pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Do I need to crop out dead space in isolation?  (Read 4295 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: April 04, 2009, 04:50 »
0
In your experiences do you need to crop out empty space in isolation?

This is what I am referring to:



This came from this photo:


« Reply #1 on: April 04, 2009, 07:31 »
0
No don't crop.  Empty space is good for advertising, also called copy space.

« Reply #2 on: April 04, 2009, 08:55 »
0
It's ambiguous. Theoretically, you could add copy space to every image you post, to qualify for Extra Large status. i don't think designers need that extra space, since they would probably take the isolation, and incorporate it into whatever space they need. I think whenever I see submission, that has "copy space", I am looking at a very old submission, tied to an old idea. I mean where do you stop? An isolation with 4 feet of "copy space"? I've had a couple of rejections, for too much empty space, but the isolations were centered. It's a total crap shoot.

batman

« Reply #3 on: April 04, 2009, 09:35 »
0
copyspace is fine so long as it is reasonable . as rimglow mentioned, it can be misuse to get an XL size. some sites will reject you for adding too much copyspace . but yes, it is better than leaving the background out, esp if it's selective focus, which 2 big 6 sites will reject  as "out of focus".
you may also try dodging parts of the flowers to give it a nice clean highlight/shadow range .

« Reply #4 on: April 04, 2009, 10:33 »
0
I think you'd be better off with a tighter crop on the flowers and with a white background. Here's how I did a similar shot:



« Reply #5 on: April 04, 2009, 11:28 »
0
Leave it in context.  Why isolate at all.  It's nice the way it is and it looks like it would be fairly easy to isolate if that's what the designer wanted.  If you do isolate though, some sites will definitely reject for too much blank space.

« Reply #6 on: April 04, 2009, 12:44 »
0
I always keep the dead space as it can be used by the designer. The buyer can crop the image if they want to

« Reply #7 on: April 04, 2009, 13:34 »
0
I like it the way it is.......but if you submit it to Istock...you better trim it alittle as they tend to reject photos with to much open space.  They've P##$^eed of more than once doing that. 

« Reply #8 on: April 04, 2009, 14:01 »
0
Leave it in context.  Why isolate at all.  It's nice the way it is and it looks like it would be fairly easy to isolate if that's what the designer wanted.  If you do isolate though, some sites will definitely reject for too much blank space.

I agree ... I think the original photo looks good the way it is. If a designer needs to isolate then usually they prefer to do it themselves anyways.

« Reply #9 on: April 04, 2009, 16:17 »
0
I have done this in both ways (trimmed and untrimmed) and I think only once I got a rejection, it was in DT if I remember it right. 

I did add some extra background in a couple of images to make them jump to a larger max size.  I believe that if you keep the main subject taking at least about half the frame, the sites take it.

A good isolation sells well.  Many people don't want to spend time editing, or don't have the skills to.  Not every buyer is a "designer".

Regards,
Adelaide

« Reply #10 on: April 05, 2009, 11:43 »
0
Submit both images. First one now, and second (original) after few weeks. About cropping the dead space...I would do it like this:


tan510jomast

« Reply #11 on: April 05, 2009, 12:03 »
0
Yes, like sharply_done showed you, I would a) clean up the exposure b)isolate it.
this will make it less like a "snapshot" (as one reviewer like to call their rejections).
Since it's not a one time shooting op, I would not even try to rescue it with post processing. I would go back and reshoot with better lighting and get my exposure right on so you have a nice clean image to submit. If you are not good at isolating with Photoshop, then put a white cardboard behind the flower, light it well,
and reshoot the flower. 

« Reply #12 on: April 05, 2009, 20:15 »
0
Actually, this is a once a year opportunity for me. This was taken early morning at an amusement park that I get a free ticket to every year. I walked around until I found the right combination of flowers and sunlight. I don't know if you call that a snapshot, but it certainly wasn't done in the studio.

Anyhow, what is the issue with the exposure? I brightened the image 1 f-stop during the RAW conversion since it seemed underexposed. Is it overexposed now?

I really like the way Whitechild did the crop, mind if I steal it?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
3103 Views
Last post October 13, 2006, 10:57
by Striker77s
4 Replies
2407 Views
Last post February 21, 2007, 04:02
by CJPhoto
7 Replies
3358 Views
Last post May 16, 2008, 12:48
by sharply_done
2 Replies
7131 Views
Last post June 17, 2008, 04:01
by litifeta
14 Replies
12176 Views
Last post September 12, 2012, 08:34
by ctsankov

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors