dslr's the lowest you can go is 100 and not 60 (at least with the ones I have used)
And yes many photos shot at 800 iso on the 55 have been accepted and are selling on the major sites.

Not sure if that helps at all but best of luck!

« Reply #63 on: June 08, 2016, 08:58 »
0
 :)yes, that's true about the cookies. On top of that, the background was black marbled. Longtimeshooter, you might be right. I shot these 2 images outside, one Jpeg, one Raw file and I used the automatic setting for once. Camera found ISO 125 a good idea. When I edited the RAW file I was surprised that the noise wasn't really more than when I use ISO 80. Well, not that I noticed. I think the Sony A7RII can go to ISO 50. Yesterday I saw a professional video review showing the autofocus problems when making a video with my camera. I am now having a professional photographer coming next week. I do have a 15MP camera, also a Sony but this one doesn't have Exposure Compensation.....and only shoots Jpeg. The sensor is even smaller. I will see what the photographer says. I will increase the ISO and see if that helps. I will have a look at the Sonya55. Thank you.

« Reply #64 on: June 08, 2016, 09:02 »
0
I've just been looking at some shots I've taken with the RX100 Mk1. Some of a grey black sky with a rainbow. Bit underexposed. f4 @ 1/640th ISO 125 Really not that noisy or soft. Town shots of buildings. Winter afternoon, F5 @ 1/80th ISO 125. Bit UUE again. Not that noisy or soft.


They both needed some NR for the shadow areas in post IIRC. Not all over though. And they were taken on aperture priority, hence the bit of UUE, which wasn't really a problem.


I use RawTherapee and The Gimp. So no fancy software (although RawTherapee is a very good converter IMO)


By the way it really isn't a matter of a camera having lower ISO being "better".  It's down the the camera type, the sensor and how it's used.


I'd conclude that you might have a noisy example of the camera.


Otherwise (and no offence meant) you are getting something wrong when taking the shots,
or taking shots which the agencies don't really want, and are therefore applying stricter inspection rules to.

« Reply #65 on: June 08, 2016, 09:14 »
0
I will try this out with ISO125. I just edited a photo using LR and simply stopped at noise removal setting 50. I am giving that to DT first. Next week I want to show the professional photographer how I use the camera and maybe I am doing something wrong. Manual focus I find horrible difficult on this camera. I found it easier on my old Canon, a film camera with a 200mm lens. I took photos of cats and just a ear of a cat. They were sharp. Unfortunately I don't have that camera any longer and haven't taken photos for years in between.

« Reply #66 on: June 08, 2016, 09:18 »
0
I'd agree that manual focus is pretty difficult. Only ever used it a few times, when doing things like focusing on rain on glass when the camera wants to focus on what's behind.


 

« Reply #67 on: June 08, 2016, 09:27 »
0
If I use automatic mode and half press the shutter button 6 times, it will focus 6 times differently. Outside it's okay. That's why I use manual focus sometimes as well. I do use the colour peaking but don't know if that doesn't just make it worse.

« Reply #68 on: June 08, 2016, 09:50 »
0
What autofocus area are you using? Don't use "multi" (assuming your camera is the same I know they are very similar) If you do then you are letting the camera decide what the subject is.
Use "Center" focus and then recompose your shot, or use "Flexible" and move the small spot to where you want the focus.


Just to say that while I use the camera on "aperture priority" most of the time, that's only because the manual controls are a bit fiddly IMO. I usually shoot manual with the DSLR for non moving type stuff. Apart from anything else it saves having different exposures through a series. It also allows for correction for things like white backgrounds, which nearly always come out with the subject under exposed due to the camera being "fooled"


Generally when I get a new camera I read the manual (yes really! :)) and then spend time turning off most of the automatic "features".


I want the camera to do what I want it to do.

« Reply #69 on: June 08, 2016, 10:02 »
0
I read the manual. It's not a very good one. Yes, I started using multi. That's the one I mean. I use the one you can move more and more often. However, that gave me the soft image with the asparagus. Centre I don't use at all really. I try to use multi but I am so disappointed.  For all macro flower images I use the flexible spot one. Multi works better outside I think. I am just editing an image I have taken outside a few weeks ago. I am trying to find the noise. Honestly. I am using LR and I have the noise slider on 21 and will leave it there. There is no sky in that image. My skies are always full of noise and the images taken inside. What do you do in sunlight? I can hardly see the green focus field when I am outside in sunlight. This constantly pressing on that wheel is also not exactly great.

« Reply #70 on: June 08, 2016, 10:25 »
0
As I said, I don't use multi. It's letting the camera decide what the subject is.
For preference and for most uses I use the "center" focus and re-compose after half pressing the release.


There should be two parts to the manual (or at least there are with mine), a sort of basic one and a more comprehensive one. Should be on the disc or available from the Sony site.


Working in sunlight is the biggest problem with using the screen on any camera, although I can't say that I've found it a real issue with this one.


 

« Reply #71 on: June 08, 2016, 10:31 »
0
I have one manual and no disc. Don't you use multi for landscape, seascape and when taking images of a row of houses...when you want everything in focus? I used the flexible spot until SS complained about soft focus. After that I switched back to multi. I will try out the centre one. Moving that flexible one is not that great for my thumb.

« Reply #72 on: June 08, 2016, 11:04 »
0
It doesn't work like that by making "everything in focus" (or at least not as far as I know!). It "decides" where the focus point should be, and "brackets" that area to show you where the focus is.
As I say, it's only my opinion, but I want to decide where the focus is myself. hence my use of the fixed point.


The manual you want is the "Instruction / Operation manual DSC-RX100M3
(I think that's the right one)


The English site is here
http://www.sony.co.uk/support/en/content/cnt-man/DSC-RX100M3/list
but you'll probably want to get it in your own language.

« Reply #73 on: June 08, 2016, 11:15 »
0
I have the manual in English. Multi gives you a huge green field. Nearly as big as the whole LCD screen. I use that when I am outside. For example when I shoot in a park, where there are trees and grass and flower beds....When I basically want everything. But I photographed a duck in a pond. I wish I would have seen something on the screen and could have used the flexible spot. One duck had already run away and just for myself I wanted to have a photo. I so much wanted the duck, I didn't see at all where the camera focused...too much sun...of course it wasn't on the duck, not even on the stones in front. Do you leave camera on centre setting all the time so that it is faster to take a photo?

« Reply #74 on: June 08, 2016, 11:56 »
0
I have the manual in English.

There is a "manual" with 30 pages or so. And an "Instruction operation manual" with 200+ pages.


Do you leave camera on centre setting all the time so that it is faster to take a photo?


Yes, as I have said.


I've nothing more to add really. Good luck!


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
7 Replies
3295 Views
Last post August 04, 2007, 12:23
by Eco
rejected photo

Started by chl « 1 2  All » Photo Critique

27 Replies
5750 Views
Last post August 15, 2009, 16:33
by Dreamframer
5 Replies
1760 Views
Last post November 16, 2011, 22:49
by frozensage
18 Replies
5096 Views
Last post January 08, 2013, 17:20
by shotupdave
27 Replies
5204 Views
Last post January 21, 2016, 09:54
by Lana

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors